Ken wrote on the Royal Society meeting: “There is at least a rumor that there might be a related meeting on governance issues on Nov 10 and 11 following the already advertised meeting focused on science issues (Nov 8 and 9).”
Thanks Ken and Jesse The technical issues (modeling, construction, test deployments) are all solvable. The knotty one indeed is governance. In the end, I don’t believe the interests of any sustainable group of countries will align on this, even among developed countries. I suspect a little hegemony (should I be redundant and say “unilateral hegemony”?) is going to come into play, because of all of the uncharted and embryonic governance issues for which there is no signle well supported plan. And scientists’ plans (model model model) will differ from business interest plans (get capital now, deploy for profit under contract very soon) which will differ from Government plans (strategic, preservation of domestic food supply, and military implications). Or even, what about the simple question of what is the U.S. liability if its program changes weather patterns and Myanmar washes away (again)? Think “ambulance chasers” at the World Court. OK, I’m rambling. d David Benaron, MD Founder (and former Director) of Stanford Biophotonics Group Professor, Stanford School of Medicine (consulting) | [email protected] and David Benaron Chief Executive Officer | Spectros Corporation 650.851.4040 ext (#1)236 | [email protected] -- 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.
