Dear Andrew,
This is not correct. For example, please see the paper by Tilmes et
al., in press in JGR:
Tilmes, Simone, John Fasullo, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Daniel R. Marsh,
Mike Mills, Kari Alterskjær, Olivier Boucher, Jason N. S. Cole, Charles
L. Curry, J. H. Haywood, Peter J. Irvine, Duoying Ji, Andy Jones, D. B.
Karam, Ben Kravitz, Jón E. Kristjánsson, John Moore, Helen O. Muri,
Ulrike Niemeier, Philip J. Rasch, Alan Robock, Hauke Schmidt, Micheal
Schulz, Yang Shuting, Balwinder Singh, Shingo Watanabe, and J.-H. Yoon,
2013:The Hydrological Impact of Geoengineering in the Geoengineering
Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). /J. Geophys. Res. Atmos./, in
press, doi:10.1029/ 2013JD019852.
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/GeomipPrecipG1InPress.pdf
Alan
Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor
Editor, Reviews of Geophysics
Director, Meteorology Undergraduate Program
Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-848-932-5751
Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644
14 College Farm Road E-mail: [email protected]
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock
http://twitter.com/AlanRobock
Watch my 18 min TEDx talk at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsrEk1oZ-54
On 9/27/2013 6:39 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote:
The bit that jarred with me was the IPCC comment about the hydro cycle
under SRM. I don't think it expresses the science well. SRM doesn't
disrupt the hydro cycle, it just doesn't fix hydro and temperature by
exactly the same amount. Running SRM actually RESTORES the hydro
cycle, rather than disrupts it. I'm sure that's just down to
unfortunate wording rather than bad science, but these things matter!
A
On Sep 27, 2013 10:31 PM, "Ronal W. Larson" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Joshua and list
1. Thanks for the alert. Besides your excerpt below, there
is another (well hidden, but is in Section E8, with
"Irreversibility" in the Section Title) place in the Summary where
CDR appears (albeit indirectly). I found it as I was reading
today's RealClimate summary of the Summary. The Comment I left
(slightly modified here) said:
1. The Real Climate summary above is only partly accurate when
it says at the end of the first section on global warming:
/"A large part of the warming will be *_irreversible_*: from the
point where emissions have dropped to zero, global temperature
will remain almost constant for centuries at the elevated level
reached by that time. (This is why the climate problem in my
opinion is a classic case for the precautionary principle.)"/
2. But the just released actual IPCC report has an important
added qualifier on page 20 in Section E8:
/"A large fraction of anthropogenic climate change resulting from
CO2 emissions is *_irreversible_* on a multi-century to millennial
time scale, *_except in the case of a large net removal of CO2
from the atmosphere over a sustained period."_*/
3. This added clause introduces in these IPCC series for the
first time the hugely important concept of Carbon Dioxide Removal
(CDR) - which can be accomplished, and which I hope Real Climate
and its readers can get behind wholeheartedly.
Ron
ps: Anyone found any other place?
On Sep 27, 2013, at 5:57 AM, Josh Horton
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
It's finally out and here's what it says about geoengineering:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5-SPM_Approved27Sep2013.pdf
Methods that aim to deliberately alter the climate system to
counter climate change, termed geoengineering, have been
proposed. Limited evidence precludes a comprehensive quantitative
assessment of both Solar Radiation Management (SRM) and Carbon
Dioxide Removal (CDR) and their impact on the climate system. CDR
methods have biogeochemical and technological limitations to
their potential on a global scale. There is insufficient
knowledge to quantify how much CO2 emissions could be partially
offset by CDR on a century timescale. Modelling indicates that
SRM methods, if realizable, have the potential to substantially
offset a global temperature rise, but they would also modify the
global water cycle, and would not reduce ocean acidification. If
SRM were terminated for any reason, there is high confidence that
global surface temperatures would rise very rapidly to values
consistent with the greenhouse gas forcing. CDR and SRM methods
carry side effects and long-term consequences on a global scale.
{6.5, 7.7} (p. 21)
Not quite what the Guardian was reporting last week ...
Josh
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:geoengineering%[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[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.
