Ken cc list
This is to support your request for ideas for a #2 list (though I
wonder what is on the #1 list). I recognize that you asked for only in the
SRM category, but Andrew added two (his 7th and 8th) on CDR (which probably
sound to a few CDR-folk as not so myth like) so I thought I should add one that
attempts to tie CDR/NET to SRM:
See below, so I can expand (very briefly, since you are urging a new
thread) into the #2b and 2c categories which is where the interesting
information is . See below
On Aug 5, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I am supposed to give a keynote talk at CEC14 in two weeks. For this talk, I
> would like to try to develop a list of oft-cited memes that many assume are
> established facts, but which may not in fact be true.
>
> I am thinking of things like: "With solar geoengineering, there will be
> winners and losers." "Termination risk is an important reason not to engage
> in solar geoengineering." "Solar geoengineering will cause widespread drying."
[RWL: I hope your keynote will be televised to hear your discussion on
these. I like the slant you are taking.
>
> I don't want to discuss all of these things here but simply to develop a
> list. You could help me by sending an email answering the questions:
>
> 2a. What memes are out there which many "experts" regard as well-established
> facts but which in fact might not be correct?
[RWL: SRM can be analyzed adequately and correctly without comparing
to CDR/NET.
>
> 2b. Why do you suspect the correctness of that meme?
[RWL: Because of a failure to develop a useful agreed-upon methodology
for comparing these two parts of "Geoengineering" ("Climate Engineering" at
CEC14).
>
> 2c. (optional) Can you provide a citation or a link to where someone is
> assuming the meme is true?
[RWL: a) The high percentage of technical articles which use the
terms "geoengineering" ("climate engineering") to mean only SRM.
b) The high percentage of articles (and AR5/IPCC) making
no effort to compare and contrast the two.
c) The high percentage of articles that assume/assert
CDR/NET will take too long and cost too much.
d) The failure of ethicists to look seriously at the
CDR/NET arena; to only look at SRM.
Ron, with an apology for not starting a separate thread as requested.
>
> Thoughtful responses would be most appreciated. If you want to start
> discussion about a meme, please do so in a separate thread so that this
> thread can be easily used to develop a list.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ken
>
> _______________
> 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
> https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira
>
> Assistant: Dawn Ross <[email protected]>
>
>
> --
> 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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
