Bhaskar I don't speak for the IPCC, I am just helping organize the meeting. So are several other people on this distribution list.
The following speculation not a position statement: Given that this is the IPCC, and given that it is a coordinating meeting between all three working groups, I think there's little danger that the focus will be narrow. However exactly the taxonomy is divided, I would guess we will end up with an expansive coverage of topics typically called geoengineering. Given there are three working groups, the review very likely cover science, environmental impacts, and social science issues including issues of governance, distributive justice, economics and public perception (one could probably get a decent sense of what the coverage might be in this area from looking at previous WG III reports). Yours, D -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of M V Bhaskar Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 5:33 AM To: geoengineering Subject: Re: IPCC on geo-engineering Re: [geo] geo eng and new Friends of the Earth EWNI report urges very deep and rapid emission cuts Dr Keith Glad to know you are on the Organising committee for the IPCC WG meetings in Peru. IPCC website says - "Current discussions that suggest geoengineering as an option to support climate mitigation efforts remain rather abstract and lack comprehensive risk assessments that take into account possible adverse impacts over short and longer time frames. Major uncertainties exist regarding the effects of these techniques on the physical climate system and on biogeochemical cycles, their possible impacts on human and natural systems, and their effectiveness and costs. " In the field of Ocean Fertilization we believe that we have addressed many of the risks noted above. We have been causing controlled blooms of Diatoms on a medium scale for the past 5 years. So the costs, benefits, consequences, etc., are know. How can we put forth our views to the WG at Peru? best regards Bhaskar On Jan 3, 6:33 pm, David Keith <[email protected]> wrote: > I am on the organizing committee for the IPCC interworking group meeting on > geoengineering in Peru this summer. > > The possibility of a special report will no doubt be discussed at some length > at that meeting. > > My views are pretty well aligned with Ken's here. There are lots of summary > reports written in more in the works, what is lacking is sufficient serious > analysis of the various methods, their potential, risks and uncertainties. > > -D > -- 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. -- 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.
