I'll sign letter as it stands.  I'll almost certainly be willing to
sign any revision that others here come to consensus on, too.  I agree
that keeping it short is probably a good idea.  Using the word
"geoengineering" has pros and cons.  I slightly prefer the three-item
version over Tom's two-item version.

Dan Wylie-Sears

On Apr 3, 6:03 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> First, don't confuse what Pachauri says/does with IPCC as an institution.
> These are not the same thing. With regard to Geoeng, I suspect Pachauri is
> even more conservative (negative? ignorant?) than IPCC. But IPCC cannot
> ignore the scientific issue or the literature on the subject.
>
> Second, I think there should only be two items ...
>
> (A) Emissions reduction (Mitigation)
> (B) Carbon cycle and radiation management (Geoengineering)
>
> Unless we mention Geoeng specifically, many will not know what we mean.
>
> I would be happy to sign such a letter.
>
> Tom.
>
> +++++++++++++++++===
>
>
>
> > I suggest that we draft an Open Letter addressed to the Participants
> > of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, who will be at the
> > preparatory session at the US Department of State on April 27-28 in
> > Washington, D.C.
>
> > Taking into account Stephen's comments on the body language of Dr
> > Pachauri, it may be wise to make a very brief statement, such as the
> > following:
>
> > ===== OPEN LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES FORUM ON
> > ENERGY AND CLIMATE ==========
>
> > Participants,
>
> > We, a group of scientists, researchers and other people sharing a
> > strong background and interest in climate change, are concerned that
> > the Forum's sole focus will be on the politics of energy, as seems
> > confirmed by the name of the Forum.
>
> > Whilst we acknowledge that the politics of energy are vitally
> > important, we believe that a more comprehensive approach to global
> > warming is appropriate, which would include the following three parts:
>
> > Part A: Emissions reduction
> > Part B: Carbon stock management
> > Part C: Heat transfer and radiation management
>
> > We are especially worried that there appears to be little or no
> > funding for research and testing regarding part C.
>
> > Signatories:
>
> > John Nissen, ...
> > Sam Carana
> > etc.
> > =========   END PROPOSED OPEN LETTER   =====================
>
> > I invite others to make changes, but suggest that leaving the Open
> > Letter short could make more members of this group willing to sign,
> > while we could always each elaborate in separate articles as to what
> > we each individually propose. Please all make comments and changes as
> > you see fit, but do add your name and just let's try and get more
> > names under the Open Letter this time!
>
> > Cheers!
> > Sam Carana
>
> > PS: I'll add details about the Forum below:
>
> > President Obama Announces Launch of the Major Economies Forum on
> > Energy and Climate
> >http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-Announces-...
>
> > THE WHITE HOUSE
>
> > Office of the Press Secretary
> > _____________________________________________________________
> > For Immediate Release                                    March 28, 2009
>
> > President Obama Announces Launch of the Major Economies Forum on
> > Energy and Climate
>
> > The President is pleased to announce today the launch of the Major
> > Economies Forum on Energy and Climate.
>
> > The Major Economies Forum will facilitate a candid dialogue among key
> > developed and developing countries, help generate the political
> > leadership necessary to achieve a successful outcome at the UN climate
> > change negotiations that will convene this December in Copenhagen, and
> > advance the exploration of concrete initiatives and joint ventures
> > that increase the supply of clean energy while cutting greenhouse gas
> > emissions.
>
> > President Obama has invited the leaders of 16 major economies and the
> > Secretary General of the United Nations to designate representatives
> > to participate in a preparatory session at the Department of State on
> > April 27-28 in Washington, D.C. The preparatory sessions will
> > culminate in a Major Economies Forum Leaders’ meeting, which Prime
> > Minister Berlusconi has agreed to host in La Maddalena, Italy, in July
> > 2009.
>
> > The 17 major economies are: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the
> > European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan,
> > Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the
> > United States. Denmark, in its capacity as the President of the
> > December 2009 Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention
> > on Climate Change, and the United Nations have also been invited to
> > participate in this dialogue.
>
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Stephen Salter <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> John
>
> >> We could start summer spraying from land-based plant on the Faeroes or
> >> conventional ships two years after getting some money.  However it
> >> would be
> >> essential to have proper climate modeling, such as that from Phil Rasch,
> >> before any spray is released.
>
> >> I was watching the body language of Dr  Pachauri when you gave him the
> >> letter in Copenhagen and I believe that we should not be too hopeful of
> >> ant
> >> immediate help from IPCC.  Their track record on Arctic ice is dismal
> >> and
> >> they will be on the defensive.  I hope that I am wrong so please let me
> >> know
> >> if you have had, or if you get, any reply from him.
