Is there anyone in this group who does not agree that the primary urgency,
virtually to the exclusion of all other geoengineering considerations, is
reversing the Artic ice melt. And if you agree than do you agree that the
issue is removing huge amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere quickly or
reducing the amount of sunlight falling on the Arctic region. Can you add to
that list? 

Priority 2 is how do we organize geoengineering into a valid professional
activity that can promote geoengineering into a position wherein these
overriding needs can be implemented? Once that is done it becomes a
professional activity that offers a recognized and critical venue for the
activity; and a vehicle for obtaining funding for a whole variety of
activities.

Why do we continue to discuss longterm methods for reducing the amount of
carbon going into the atmosphere? You are fiddling while Rome burns.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stephen Salter
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 5:20 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: John Nissen; greenhouse effect; geoengineering; geo-engineering
Subject: [geo] Re: What is geo-engineering?


Sam Carana

The power rating of a spray vessel is only 100 kW.  They have to operate in
mid ocean and migrate with the seasons so they have to generate their own
energy as they move through the water rather than rely on supplies from wind
turbines.

Stephen Salter

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   



Sam Carana wrote:
> Good point, John, the risk of a runaway greenhouse effect is such that 
> we need to prepare to use everything we've got to counter this.
>
> For starters, we should use techniques that are safe, such as where 
> suitable selecting vegetation, roofs and pavement that are as white 
> and reflective as possible. Pyrolysis of organic waste and biochar 
> burial should definitely be adopted. We should switch to clean and 
> safe ways to produce energy, concrete, etc.
>
> The more wind turbines, the more surplus energy, which can be used to 
> make hydrogen, for air capture of CO2 and to power spraying seawater 
> into the sky to change albedo above the sea.
>
> So, not only do all these technologies add up, they go hand in hand.
> One hand washes the other!
>
> Cheers!
> Sam Carana
>
>   

-- 

 


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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to