The abstract mirrors my personal opinions, I think they nailed it. I am firmly against any solution that involves creating more pollution. The "chemtrail" community is up in arms over what they think is "geoengineering SRM" and will rightly "tar and feather" anyone who's willing to go on record as saying they want to spray the skies. The outrage should SRM be deployed will be tremendous, and I'll be there to lead that march.
Thank you to this community for being so willing to openly discuss your research. I hope that we can focus on solutions like CDR and albedo enhancement (as long as it isn't used to steer hurricanes<http://climateviewer.com/2013/11/08/hurricane-hacking-the-department-of-homeland-security-enters-the-weather-modification-business/>, nudge nudge) ~ Jim Lee Climate Viewer News http://climateviewer.com/ On Sunday, January 12, 2014 7:30:22 PM UTC-5, andrewjlockley wrote: > > http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2087.html > > A quantitative evaluation of the public response to climate engineering > > Published online 12 January 2014 > > Atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations continue to increase, with > CO2 passing 400 parts per million in May 2013. To avoid severe climate > change and the attendant economic and social dislocation, existing energy > efficiency and emissions control initiatives may need support from some > form of climate engineering. As climate engineering will be controversial, > there is a pressing need to inform the public and understand their concerns > before policy decisions are taken. So far, engagement has been exploratory, > small-scale or technique-specific. We depart from past research to draw on > the associative methods used by corporations to evaluate brands. A > systematic, quantitative and comparative approach for evaluating public > reaction to climate engineering is developed. Its application reveals that > the overall public evaluation of climate engineering is negative. Where > there are positive associations they favour carbon dioxide removal (CDR) > over solar radiation management (SRM) techniques. Therefore, as SRM > techniques become more widely known they are more likely to elicit negative > reactions. Two climate engineering techniques, enhanced weathering and > cloud brightening, have indistinct concept images and so are less likely to > draw public attention than other CDR or SRM techniques. > -- 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.
