You may be confusing Pielke with someone else. He has never been a climate-change denier (his father RP Sr, is an atmospheric scientist working on this since a long while back, actually). In the years that I've been aware of him he has been interested in geoengineering, especially CDR, and in CCS. He was, and is, dismissive of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade strategy, not on grounds of principle but of effectiveness. This put him at odds with most environmental groups and led to a long-running, bitter (and to observers, very entertaining) feud with Joe Romm at Climate Progress. One aspect of the Romm's attacks was to claim that Pielke was a climate-change denier, although that was obviously untrue if you read what Pielke actually wrote in response to Romm. Pielke is now afiliated with Nordhaus and Shellenberger at the Breakthrough Institute, which makes sense because they too predicted that W-M, and the European system too, would fail, and why (quite accurately alas). So the Atlantic piece just restates a familiar position of his.
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 4:52 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Today's Topic Summary > > Group: http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/topics > > - Grist magazine on geoengineering <#13ea7d2387510601_group_thread_0>[5 > Updates] > - Tropical coral reef habitat in a geoengineered, high-CO2 > world<#13ea7d2387510601_group_thread_1>[1 Update] > - Solar radiation management: An evolving climate policy option - > Energy and the Environment - AEI (Event, > video)<#13ea7d2387510601_group_thread_2>[1 Update] > - Opinion Article by Tim Kruger on the Oxford > Principles<#13ea7d2387510601_group_thread_3>[1 Update] > - Pielke calls for full speed ahead on burning fossil fuels *and* > CCS<#13ea7d2387510601_group_thread_4>[1 Update] > > Grist magazine on > geoengineering<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/t/ab844b1eea2ec99a> > > Fred Zimmerman <[email protected]> May 14 09:45AM -0400 > > From scott Rosenberg, who moderated last week's Caldeira/Hamilton > event: > > http://grist.org/climate-energy/geoengineering-research-never-or-now/ > > Hamilton’s *Earthmasters* book quotes Lawrence Livermore Labs scientist > Lowell Wood: “We’ve engineered every other environment we live in — > why not > the planet?” > > If the hubris there is too much for you, Hamilton balances it with a > line > from another scientist, Ron Prinn: “How can you engineer a system you > don’t > understand?” > > --- > Fred Zimmerman > Geoengineering IT! > Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information > technology > GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 > > > > > Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> May 14 07:47AM -0700 > > The context of course is that we are already interfering in Earth's > climate > system in a major way ... we are already throwing sand in the gears. > > Model results indicate that throwing some oil on the gears will help > make > the clock run smoothly, despite not knowing how all the gears really > fit > together. > > When efforts to stop throwing sand fail, where does hubris lie? Does it > reside in the person who wants to consider oiling the gears or in the > person who claims a priori that their heightened ethical sensitivity > demands that the gears not be oiled (as we watch the clockwork > mechanism > grind to a halt)? > > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Fred Zimmerman > > > > > Jim Fleming <[email protected]> May 14 11:01AM -0400 > > Prinn's quote is via Oliver Morton. > > See Fleming, Fixing the Sky p. 225 > > *How can you engineer a system whose behavior you don’t understand?* > > —Ron Prinn, quoted in Morton, “Climate Change” > > > Of course, this begs the question of someday gaining better > understanding. > > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Fred Zimmerman > > -- > James Fleming > STS Program > Colby College > 5881 Mayflower Hill > Waterville, ME 04901 > Ph: 207-859-5881 > Fax: 207-859-5846 > Web: http://www.colby.edu/profile/jfleming < > http://web.colby.edu/jfleming> > > > > > RAU greg <[email protected]> May 14 08:57AM -0700 > > Just to follow up, we may not entirely understand the system but we > know that > elevated air CO2 (sand) is not good for it. Job 1 is then to stop air > CO2 from > increasing. Given that we have thus far failed to do this, what are > the ethics > of actively discouraging research on any CO2 management methods > (engineering or > otherwise) that might help us in this task? Ethics, economics, and > politics > should enter the equation once research tells us if we actually have > any > technically and environmentally viable options. Or is SRM the only > ethics target > here? Or simply any "engineering"? Or anything that disturbs pre-1750 > BAU? > Greg > > > > ________________________________ > From: Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: geoengineering <[email protected]> > Sent: Tue, May 14, 2013 7:48:25 AM > Subject: Re: [geo] Grist magazine on geoengineering > > The context of course is that we are already interfering in Earth's > climate > system in a major way ... we are already throwing sand in the gears. > > Model results indicate that throwing some oil on the gears will help > make the > clock run smoothly, despite not knowing how all the gears really fit > together. > > When efforts to stop throwing sand fail, where does hubris lie? Does > it reside > in the person who wants to consider oiling the gears or in the person > who claims > a priori that their heightened ethical sensitivity demands that the > gears not be > oiled (as we watch the clockwork mechanism grind to a halt)? > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Fred Zimmerman < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > From scott Rosenberg, who moderated last week's Caldeira/Hamilton > event: > > >Geoengineering IT! > >Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information > technology > >GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 > -- > > -- > 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. > > > > > Ninad Bondre <[email protected]> May 15 02:42AM -0700 > > Two points below. > > 1) Ken's comment that "we are already interfering in Earth's climate > system > in a major way". > > I liked Ben Hale's response to this line of argumentation in April > 2012 > (although the context was somewhat different): > > "If you have such a wide view of GE, then there is no ethical question > about GE. It’s either permissible or obligatory or forbidden or a > foregone > conclusion (depending on your view of such actions). In other words, > you’re > begging the question. Ought we to geoengineer? Your answer to this > question > cannot be: geoengineering is permissible because everything we do is > geoengineering. > > > 2) Greg Rau's comment that "Ethics, economics, and politics should > enter > the equation once research tells us if we actually have any > technically and > environmentally viable options." > > This rather anachronistic view of research does not account for the > interests, biases, presuppositions and motivations of researchers and > their > funders (be it governments or corporations). Research isn't > politically or > ethically neutral, which is why it cannot be insulated from those > considerations. This group might want to read this Ruha Benjamin piece > in > the Huffington Post: > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ruha-benjamin-phd/beyond-tokenistic-inclusi_b_2950515.html?utm_hp_ref=tw > > 3) Finally, regarding some group members' penchant for analogies - you > may > want to have a look at > www.skepticsfieldguide.net/2012/09/false-analogy.html > > Ninad > > > On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 5:57:16 PM UTC+2, Greg Rau wrote: > > > > Tropical coral reef habitat in a geoengineered, high-CO2 > world<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/t/f6f286e39a0518bc> > > Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> May 15 12:26AM +0100 > > Poster's note: Hopefully the author (see cc ) will be kind enough to > submit her paper to this list, as I lack a URL or copy > > Citation > > Couce, EM, Irvine, PJ, Gregorie, L, Ridgwell, AJ & Hendy, E 2013, > ‘Tropical > coral reef habitat in a geoengineered, high-CO2world’. Geophysical > Research > Letters, vol 40. > > Abstract > > Continued anthropogenic CO2 emissions are expected to impact tropical > coral > reefs by further raising sea surface temperatures (SST) and > intensifying > ocean acidification (OA). Although geoengineering by means of Solar > Radiation Management (SRM) may mitigate temperature increases, OA will > persist, raising important questions regarding the impact of different > stressor combinations. We apply statistical Bioclimatic Envelope > Models to > project changes in shallow-water tropical coral reef habitat as a > single > niche (without resolving biodiversity or community composition) under > various Representative Concentration Pathway and SRM scenarios, until > 2070. > We predict substantial reductions in habitat suitability centered on > the > Indo-Pacific Warm