[I've shown my responses. See below. I would guess that the overall response would be 75% negative, however in terms of supporting geoengineering research if one polled the IPCC scientists. AG]
The Independent Survey on Geoengineering: should we have a “Plan B”? The Independent newspaper in London is conducting a major poll of the world’s leading climate scientists to gauge their opinion on geoengineering – the deliberate manipulation of the climate to counteract global warming. Emissions of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere continue to increase at an alarming rate – a one per cent increase per year, faster than even the IPCC’s worst-case scenarios. There are growing concerns that international agreements may not succeed in curbing future CO2 levels to a point that avoids dangerous climate change. Most experts would agree that is it essential to get a meaningful treaty at Copenhagen next December to reduce carbon emissions: but should there be a “plan B” if this approach looks like failing? You have been chosen as one of the key scientists involved in climate research whose opinion we would value as a contribution to our survey. Please could you find time to fill in this short questionnaire (attached). It should take no more than 10 minutes and you will have made a valuable contribution to the wider public debate on climate change. You also have the opportunity of providing a short statement for publication in the newspaper or on our website. But, if you prefer, your contribution can remain completely anonymous although we would need your name and affiliation for compiling our data. We need to have the survey returned by our DEADLINE of 22 December 2008. It can be emailed back to this email address: [email protected] Thank you for your time. Chris Independent House, 191 Marsh Wall, London E14 9RS Telephone 020 7005 2000 Fax 020 7005 2051 The Independent Survey on Geoengineering: Should we have a “Plan B”? The question we pose is whether a geoengineering strategy should exist in parallel to a binding international treaty on carbon cuts. The Royal Society in London is preparing a report on geoengineering to be published next summer and is currently gathering evidence on proposals such as aerosols release and ocean fertilisation. We would very much like you to voice your opinion on geoengineering for a major article to be published in The Independent newspaper. Please could you answer the following four questions as best you can. We realise that the yes/no format is not ideal but it helps us to gauge whether there is a consensus of opinion among a peer group of experts. There is room at the end to provide a short comment for quotation as well, if desired. 1. Are you more, or less optimistic about the prospects of curbing CO2 levels to avoid dangerous climate change now compared to ten years ago when Kyoto was signed? More optimistic………[ ] Less optimistic ...…….[ X ] About the same………[ ] 2. Are you more, or less optimistic about the ability of the Earth’s climate system to cope with expected increases in atmospheric carbon levels now compared with 10 years ago given recent research on potential climate feedbacks and carbon sinks? More optimistic………[ ] Less optimistic……….[ X ] About the same………[ ] 3. Do you believe that talk of geoengineering is a dangerous distraction and that on no account should it ever be considered as a viable option even if carbon dioxide levels continue to rise? Agree…………………[ ] Disagree………………[ X] Don’t know…………...[ ] [This is a compound question, although I would expect that most who would answer yes to the distraction question would also answer yes to the never consider it an option part as well. AG] 4. Do you agree that we now need a “Plan B” whereby a geoengineering strategy – research, development and possible implementation – is drawn up in parallel to a treaty to reduce carbon emissions (subject to international agreements and a scientific assessment of risk)? Agree…………………[ X ] Disagree………………[ ] Don’t know…………...[ ] Many thanks for completing this short questionnaire. Please feel free to add a short comment (no more than 150 words) which explains your position on geoengineering. Please include your name and institution and let us know whether you would like your comments to be attributed. Your name: Your institution: Your short comment: (no more than 150 words) Would you like your comments attributed in a future article? Yes [ ] No [ ] Please feel free to pass on this questionnaire to a suitably qualified colleague involved in climate studies. Please send you replies to [email protected]. Our deadline for replies is 22 December 2008. Steve Connor Science Editor The Independent ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Salter" <[email protected]> To: "geoengineering" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 12:12 PM Subject: [geo] [Fwd: The Independent survey on geoengineering (URGENT)] > Hi All > > Attached is a call from our Independent newspaper ( most respected one > in the UK) about a geo-engineering enquiry they are holding. They want > us to forward it to all our chums. Note the deadline of 22 December. > > Stephen > > -- > Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design > School of Engineering and Electronics > University of Edinburgh > Mayfield Road > Edinburgh EH9 3JL > Scotland > tel +44 131 650 5704 > fax +44 131 650 5702 > Mobile 07795 203 195 > [email protected] > http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
<<inline: clip_image002.gif>>
