Dear Mike: Exactly! On Sep 17, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Mike MacCracken wrote: > > Holding off on SRM until Greenland is rapidly losing mass, methane is > pouring from the thawing permafrost, and Arctic sea ice is only > present in > the depths of winter (so much biodiversity is extinct or virtually > so) is > likely too late to reverse these effects--so what is the point. No > question > we must mitigate all that we can, but holding off on geoengineering > until > all is nearly lost is like waiting to help those facing severe climate > impacts until they are malnourished and near death--the intervention > must be > much greater and costly (i.e., many of the most vulnerable will > already have > died) and may well not even save those who remain (and certainly not > their > culture and heritage). The situation is already so serious in some > locations > that it seems to me those concerned about the Earth and its people > should be > advocating, in addition to very strong mitigation, aggressive > research and > even a low-level start to geoengineering in order to stave off > getting to > the emergency situation (and, of course, we may only know a > situation is an > emergency one well after that point is reached, or at least > committed to > once ocean inertia allows the climate to catch up). Indeed, it seems > to me > that arguing one waits is saying that the way to get the world to act > strongly enough on mitigation is to give them a taste of the very > worst that > can happen and then trying to pull back--so keep working to lift the > foot > off the accelerator as the climate is accelerating toward the > likely, but > unknown, end of the road, and plan on hitting your brakes so hard > that you > will stop even after your front end is over the edge of the > precipice (sorry > to mix metaphors). > > Tom Wigley's approach was to use geoengineering as a way to minimize > overall > costs of mitigation, so slowing mitigation a bit and making it up with > geoengineering. It seems to me that we need to be doing all we > practically > can on mitigation (and I know "practically" is the qualifier--I'd > say up to > a few % of GDP) and use geoengineering in conjunction with > adaptation to > alleviate the large impacts that have started to show or likely lie > just > ahead. So, don't make geoengineering subject to what is done on > mitigation > (or let mitigation rely on geoengineering), but consider > geoengineering a > complement to adaptation, holding off on it until other adaptive > efforts are > overwhelmed (as is emerging now as the situation in the Arctic, etc.). > > Best, Mike MacCracken > > On 9/17/09 11:41 AM, "Andrew Lockley" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> For the avoidance of doubt, a motion passed at conference is NOT a >> policy statement. However, it is a very good indicator that FoE will >> shortly be bringing forward a strong policy. >> >> My money is on it saying: >> >> 1) Geoengineering is not an excuse not to mitigate >> 2) We should engage in atmospheric carbon reduction in the medium >> term >> 3) We should research SRM geoengineering as a possible last resort >> 4) We should control and regulate field trials >> >> A >> >> 2009/9/17 jim woolridge <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Andrew: this is something of a great leap forward--Friends of the >>> Earth UK (as it then was) was very fast out of the traps re Climate >>> Change in the late '80s and has played a major role in bringing the >>> issue to public attention in the UK; it's good to see them move on >>> from the sterility of the emissions reduction alone policy. >>> That's a >>> problem of being an early adopter--it is easy to get stuck in place >>> with your once-new breakthrough turned old and stale. >>> >>> I seem to remember you mentioning some months ago that such a motion >>> would be put to the FoE conference so kudos to all those who >>> helped to >>> bring this about; it provides a welcome, & necessary, counterbalance >>> to Lomborg et al! >>> >>> On Sep 15, 5:21 pm, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> The following motion was passed at Friends of the Earth (England, >>>> Wales and Northern Ireland) conference: >>>> >>>> A >>>> PS There may have been some minor amendments to the wording - I >>>> apologise if it's not the latest version. >>>> >>>> Conference notes >>>> 1) The failure to control emissions of greenhouse gases to >>>> date >>>> 2) The rising global temperature >>>> 3) The ever worsening risk of breaching the 2C limit >>>> 4) The commencement of feedback effects such as Arctic >>>> shrinkage >>>> and Arctic methane release >>>> 5) The emerging discipline of Œgeoengineering¹, which seeks to >>>> directly reduce global warming >>>> 6) The belief held by some scientists that climate change >>>> cannot >>>> be safely controlled without geoengineering >>>> 7) That geoengineering consists of two distinct disciplines: >>>> carbon sequestration (e.g. biochar burial) and solar radiation >>>> management (e.g. stratospheric aerosol injection) >>>> 8) The controversy surrounding some geoengineering techniques >>>> >>>> MOTION >>>> Conference calls on the board to: >>>> >>>> 1) Consider whether or not geoengineering is necessary or >>>> desirable as a part of the solution to climate change either now >>>> or >>>> in future >>>> 2) Establish a stated and scientifically robust policy on >>>> geoengineering >>>> 3) Consider the merits and shortcomings of various >>>> geoengineering >>>> techniques. >>>> 4) Clearly establish a position on geoengineerinng field tests >>>> >>> >> >>> > > > > >
Bill Fulkerson, Senior Fellow Institute for a Secure and Sustainable Environment University of Tennessee 311 Conference Center Bldg. Knoxville, TN 37996-4138 [email protected] 865-974-9221, -1838 FAX Home 865-988-8084; 865-680-0937 CELL 2781 Wheat Road, Lenoir City, TN 37771 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
