|
Dear Jim, Thanks for your response. I am not so gloomy about our ability to cool the Arctic, but the challenge gets more forbidding each month that we wait. It will probably require a combination of methods - e.g. stratospheric aerosols and marine cloud brightening. Also it would be help to reduce levels of black carbon. I cannot prove that the loss of sea ice would be a point of no return. However, I can argue that geoengineering should be tried, to reduce the risk of catastrophe of methane release and Greenland ice sheet disintegration. Countries do have authority, even a mandate, to take action to protect their citizens, under the UNFCCC Article 3, even when there is a lack of full scientific certainty [1]. Still, I can't expect you to change your mind. I am just sad that so much effort has gone into discrediting geoengineering, when it seems essential to tackle the collosal challenges ahead to rescue the planet for the enjoyment of future generations. Nobody seems to want to face up to these challenges - emissions reductions are part of the solution, but not the whole solution. We have to pull out all the stops. There is no precedent in human history. The first step is to admit that we must cool the Arctic and geoengineering has to be involved. To have this as a post-script to the book would be tremendous! Best wishes, John [1] http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/background/items/1355.php --- James R. Fleming wrote: Dear 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. |
Title: Re: [geo] Fixing the Sky just published by Columbia University
Press
