Poster's note : despite the apologies to Lee, geoengineering does seem to offer a way for deniers to get out of their intellectual dead end. Please excuse lack of paragraphs. I'm ill, and line breaks are not high on my list of priorities!
http://blogs.redding.com/dcraig/archives/2013/06/apologizing-to.html Apologizing to Lee Lane June 3, 2013 10:22 PM I stand corrected.On May 20, 2013, I posted the second blog in a series with the following title: "The conservative flip-flop on climate change (2)."In that blog I wrote, "While the Hudson Institute regularly publishes articles denying that global warming is real or human-caused, many of those pieces are written by Lee Lane, a resident fellow at AEI and codirector of the AEI Geoengineering Project, who has advocated researching the use of climate engineering (CE) technologies like solar radiation management (SRM)."I wrote, "Lane was the lead author of a paper that offered, 'a preliminary and exploratory assessment of the potential benefits and costs of climate engineering (CE). We examine two families of CE technologies, solar radiation management (SRM) and air capture (AC), under three emissions control environments: no controls, optimal abatement, and limiting temperature change to 2°C.'"I continued to quote Mr. Lane: "Our analysis suggests that, today, SRM offers larger net benefits than AC, but that both deserve to be investigated further. In the case of SRM, we investigate three specific technologies: the injection of aerosols into the stratosphere, the increase of marine cloud albedo, and the deployment of a space-based sunshade."We estimate direct benefit-cost (B/C) ratios of around 25 to 1 for aerosols and around 5000 to 1 for cloud albedo enhancement."And then I wrote this:"In other words, conservatives insist that global warming is not real or human-caused if the solution is carbon taxes or government regulation. However, if the solution is the highly profitable business of geoengineering, they not only believe global warming is real and human-caused, they think we need to get cracking on saving ourselves from it."In response, Mr. Lane wrote me today, adamantly insisting that I have done him a disservice and that I have not fairly or accurately characterized his views. And he is correct.Lane writes that I made "blatantly false and misleading statements about my writings on climate change. You state, 'While the Hudson Institute regularly publishes articles denying that global warming is real or human-caused, many of those pieces are written by Lee Lane, ... who has advocated researching the use of climate engineering (CE) technologies like solar radiation management (SRM).'"Mr. Lane writes, "In fact, I have never claimed that global warming is not real nor have I ever asserted that humans have not contributed to it. My monograph posted on the Hudson Institute website here places the anthropogenic origins of climate change in a historical context. It also explains why it is extremely unlikely that effective greenhouse gas controls will be deployed on a sufficient scale to avoid climate change damage in the more vulnerable societies, which is the source of my interest in SRM."My monograph on climate engineering is easily accessible here. I challenge you to find any claim in it that disputes either the reality or the anthropogenic roots of climate change."Or, if you only read shorter pieces, you might consult the piece listed here."I excerpt: 'Many Republicans will doubtless again respond by challenging the science that shows that greenhouse gas emissions could cause harmful climate change. Were such challenges directed at poking holes in the often hyped claims of green advocates, they would serve the public interest.'"But Senator James Inhofe and many other Republicans go much farther, claiming that manmade climate change is a huge scientific hoax and that greenhouse gas emissions pose no risk.'"'Hoax, really? Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish Nobel laureate chemist, first described the greenhouse effect in 1896. Science, then, has long known that carbon dioxide and some other naturally occurring gases in the atmosphere cause Earth to be about 30 degrees C warmer than it otherwise would be.'"'Mankind, by burning fossil fuels and cutting down forests, is adding to the atmosphere's stock of warming gases. If that process continues, all else being equal, simple logic tells us that the planet will warm further. Warming is highly likely to affect rainfall, clouds, ice cover, and much else.'""Not only is your description of my views are grossly misleading, but had you taken even the most rudimentary care to check their accuracy would have clear evidence refuting them. Stop telling lies about my writings." Lee Lane Visiting Fellow Hudson Institute Mr. Lane is right. I was wrong. And I apologize for not presenting his views on anthropogenic climate change correctly. I am happy to publish this correction -- 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.
