This paper is dated Feb 2014.  Is it peer reviewed?  Was it published and 
if so where?  A quick Google Scholar search throws up nothing.

Robert Chris

On Saturday, 10 January 2015 00:23:21 UTC, andrewjlockley wrote:
>
> (Attached) 
>
> A temporary, moderate, and responsive scenario for solar geoengineering   
>
> David W. Keith and Douglas G. MacMartin
>
> Abstract 
>
> Evaluation of the risks and benefits of solar geoengineering, or Solar 
> Radiation Management (SRM) depend on the scenario for its implementation. 
> Claims that SRM will reduce precipitation, increase ocean acidification, 
> deplete stratospheric ozone, or that it must be continued forever once 
> started are not inherent features of SRM but rather depend on the specific 
> technology and time trajectory for implementation. We argue that the common 
> assumption that SRM would be used to restore temperatures to preindustrial 
> is a poor scenario choice on which to base policy-relevant judgments about 
> the utility of SRM. As a basis for further analysis we provide a scenario 
> that is temporary in that its end point is zero SRM, is moderate in that it 
> offsets only half of the growth in other anthropogenic climate forcing, and 
> is responsive in that it explicitly recognizes that the amount of SRM will 
> be adjusted in light of new information. We provide specific quantitative 
> illustrations of such a scenario for the case of stratospheric sulfate 
> aerosols.  
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to