Pool under net anthropogenic radiative forcing of > ≥3.0 > W/m2. The near-term dominant risk to coral reefs is increasing SSTs; > below > 3 W/m2 reasonably favorable conditions are maintained, even when > achieved > by SRM with persisting OA. ‘Optimal’ mitigation occurs at 1.5 W/m2 > because > tropical SSTs over-cool in a fully-geoengineered (i.e. pre-industrial > global mean temperature) world. > > Key Points: > > • Large reductions in reef habitat suitability under net radiative > forcing > >3 W/m2 > • Rising SSTs are greater threat for tropical coral reefs than ocean > acidification > • Solar Radiation Management may help maintain coral reef habitat over > near-term > > > > Solar radiation management: An evolving climate policy option - Energy > and the Environment - AEI (Event, > video)<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/t/832df366a588f0e8> > > Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> May 14 05:37PM +0100 > > > > http://aei.org/events/2013/05/29/solar-radiation-management-an-evolving-climate-policy-option/ > > Solar radiation management: An evolving climate policy option > Wednesday, May 29, 2013 | 4:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. > AEI, Twelfth Floor 1150 Seventeenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 > > As hopes for curbing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions wane, interest in > solar > radiation management (SRM) continues to rise. A number of experts > speculate > that SRM might offset some of the harm from climate change by slightly > enhancing the reflectiveness of Earth’s atmosphere. As the controversy > over > climate policy has grown, it has been said that GHG control is too > hard but > SRM is too easy. A new paper by Lee Lane of the Hudson Institute and J. > Eric Bickel of the University of Texas at Austin probes the truth of > these > propositions. The paper shows the potential economic benefits of SRM > but > also explores its risks. It argues that effective GHG control is > likely to > remain elusive but that barriers in international governance will > probably > impede hasty action on SRM, leading to hard bargaining and gridlock. > Join > AEI for a discussion of this new research with the authors and Nobel > Laureate Thomas Schelling. A reception will follow. > > If you are unable to attend, we welcome you to watch the event live on > this > page. Full video will be posted within 24 hours. > > Agenda > 4:15 PMRegistration > 4:30 PMOpening Remarks > 4:35 PMPresenters:J. Eric Bickel, University of Texas at AustinLee > Lane, > Hudson Institute > 5:05 PMDiscussant:Thomas Schelling, University of MarylandModerator: > Kevin > A. Hassett, AEI > > 5:30 PMQuestion-and-Answer Session Moderator:Kevin A. Hassett, AEI > 6:00 PMAdjournment and Reception > > Event Contact Information > For more information, please contact Brad Wassink at > [email protected], > 202.862.7197. > > Media Contact Information > For media inquiries, please contact [email protected], 202.862.5829 > . > > > > Opinion Article by Tim Kruger on the Oxford > Principles<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/t/16d0fff992cb27b5> > > "Geoengineering Our Climate (eds. Blackstock, Miller and Rayner)" < > [email protected]> May 14 01:21PM +0200 > > Dear colleagues, > > An Opinion Article by Tim Kruger (Oxford Martin School) entitled "A > Commentary on the Oxford Principles" is available at > http://geoengineeringourclimate.com/. It can be seen as a more > personalized > account of the paper published earlier this year by Rayner et al in > Climatic Change ( > http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-012-0675-2). > > > I have also attached the PDF here. > > Best wishes, > > Sean Low > > > > Pielke calls for full speed ahead on burning fossil fuels *and* > CCS<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/t/d34bc97b12379490> > > Fred Zimmerman <[email protected]> May 14 08:46AM -0400 > > An article in the Atlantic by noted climate change skeptic Roger > Pielke Jr. > calling for CCS to allow for continued burning of fossil fuels. > > I read this as a major concession. RIP denialism? > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group > geoengineering. > You can post via email <[email protected]>. > To unsubscribe from this group, > send<[email protected]>an empty message. > For more options, > visit<http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/topics>this group. > > -- > 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. > > > -- Thanks, Bill Stahl -- 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.