>
> >> 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
>
> >> John Nissen wrote:
>
> >>> Hi Sam,
>
> >>> Excellent posting.  Two matters arising:
>
> >>> Firstly, on the matter of Stephen Salter's "cooling ships", we could
> >>> start
> >>> with a sea-side installation on some suitable NE Atlantic island, (e.g.
> >>> Faeroes?) to provide infrastructure - easy access for power, people,
> >>> maintenance, etc.  We badly need funds to jump start this technology.
> >>>  Any
> >>> suggestions?
>
> >>> Secondly, thanks for the great idea of an open letter to the
> >>> forthcoming
> >>> international climate forum.  Can it be the same letter as sent to Dr
> >>> Pachauri?
>
> >>>http://geo-engineering.blogspot.com/2009/03/open-letter-to-dr-pachaur...
>
> >>> If possible I'd like to include an argument for the urgency for Part C
> >>> action in the Arctic, as has been suggested we might discuss in this
> >>> geoengineering forum over the next week.  How should we balance the
> >>> risks of
> >>> geoengineering against the risks of not geoengineering, or delaying
> >>> action?
> >>> What is the optimum ramp up speed for candidate techniques?
>
> >>> Also we should point out the rediculously low cost of Part C type
> >>> geoengineering, in relation to potential cost and life saving if it
> >>> manages
> >>> to prevent Arctic tipping points tipping.
>
> >>> BTW, who should the open letter be addressed to, at the forum?
>
> >>> Here it gives the date as April 27-28:
> >>>http://www.france24.com/en/20090328-obama-climate-change-denmark-un-s...
>
> >>> AFP - President Barack Obama Saturday launched a Major Economies Forum
> >>> on
> >>> Energy and Climate to give a boost to a historic agreement on climate
> >>> change
> >>> facilitated by the UN.
>
> >>> Leaders from the 16 major economies are to participate in a
> >>> "preparatory
> >>> session" on April 27-28 in Washington to "help generate the political
> >>> leadership" for successful climate change negotiations December in
> >>> Copenhagen, the White House said in a statement.
>
> >>> The forum, the White House added, would encourage "a candid dialogue"
> >>> between developing and industrialized countries and help "advance the
> >>> exploration of concrete initiatives and joint ventures that increase
> >>> the
> >>> supply of clean energy while cutting greenhouse gas emissions."
>
> >>> Denmark, which is hosting a UN meeting in December to create a new
> >>> agreement on global warming to replace the Kyoto Protocol, and the
> >>> United
> >>> Nations were also invited.
>
> >>> The preparatory sessions would conclude with the Major Economies Forum
> >>> Leaders' summit, to be hosted in July by Italian Prime Minister Silvio
> >>> Berlusconi in La Maddalena, Italy.
>
> >>> The 17 major economies are Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the
> >>> European
> >>> Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia,
> >>> South Africa, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States.
>
> >>> UN talks were to resume in Bonn on Sunday with some 190 countries
> >>> participating to reach a new pact for curbing greenhouse gases beyond
> >>> 2012,
> >>> when Kyoto Protocol provisions expire.
>
> >>> The climate treaty was rejected by the US Congress in 1997 because it
> >>> did
> >>> not impose commitments on developing countries.
>
> >>> Obama's announcement came ahead of a Group of 20 economic crisis summit
> >>> in
> >>> London on April 2, for which he would embark on his first major foreign
> >>> trip
> >>> as president, with other stops planned in France and Germany for a NATO
> >>> summit, the Czech Republic for an EU/US summit and an onward trip to
> >>> Turkey.
>
> >>> ----
>
> >>> Cheers,
>
> >>> John
>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Carana" <[email protected]>
> >>> To: "Geoengineering" <[email protected]>
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:49 PM
> >>> Subject: [geo] Re: the limits of geoengineering?
>
> >>> Andrew,
>
> >>> Looking at global historic data of warming, one might at first glance
> >>> conclude that only a relatively small amount of global warming did
> >>> cause the arctic melting we're witnessing now. So, the conclusion
> >>> would then be that we similarly needed to reflect just a small amount
> >>> of sunshine back into space to have the reverse effect.
>
> >>> However, what complicates things is that global warming is amplified
> >>> in specific areas, notably around the North Pole. East Siberia was at
> >>> times 7°C warmer than
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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