Well, maybe what that says is that we should simply consider SRM in the
same context as mitigation and adaptation proposals. Everything winds up
coming out of the same RF/carbon budget. We need a global systems solution
anyway.


---
Fred Zimmerman
Geoengineering IT!
Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information technology
GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080


On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Ken Caldeira <
[email protected]> wrote:

> As per my earlier email seeking a new definition of "geoengineering", what
> is the point of lumping all SRM and CDR techniques together and not
> considering the entire range of mitigation (and possibly adaptation)
> proposals?
>
> Many CDR techniques (e.g., BECCS, DAC) have far greater similarity with
> conventional mitigation approaches than they do with spraying aerosols in
> the stratosphere.
>
> see:  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/geoengineering/xsD3wqMahbc
>
>
> _______________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Andrew Lockley 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Fred
>>
>> John Shepherd (cc) did a graphical analysis of this issue, which I found
>> very helpful.
>>
>> I've cc'd him, and maybe he can provide the graph.
>>
>> A
>> On Sep 24, 2013 2:54 PM, "Fred Zimmerman" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We spend a lot of time discussing the merits of individual approaches to
>>> geoengineering and arguing for prioritizing one or the other.
>>>
>>> Assuming hypothetically that
>>>
>>> 1) all methods, all flavors of SRM/CDR are "approved" by a governance
>>> authority
>>> 2) all methods, all flavors are assigned values for "years to
>>> deployment" and "RF per year" and "cost per unit of RF"
>>>
>>> has anyone done an exercise modeling the optimum mix across all
>>> methods/all flavors? if some methods/flavors are disapproved?  if values
>>> are modified?
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Fred Zimmerman
>>> 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.
>>> 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.
>> 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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to