Re: [geo] Nathan Myhrvold argues for geoengineering (back to original thread)

[John Nissen]

Thanks Ron. That paper you mention from Intellectual Ventures Lab [1] has some excellent arguments for geoengineering in general and for the Lab's geoengineering design work in particular.  For example: --- 8. What is the greatest potential benefit you see from geoengineering? What about possible harms? Realistically, geoengineering could offer us a way to buy time by preventing the worst effects of global warming while society gets its act together on a carbon-emission free energy infrastructure. [snip] Other people worry that geoengineering may not work, or that it could provide a false hope. That is an argument for more research and development, not less. At the present time there is almost no research and development funding for geoengineering, which seems foolish given what is at stake. Another concern is that there might be unforeseen consequences of geoengineering. This is also a topic which research can address. Geoengineering is only under consideration to combat the vastly more harmful effects that are predicted from severe climate change. --- However they seem unaware of urgency - acting quickly to minimise the risk of losing the Arctic sea ice and passing a point of no return. Cheers, John [1] http://intellectualventureslab.com/?p=338 --- Ron Larson wrote: 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 geoengineering@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. 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 geoengineer...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.