John and ccs
[RWL: I hope one of the 22 authors (19 locations) will respond -
obviously I can’t answer any of your below “they” questions.
They (unfortunately) stated (paragraph 1: “…geoengineering, a term
taken here to be synonymous with solar radiation management…”). From our past
discussions, I know that you (fortunately, conversely) mean your term
“geoengineering” below to include CDR. As you know, I believe CDR can do what
you want - and can do so quickly. I understand fully that this is not a
common belief.
I concur with all your concerns on the seriousness of the situation.
My guess is that all 22 authors generally do as well; they are not deniers.
I wager they considered all your questions/issues before coming to
their negative conclusions re SRM. Also they must have known their conclusion
would be controversial. But their conclusion is only on SRM, not on CDR.
This short “Reconsidered” paper uses the word “political” eight times
(about half of their paper) - so it fits well into the governance thread,
initiated yesterday by Dr. Thomas. Perhaps one/some of the 22 authors or
anyone can also comment on the (missing) relationship between politics, CDR (as
opposed to SRM), and the Arctic.
Ron
On Jul 2, 2015, at 11:40 AM, John Nissen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Ron,
>
> Thanks for the reference to “Climate engineering reconsidered". Nature
> Climate Change, 4 (7) pp. 527-529. ISSN 1758-678X DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2278
> [1].
>
> There is a fundamental flaw in their argument against SRM in any circumstance.
>
> The section on averting disasters fails to consider that geoengineering might
> be the only way to prevent certain disasters which would be absolutely
> catastrophic for humanity. Do they think that disasters on such a scale are
> impossible?
>
> For example, in the case of Amazon forest die-back from excessive drought,
> geoengineering might be the only way to prevent it. And die-back and burn
> would put so much CO2 into the atmosphere, that dangerous global warming
> could not be avoided.
>
> In the case of the Arctic, they fail to mention the obvious threat of sea ice
> seasonal disappearance, which could happen in just a few decades according to
> the latest climate models or just a few years according to the observed trend
> in September volume decline. Why do they not mention this? Is it because
> they think it can't happen? Or is it because their argument against
> geoengineering falls down, so they don't want to talk about it?
> Geoengineering will almost certainly required to cool the Arctic enough to
> prevent the Arctic Ocean getting locked into a low-ice state, risking
> catastrophic consequences for sea level rise, climate change and methane
> feedback. Do they not realise this? Or do they think a disaster to threaten
> all humanity simply can't happen?
>
> I would love to believe that nothing so catastrophic could threaten us all so
> soon, but surely governments should be warned of the real possibility and
> prepare for intervention to stave off disaster.
>
> Cheers, John
>
> [1] No fee version at:
> http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/60824/1/__lse.ac.uk_storage_LIBRARY_Secondary_libfile_shared_repository_Content_Tavoni,%20A_Climate%20engineering_Tavoni_Climate%20engineering_2015.pdf
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Ronal W. Larson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> Michael cc list:
>
> 1. Thanks for supplying the draft bibliography. Certainly can be a
> help. Perhaps in a later version you can separate into SRM, CDR, and “both”
> categories. Perhaps also can show which are available on a no-fee basis.
>
> 2. I searched (mostly unsuccessfully) for those that might have a CDR
> slant. I enjoyed the short “freshwater” paper you listed by Spears and
> Maberly, which has both SRM and CDR aspects. It is on a no-fee basis at:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bryan_Spears/publication/268153730_Lessons_learned_from_geoengineering_freshwater_systems/links/54632bfe0cf2837efdb02b6b.pdf
>
> 3. This last refers several times to a (SRM-only) paper, not on your
> list, that should be of interest to many:
>
> Barrett, Scott, Lenton, Timothy M., Millner, Antony, Tavoni, Alessandro,
> Carpenter, Stephen, Anderies, John M., Chapin, F. Stuart, Crépin,
> Anne-Sophie, Daily, Gretchen, Ehrlich, Paul, Folke, Carl, Galaz, Victor,
> Hughes, Terry, Kautsky, Nils, Lambin, Eric F., Naylor, Rosamond, Nyborg,
> Karine, Polasky, Stephen, Scheffer, Marten, Wilen, James, Xepapadeas,
> Anastasios and de Zeeuw, Aart (2014)
>
> “ Climate engineering reconsidered". Nature Climate Change, 4 (7). pp.
> 527-529. ISSN 1758-678X DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2278
>
> No fee version at:
> http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/60824/1/__lse.ac.uk_storage_LIBRARY_Secondary_libfile_shared_repository_Content_Tavoni,%20A_Climate%20engineering_Tavoni_Climate%20engineering_2015.pdf
>
> Ron
>
>
> On Jun 30, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Michael Thompson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We've asked our research assistants to pull together a draft bibliography
>> for climate engineering governance, taken from English language published
>> volumes and peer reviewed literature.
>>
>> Hoping for feedback from the community, regarding missing works or
>> otherwise. Looking forward to hearing from you.
>>
>> Please see here
>> http://dcgeoconsortium.org/ce-governance-bibliography/
>>
>> Happy reading.
>>
>> Michael
>> --
>>
>>
>> Michael Thompson
>> Managing Director
>> Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment
>> A Scholarly Initiative of the School of International Service, American
>> University
>> www.dcgeoconsortium.org
>> p- 202 556 3776
>>
>> <FCEA_LOGO_HORIZONTAL_RGB.jpg>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>
--
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.
