List, especially Mike and John, cc Brian (who started this)
1. This is to explore further how this biotic pump topic would
influence any part of geoengineering. I have concluded, like Brian, that this
paper is important in promoting regrowth of forests. John certainly agrees and
probably (?) Mike. Anyone disagree?
2. Inadvertently (I thought this was a 2015 paper for a while), I read
not only the final paper, but the many difficulties in getting it published (>
1000 days). From the 24 subsequent papers found through Google Scholar, I
conclude that it is not now a continuing controversy - but I have found no
evidence that the paper has changed any existing models (as I’m sure the
authors intended and hoped). Anyone know?
3. Others may find it interesting to see how the controversy was
handled. Although it took a long time, I think the Journal basically did a
good job and made a correct (but controversial) decision to publish. I was
surprised how all (?) the editorial review correspondence is still available
(nothing anonymous) - at a site given by the main editor in the paper’s last
paragraph.
The main author, Dr. Makarieva, was indefatigable - many dozens of
pages defending everything in the paper. Here is the summary (with
forest-oriented emphases added) from her invited post-publication comment at:
http://judithcurry.com/2013/01/31/condensation-driven-winds-an-update-new-version/#comment-291429
Summary and outlook
The Editor’s comment on our paper ends with a call to further evaluate our
proposals. We second this call. The reason we wrote this paper was to ensure it
entered the main-stream and gained recognition. For us the key implication of
our theory is the major importance of vegetation cover in sustaining regional
climates. If condensation drives atmospheric circulation as we claim, then
forests determine much of the Earth’s hydrological cycle (see here for
details). Forest cover is crucial for the terrestrial biosphere and the
well-being of many millions of people. If you acknowledge, as the editors of
ACP have, any chance – however large or small – that our proposals are correct,
then we hope you concede that there is some urgency that these ideas gain clear
objective assessment from those best placed to assess them.
4. A slightly later paper entitled “Revisiting forest impact on
atmospheric water vapor transport and precipitation”, by many of the same
authors is also NOT behind a paywall - and carries this forest theme further:
http://www.bioticregulation.ru/common/pdf/taac-en.pdf. There are numerous
other climate related papers from this Russian group - that almost certainly
have relevance also on the SRM side of “Geo”.
Ron
On May 31, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Mike MacCracken <[email protected]> wrote:
> How are they not both important—the condensation releases the heat that
> carries the air upward, creating a pressure gradient that pulls the air
> ashore?
>
> Mike
>
>
> On 5/31/15, 10:09 AM, "John Harte" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The work of Makarieva and Gorshkov (note: not Gorshkov and Makarieva; she is
>> first author on their papers on this topic) is challenging atmospheric
>> scientists not because it points to the huge role of forests in the
>> hydrocycle (I have been teaching that for decades) but rather the specific
>> mechanism they propose. Their argument is that it is the pressure
>> difference created by condensation, not the heat released by condensation,
>> that is the more important driver. Certainly both play a big role; my
>> understanding is that the pressure effect was largely ignored in the past.
>>
>> John Harte
>> Professor of Ecosystem Sciences
>> ERG/ESPM
>> 310 Barrows Hall
>> University of California
>> Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 30, 2015, at 2:49 PM, Brian Cartwright <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> To the geoengineering group,
>>>
>>> I'm curious whether group members are familiar with the "biotic pump" model
>>> of Gorshkov and Makarieva; this article gives a quick introduction:
>>>
>>> http://news.mongabay.com/2013/0130-hance-physics-biotic-pump.html
>>>
>>> A big climate benefit of inland forests is that phase change from
>>> evapotranspiration -> condensation creates low-pressure areas that pull in
>>> moisture and create healthy weather circulation. Seems to me that
>>> widespread deforestation is aggravating stalled hot-weather trends by
>>> blocking this kind of circulation. The leaf area of a mature forest offers
>>> considerably more surface area for evaporation than the same area of open
>>> water on ocean or inland lake.
>>>
>>> Brian Cartwright
>
>
> --
> 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.
