John and list:
I agree that this was an important interview for advancing
geoengineering (Fareed Zakaria is one of my favorite
writers/analysts/interviewers). My main objection was that Fareed or
his show producers seemed to not be aware of the limitations of SRM. By
this I mean that the fundamental causation agent - excess CO2 - was
ignored, not mentioned once. Greg Lau's message to the list just
earlier on the need to protect against ocean acidification was never
hinted at. (More tomorrow on that.)
The end of the twenty minutes was on Myrhvold's firms focus on
investing in inventions - which he says only his new firm is doing
(emphasizing this is not the same as venture capital - which he also
claimed has revolutionized modern American (world?) business).
I wish I knew whether Myrhvold himself was working on CO2 removal as
well as his SO2 approach. The site also has quite a bit on the Salton
Sink concept (see
http://www.intvenlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Salter-Sink-white-paper-300dpi1.pdf).
Also see http://intellectualventureslab.com/?p=338 for added material on
geoengineering.
Ron
John Nissen wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Have you seen this? Best case for SRM in Arctic I've seen!
>
> Inventor Nathan Myhrvold describes "space hose" for getting aerosols
> into stratosphere - and he's done the modelling to show it could be used
> at the Arctic, to cool whole hemisphere, without disrupting weather (see
> about 9 minutes in). "Cooling the Arctic shuts of a whole lot of
> tipping points." It shows incredible promise, but governments aren't
> running to him - so far.
>
> http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/podcasts/fareedzakaria/site/2009/12/20/gps.podcast.12.20.cnn
>
>
>
> "Suppressing the only technology that could get us out of this
> pickle..." would be plain silly.
>
> He argues (as nobody I've seen to argue before), that even emissions
> reduction to zero overnight, would not solve the problem of global
> warming, because about 20% CO2 stays in atmosphere for thousands of years.
>
> "Geoengineering has to be part of the debate". "We have to examine the
> options". "You can't rule these things out."
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
> --
>
> 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.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.121/2589 - Release Date: 12/27/09
> 02:18:00
>
>
--
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.
