If I may, I think the difference is subtle but critical. The implication of the statement "...we fear it will be [needed]" is that we may be forced into a situation where we use geoengineering, but it's the correct remaining response.
What Alan's arguing might be summed up as a fear that we will use geoengineering before really understanding the consequences, a fear that we will come to believe geoengineering to be "needed" without being able to consider the full range of negative repercussions -- which could, in some scenarios, be worse than the warming. -Jamais Cascio On Mar 23, 2012, at 9:09 AM, Stephen Salter wrote: > Dear Alan > > The difference between my Commons statement and your position is too subtle > for me. Do you mean that you are not alarmed about the possibility of the > need for geoengineering becoming apparent? > > I could not possibly ask everybody because I do not have a complete list. > However in future I could if you wish say ' nearly everybody except people > like Alan Robock . . .' Perhaps in return you could in future distinguish > the tropospheric salt and stratospheric sulphur SRM techniques from one > another. > > By the way I do value your opposition. If we ever have to do geoengineering > the process will be safer because of you. All I want is to have reliable > equipment ready if it is needed in a hurry and all its effects well > understood. I am a bit surprised that you are not making more of a fuss > about figure 2b of your own paper in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics and > its effect on methane release. Where do your stand on PIOMAS Arctic volume > predictions? > > Stephen > > > > > On 22/03/2012 21:14, Alan Robock wrote: >> Dear Steve, >> >> In the article about your parliamentary hearing, it says: >> >> "Everybody working in geo-engineering hopes it won't be needed - but we fear >> it will be," said Prof Salter. >> >> This is incorrect, and I would like to request that you issue a statement to >> that effect. You are not speaking for me. And you need to ask everyone >> else working in this field, before you claim to speak for them. I >> personally fear that geoengineering will be used before all the potential >> effects are studied. This is quite different from fearing that it will be >> needed, because that implies that we know that it will be the only response >> society can take. Thanks. >> > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > -- > 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. > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jamais Cascio [email protected] Open the Future - with enough minds, all tomorrows are visible http://www.openthefuture.com “It is the business of the future to be dangerous.” –Alfred North Whitehead -- 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.
