Ron et al, One way to work around the upcoming dismantlement of climate mitigation work is to couch the work as a form of economic expansion, which is a cornerstone of the Rep. party platform. Fortunately, biochar, olivine, industrial agro improvements in general as well as marine BECCS can all be rightfully couched as economic expansion projects. This is a realpolitik approach which will allow those in the party, who actually do understand the science of climate change, to support climate change mitigation while not outing themselves to the extreme (simple minded) faction within their party.
The profit potential of the above mentioned mitigation concepts is substantial and thus the profit motivation can potentially attract support from the extreme faction much like a hungry predator is attracted to rotten meat hung in a tree. Viewed from this perspective, this election outcome is not as bleak as one might first imagine. Also, I would highly recommend that any and all mitigation project not be designed to be reliant on governmental money for long term operations simply due to the unpredictable nature of politics. As such, those mitigation projects which can become economically self supporting, from the start, may actually have a substantial advantage over those mitigation projects which can not find a market niche which will support the work over the long run. This economic self reliance factor was a strong influence on the initial IMBECS Protocol work. I'm confidant that the work on biochar can also adapt to these political whims. Best regards, Michael On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 9:54:45 PM UTC-8, Ron wrote: > > List: > > My guess is that climate-related funding and action in the US has > been set back by at least two years because of the US election results that > are now in. I was amazed at what has happened - and have no insights as > to why it happened. Much blame being placed on Obama - which seems unfair, > since his views seem mostly to be those of a majority of the electorate. I > have heard not one view that it had something to do with secret “dark” > money - but suspect that was influential. > > I think those of us in the US would appreciate hearing guidance on > how to get R’s to change their views on the seriousness of our looming > climate mess. I have heard nothing that is working on how to convince > deniers. Today’s sweep will make the job even harder. > > 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/d/optout.
