If you honestly think we are on the brink of global disaster, there is not even a little bit of room to be conflicted. Here's your choice - we all die, or we don't all die. Pick one and enough of this "conflicted" sillyness.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:27 PM, dasilva <[email protected]> wrote: > > What's wrong with being conflicted? Are you not even a little > conflicted? > > On Jun 16, 4:52 pm, "Alvia Gaskill" <[email protected]> wrote: > > These meetings accomplish little or nothing as it is the same people > saying the same things over and over again. Just filling up that resume. > If you are truly so conflicted about the subject, (doubt it) why don't you > get out of the business or better yet, stop interfering with others who are > in it (The I'm going to the DARPA meeting to stop it stunt you pulled a > while back). Better yet, next time you guys schedule one of these get > togethers, you can announce you are going to hold it so you can stop it. At > least announce it far enough in advance so we can all plan not to go. BTW, > I've come up with a new job description for people like Alan Robock and Dale > Jameison: Professional Critic. Since they are both employed by > universities, let's ad an un to that. Yeah, that sounds right: > Unprofessional Critic. More candidates as I get time. > > > > ----- Original > > Scientists Debate Shading Earth As Climate Fix > > by Richard Harris > > > > All Things Considered, June 16, 2009 ยท Engineering our climate to stop > global warming may seem like science fiction, but at a recent National > Academy of Sciences meeting, scientists discussed some potential > geoengineering experiments in earnest. > > > > Climate researcher Ken Caldeira was skeptical when he first heard about > the idea of shading the Earth a decade ago in a talk by nuclear weapons > scientist Lowell Wood. > > > > "He basically said, 'We don't have to bother with emissions reduction. > We can just throw aerosols - little dust particles - into the stratosphere, > and that'll cool the earth.' And I thought, 'Oh, that'll never work,' " > Caldeira said. > > > > But when Caldeira sat down to study this, he was surprised to discover > that, yes, it would work, and for the very same reasons that big volcanoes > cool the Earth when they erupt. Fine particles in the stratosphere reflect > sunlight back into space. And doing it would be cheap, to boot. > > > > Caldeira conducts research on climate and carbon cycles at the Carnegie > Institution at Stanford University. During the past decade, he said, talk > about this idea has moved from cocktail parties to very sober meetings, like > the workshop this week put on by the National Academy of Sciences. > > > > "Frankly, I'm a little ambivalent about all this," he said during a > break in the meeting. "I've been pushing very hard for a research program, > but it's a little scary to me as it becomes more of a reality that we might > be able to toy with our environment, or our whole climate system at a > planetary scale." > > > > Attempting to geoengineer a climate fix raises many questions, like > when you would even consider trying it. Caldeira argued that we should have > the technology at the ready if there's a climate crisis, such as collapsing > ice sheets or drought-induced famine. At the academy's meeting, Harvard > University's Dan Schrag agreed with that - up to a point. > > > > "I think we should consider climate engineering only as an emergency > response to a climate crisis, but I question whether we're already > experiencing a climate crisis - whether we've already crossed that > threshold," Schrag said. > > > > In reality, carbon-dioxide emissions globally are on a runaway pace, > despite rhetoric promising to control them. University of Calgary's David > Keith suggested that we should consider moving toward experiments that would > test ideas on a global scale - and do it sooner rather than later. > > > > "It's not clear that during some supposed climate emergency would be > the right time to try this new and unexplored technique," Keith said. > > > > And experiments could create disasters. Alan Robock of Rutgers > University cataloged a long list of risks. Particles in the stratosphere > that block sunlight could also damage the ozone layer, which protects us > from harsh ultraviolet light. Or altering the stratosphere could reduce > precipitation in Asia, where it waters the crops that feed 2 billion people. > > > > Imagine if we triggered a drought and famine while trying to cool the > planet, Robock said. On the plus side, it's also possible that diffusing > sunlight could end up boosting agriculture, he said. > > > > "We need to evaluate all these different, contrasting impacts to see > whether it really would have an effect on food or not," he said. "Maybe it's > a small effect. We really don't know that yet. We need more research on > that." > > > > Thought experiments to date have focused primarily on the risks of > putting sulfur dust in the stratosphere. There are many other geoengineering > ideas - like making clouds brighter by spraying seawater particles into the > air. But none of them is simple. > > > > "I don't think there is a quick and easy answer to employing even one > of those quick and cheap and easy solutions," said social scientist Susanne > Moser. > > > > There's no mechanism in place to reach a global consensus about doing > this - and a consensus seems unlikely in any event. Who gets to decide where > to set the global thermostat? And will this simply become an excuse not to > control our emissions to begin with? These were all questions without > answers at the academy's meeting. > > > > Message ----- > > From: Ken Caldeira > > To: geoengineering > > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 6:17 PM > > Subject: [geo] NPR radio story on National Academy geoengineering > workshop > > > > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105483423 > > > > ___________________________________________________ > > Ken Caldeira > > > > Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology > > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > > > > [email protected]; [email protected] > > http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab > > +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 > > > -- David W. Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
