Andrew: cc list
1. This is to be a bit more supportive on your question from
yesterday. The whole topic of supporting all aspects of “geo” (moving
perhaps to the term “climate intervention”) has received too little attention.
I tend to agree with the 4-5 comments you have received, but I don’t think any
have yet addressed enough on what could be said on what we have called SRM and
CDR. Your term “tonne of SRM” could include tonnes of white paint or white
gravel or …. - which might qualify for me.
2. The day before your question, the US NAS held a 90 minute webinar
on “Climate Intervention’ (Geo/CI) that somewhat alluded to this. Ken Caldeira
was one of only two participants, chosen because he has a good knowledge of the
subject matter and the larger panel’s thoughts. I listened and just tried
unsuccessfully to see if the webinar tape is yet available. I don’t think the
incentive topic came up.
3. My view, after personally promoting, working for, and using
incentives for solar heating and photovoltaics and for two hybrid cars, is that
incentives are appropriate when an ethically-demanding social purpose is
involved. I think they are for some, but not all, parts of Geo/CI. The two
main reasons I can think of for excluding some parts are a) no need (low cost),
and b) requires international agreement/monitoring. There are certainly other
reasons to exclude incentives for some.
4. From the two NAS volumes, a quick search found these two pertinent
excerpts emphases added from the NAS study:
a. ISBN 978-0-309-31482-4 Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to
Cool Earth
From p 141: “To this point, private-sector engagement in albedo
modification has been modest. A substantial acceleration of albedo modification
research would likely require additional incentives, such as public subsidies,
GHG emission pricing, ownership models, intellectual property rights, and trade
and transfer mechanisms for the dissemination of the technologies (Bracmort and
Lattanzio, 2013). These incentives will determine not only whether but how the
private sector engages with albedo modification. It would be preferable for the
public to have substantial discussion as to what outcomes are desirable before
determining what incentives to offer.”
Almost no other mention of incentives.
b. ISBN 978-0-309-30529-7 Climate Intervention: Carbon Dioxide Removal and
Reliable Sequestration
From p 85: CDR approaches present opportunities to address the excess
levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, but there are limitations to these approaches
that must be overcome if they are to be implemented widely. In particular,
implementation of BECCS and/or DACS on a large scale depends on the
relationship between cost of deployment and effective price on carbon
emissions, which could be imposed either directly (e.g., with a tax or via
cap-and-trade mechanism) or indirectly (e.g., with performance standards).
Although the Committee does not advocate for any specific policies related to
carbon emissions, we note that policies (or lack thereof) are an important part
of the economic calculations for determining the viability of various CDR
approaches.
The word “policy” appears many other times.
5. My guess is that European list members are way ahead of most other
list members on appropriateness and readiness for incentives (“carbon credits”
is too narrow a category) for each part of Geo/CI. We in the US haven’t even
figured out how to sign the Kyoto protocol (but I think things are looking up
for Paris COP21).
Ron
On Aug 20, 2015, at 2:15 AM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote:
> How many carbon credits is a tonne of SRM worth?
>
> We could work this out as watts cooling or weight sulphur for weight carbon.
> Doesn't really matter.
>
> Thanks
>
> Andrew
>
>
> --
> 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.
