Noah Deich provides a good summary of the CDR report at Recap and Commentary:
National Academy of Sciences Report on Carbon Removal
I have made a comment at his blog.
Robert Tulip
| |
| | | | | | | |
| Recap and Commentary: National Academy of Sciences ...Earlier today, the
National Academy of Sciences (“NAS”) released a comprehensive study dedicated
to carbon dioxide removal (“CDR”). To date, CDR has largely been ... |
| |
| View on carbonremoval.wordp... | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
| |
From: "Rau, Greg" <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>;
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, 12 February 2015, 6:31
Subject: Re: [geo] National Academies reports
Also
this:http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/02/hack-the-planet-comprehensive-report-suggests-thinking-carefully-first/To
quote: "In the end, the report clearly comes down in favor of research into
carbon removal technology. "Overall, there is much to be gained and very low
risk in pursuing multiple parts of a portfolio of [carbon removal] strategies
that demonstrate practical solutions over the short term and develop more
cost-effective, regional-scale and larger solutions for the long term," it
concludes. "In contrast, even the best albedo modification strategies are
currently limited by unfamiliar and unquantifiable risks and governance issues
rather than direct costs."But beyond the research programs, it's clear that
neither of these approaches is ready for deployment, and it's not clear that
either of them can ever be made ready, a fact driven home by the cancellation
of what would have been the US'largest carbon capture experiment. That's in
sharp contrast with non-emitting power sources, where technology is already
mature and costs are in many cases already competitive with those of fossil
fuels."Very unfortunate that CDR is again equated with CCS. The potential
approaches and success of the former need not be tied to the ongoing failure of
the latter.Greg
From: "J.L. Reynolds" <[email protected]>
Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 11:11 PM
To: geoengineering <[email protected]>
Subject: [geo] National Academies reports
#yiv1141488040 #yiv1141488040 -- _filtered #yiv1141488040 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4
6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv1141488040 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4
3 2 4;}#yiv1141488040 #yiv1141488040 p.yiv1141488040MsoNormal, #yiv1141488040
li.yiv1141488040MsoNormal, #yiv1141488040 div.yiv1141488040MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;}#yiv1141488040 a:link,
#yiv1141488040 span.yiv1141488040MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1141488040 a:visited, #yiv1141488040
span.yiv1141488040MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1141488040
span.yiv1141488040EmailStyle17 {color:windowtext;}#yiv1141488040
.yiv1141488040MsoChpDefault {} _filtered #yiv1141488040 {margin:70.85pt 70.85pt
70.85pt 70.85pt;}#yiv1141488040 div.yiv1141488040WordSection1 {}#yiv1141488040
Yesterday , a committee of the National research Council released a two volume
report on climate engineering. They are available here
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18988/climate-intervention-reflecting-sunlight-to-cool-earth
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18805/climate-intervention-carbon-dioxide-removal-and-reliable-sequestration
One must register to download, but may read online without doing so. The
newly renamed Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment (formerly the Washington
Geoengineering Consortium) has handy roundups of media coverage and NGO
reactions. I found the latter interesting, in that Friends of the Earth US came
out fully against climate engineering while the Union of Concerned Scientists,
the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Environmental Defense Fund were
supportive of the reports and further research (with varying degrees of caution
expressed).
http://dcgeoconsortium.org/2015/02/10/media-coverage-of-nas-climate-intervention-reports/
http://dcgeoconsortium.org/2015/02/10/civil-society-statements-on-the-release-of-nas-climate-intervention-reports/
The press conference was webcast. Some people “live tweeted” it. See
https://twitter.com/elikint https://twitter.com/janieflegal
https://twitter.com/TheCarbonSink https://twitter.com/mclaren_erc Cheers
Jesse ----------------------------------------- Jesse L. Reynolds, PhD
Postdoctoral researcher Research funding coordinator, sustainability and
climate European and International Public Law Tilburg Sustainability Center
Tilburg University, The Netherlands Book review editor, Law, Innovation, and
Technology email: [email protected]
http://works.bepress.com/jessreyn/ --
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
[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.
--
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.
