Hi Ken, Andrew, and everybody, I am feeling the heat!
I am in Finland with Albert Kallio, and it is extraordinarily hot - with risk of sunburn, as sun relentlessly beats down from early in the morning till late at night. This is the kind of weather they expect in July. Albert has just pointed me to the cryosphere today web site: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ I think we have an emergency now. The Arctic sea ice is extremely thin in many places, and whole sections could melt away this summer, since it is only May. We could have a record minimum sea ice extent this year, lower even than 2007. There is no sign of a recovery. Perhaps even worse, there is extraordinarily little snow, on Siberia and other Arctic and sub-Arctic land masses, compared to the same time of year for previous years. If this isn't an emergency, I don't know what is. The fuse on the time-bomb is lit. We may have left it too late. Even the most drastic use of stratospheric aerosols may not be enough to prevent catastrophic warming of the Arctic. How much worse does it have to get before we act? What sense is there for further delay? John ---- On May 20, 1:00 am, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: > Rather cynically, I'd suggest that a 'climate emergency' exists only when > the outcome of the next election hinges on it. > > Perhaps someone can express that in maths and squiggles to make it look more > 'sciencey'. > > A > > On 19 May 2010 19:41, John Nissen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks, Ken. > > > Others might like to read bios here: > >http://americasclimatechoices.org/scienceslate.shtml > > > Is there any new perspective on geoengineering in the report? There is no > > mention of SRM to save the Arctic sea ice! But there is a small section > > discussing what constitutes an emergency: > > > [quote] > > *Develop metrics and methods for informing discussions and decisions > > related to “climate emergencies”*. There are at least two components to > > this research need. For use of SRM as a potential "back-stop option” in the > > case of an emerging “climate emergency ", improved observations and > > understanding of climate system thresholds, reversibility, and abrupt > > changes (see Chapter 6)—for example, observations to let us know when an ice > > sheet or methane hydrate field may become unstable (e.g., Khvorostyanov et > > al., 2008; Shakhova et al., 2010)—could inform societal debate and decision > > making about needs for deployment of a climate intervention system. Second, > > there is no consensus on what constitutes a "climate emergency", nor is > > there a consensus regarding when an SRM deployment might be warranted. The > > notion of an "emergency" is not simply a scientific concept, but one that > > involves both scientific facts and human values—quite similar to discussions > > about “dangerous interference in the climate system” (e.g., Dessai et al., > > 2004; Gupta and van Asselt, 2006; Hansen, 2005; Lorenzoni et al., 2005; > > Oppenheimer, 2005; Smith et al., 2009). To some people, losing Arctic > > ecosystems constitutes a climate emergency, whereas to others the > > declaration of an “emergency” might require widespread loss of human life. > > Therefore, to inform a broader discussion of how society wants to address > > issues of risk, climate intervention cannot be studied in isolation but must > > be placed in a broader context considering, for example, drivers of climate > > change, climate consequences, socio-political systems, and human values. > > > [end quote] > > > So, Ken, what do you think constitutes a climate emergency to justify SRM? > > How much loss of Arctic sea ice? How much risk from methane release? How > > much risk of sea level rise from Greenland ice sheet disintegration? Can > > SRM ever be justified on the precautionary principle - and if not why not? > > What is proper risk management? What calculations are needed to justify > > geoengineering rather than further delay? > > > 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]<geoengineering%[email protected]> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > > -- > 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 > athttp://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. -- 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.
