List:
The last (at least in my mail) issue of "Science" had a review
(http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6169/371.full) of the recent book
"Climate Casino" by Prof. William Nordhaus. In my mind a little more negative
a review than deserved. A more positive review was given by Paul Krugman
(http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/nov/07/climate-change-gambling-civilization/)
in November.
Since both reviews gave credit for clarity and emphasis on risk, and I
wanted to hear more about climate economics, I gambled on a $14.99 Kindle
edition. I'm glad I did. There is much more on Geoengineering, including
Carbon Removal, than I expected. Nordhaus is not positive on most of
geoengineering, but here are a few comments that struck me, and might draw
further comment:
#1 (near Kindle 2255): ".. the option of CO2 removal, which is genuinely
attractive, is postponed to later chapters.
#2 (near Kindle 2300) " ...., no responsible country should undertake
geoengineering as the first line of defense against global warming."
#3 (near Kindle 2485) "Suppose that British Columbia were to devote half of
its forest land, or about 300,000 square kilometers, to carbon removal. This
would involve growing trees, cutting them after they mature, and storing them
in a way that prevents leakage of the CO2 into the atmosphere. British Columbia
would soon have a huge mountain of trees, but devoting half the province to the
project would offset less than 0.5 percent of the world's CO2 emissions in
coming years."
RWL: Several comments on these three sentences. First that the stated
300,000 square kilometers represents well less than 0.3 percent of global land
area (of about 13 Gha). Second, depending on assumptions, the annual carbon
removal offset at this site could be larger (not less) "than 0.5 percent... in
coming years". Third, that Professor Nordhaus nowhere in this book has used
the word "biochar". None of his two uses of "nitrous oxide", ten uses of
"soil", or four dozens uses of the word "food" capture these non-climate
aspects of biochar.
So I suspect his support of CDR will be higher when he discovers
Biochar as the most recent addition to the carbon removal option list.
Other thoughts?
Ron
--
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.
