Greg (cc list and pboyd): 

I like your paper. But I wonder if the concept of using ocean biomass for 
harvest and eventual partial placement of "half" the carbon in soil (as 
biochar) was inadvertently or intentionally omitted. 

I see major advantages of using ocean biomass (macroalgae and smaller) for 
biochar as worthy of your and this list's consideration for these reasons, that 
seem not to be shared by the options you did discuss: 

a. it provides rather than consumes energy 
b. the generated energy can be of any form - solid, gas or liquid - for any end 
use sector. My preference is to back up wind and solar, not for base load 
service. 
c. It can improve most soil types - almost all of which are rapidly depleting - 
with significant improved out-year nutrition benefits from increased primary 
production. 
d. the carbon sequestration, although not infinite, is possibly measured in 
millennia, certainly centuries - perhaps longer than some you include. 
e. such harvesting is already occurring, and generally the practice would seem 
to have little international legal/moral concern, especially if practiced in 
near-shore waters. 

Ron 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Rau" <[email protected]> 
To: [email protected], [email protected] 
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 9:44:13 PM 
Subject: [geo] RE: recent papers on marine ecosystem geoengineering 


Nor should iron fertilization necessarily be viewed as the poster child for 
marine CDR. Some other ideas attached - I was limited to 2,00O words. 
-Greg 




From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on 
behalf of Philip Boyd [[email protected]] 
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 6:54 PM 
To: [email protected] 
Subject: [geo] FW: recent papers on marine ecosystem geoengineering 





Dear Geo group, I have noticed that much of the discussion on this topic are 
based on older papers. Here is a recent one. 




Williamson P., D. W.R. Wallace , C.S. Law, P.W. Boyd, Y. Collos, P. Croot, K. 
Denman, U. Riebesell, S. Takeda, C. Vivian (2012) Ocean fertilization for 
geoengineering: A review of effectiveness, environmental impacts and emerging 
governance. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 9, 475–488. 

and also a link to a Theme Section on this topic from 2008 

Implications of large-scale iron fertilization of the oceans 
Idea: Howard Browman, Philip W. Boyd 
Coordination: Philip W. Boyd 


MEPS 364:213-309 | Complete Theme Section in pdf format (2 MB) 



Philip 

Professor Philip Boyd FRSNZ 
NIWA Centre of Chemical & Physical Oceanography 
Department of Chemistry 
University of Otago 
Dunedin 
New Zealand 

03-479-5249 


From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Ken Caldeira [[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 1:06 PM 
To: [email protected] 
Cc: geoengineering 
Subject: Re: [geo] "A Cheap and Easy Plan to Stop Global Warming" By David 
Rotman 



A nicely done article. 


I would like to expand on one of Ray Pierrehumbert's comments. 


He is quoted as saying: 


“The term ‘solar radiation management’ is positively Orwellian. It’s a way to 
increase comfort levels with this crazy idea.” —Raymond Pierrehumbert 

He is right that it was created to inrease comfort level, but it was done so 
with ironic intent. 


In 2007, I was organizing a meeting that took place at NASA-Ames. 
(Incidentally, that meeting is where this google group started. 
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20070031204 ) 


There was some nervousness on the part of local NASA officials that the term 
"geoengineering" might raise red flags back in Washington. At the time, DOE was 
talking about "carbon management" which was a bureaucratic way to speak about 
the potential for CO2 emissions reduction. 


To avoid the use of the word "geoengineering" in the meeting name, I suggested 
that we create the term "Solar Radiation Managment" to use for the workshop. It 
was meant as parody of US-government-style bureaucratic jargon. It was meant as 
a joke and was intentionally obscurantist. We were laughing about it at the 
time and never dreamed that it would become standard jargon. 


The term "Solar Radiation Management" was meant to lower the profile of the 
meeting while parodying Washington jargon. It amuses me that it has become 
standard jargon. 


What started out as parody has moved on from its comedic roots. Comedy has 
become drama. 


Incidentally, lately I have been using the term "solar geoengineering" as my 
term of choice to refer to what SRM has come to denote. 


Best, 


Ken 
_______________ 
Ken Caldeira 

Carnegie Institution for Science 
Dept of Global Ecology 

260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA 

+1 650 704 7212 [email protected] 
http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab @kencaldeira 


Caldeira Lab is hiring postdoctoral researchers. 
http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab/Caldeira_employment.html 



Our YouTube videos 


On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Simon Driscoll < [email protected] > 
wrote: 




http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/511016/a-cheap-and-easy-plan-to-stop-global-warming/
 

Ray Pierrehumbert recently sent this to me, and I haven't seen this posted to 
the group (apologies if it has been and I missed it in a quick search), so I 
thought it may be of interest. 

All the best, 

Simon 











________________________________________________ 

Simon Driscoll 
Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics 
Department of Physics 
University of Oxford 

Office: 01865 272930 
Mobile: 07935314940 

http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/contacts/people/driscoll 
http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/people/who-are-we/simon-driscoll/ 
http://80000hours.org/members/simon-driscoll 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group. 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected] . 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected] . 
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en . 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . 







-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group. 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected]. 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en . 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . 




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group. 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected]. 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en . 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . 




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group. 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected]. 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en . 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . 


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to