Hi Renaud

Currently there is just one working industrial scale co2 removal facility on 
the planet attached to a coal fired power station at Boundary Dam in 
Saskatchewan. It cost 1.5 billion Canadian dollars to build and the cost per 
tonne of CO2 removal is $100. UK, US, China have no plans to build industrial 
scale CCS. It is not utopian to stop building coal fired power stations. These 
kill people and there are alternative power sources available especially for 
hot countries such as India and Turkey. Extracting coal, building new coal 
power stations and then expecting US or UK to build plants to draw the co2 back 
down - that is a far more costly approach than finding ways to incentivise 
developing countries not to build coal fired power in the first place.

We need pragmatism not Utopianism. That is what the keep it in the ground 
movement is. Sadly the UNFCCC refuses even to discuss fossil fuels at the CoP 
meetings. There is no mention of fossil fuels in the 'Paris agreement'. But CDR 
is an unhelpful distraction from this political failure to grasp the nettle.

Best wishes

Michael

On 20 Apr 2016, at 21:18, Renaud de RICHTER 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Dear Professor Michale NORTHCOTT,

I agree with you, all this is needed but as points 2. and 3. are for the moment 
utopian, maybe original mitigation strategies can also be added to your list. 
Like non-CO2 GHG removal directly from the atmosphere, as proposed in 
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583616300858 and in 
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-016-6103-9.

Best regards
Renaud de_Richter


Le dimanche 17 avril 2016 21:25:14 UTC+2, NORTHCOTT Michael a écrit :
Hi John

The course of action to slow the rate of warming (it is 0.1 degree per decade 
not 0.2) and ultimately to stop it requires all of the following. Young people 
and climate activists the world over are calling for these things and 
campaigning actively and at cost of their freedom sometimes to bring them about:

1. Ending tropical forest burning
2. Stopping building of new coal and oil fired power stations (Turkey and India 
and S Africa are planning 100s) and ending coal extraction by China, Indonesia, 
and even Australia, Germany US and UK who have no conceivable need to continue 
extracting the stuff given the wealth already at the disposal of their citizens 
and corporations
3. Closing existing coal and oil fired electric power plants
4. Reforesting uplands, reducing sheep grazing, and increasing uptake of co2 in 
agric land with biochar, compost etc
5. Ending expansion of air sea and road travel and moving all road and sea 
travel to electric vehicles and wind. Rationing air travel to gradually shift 
international and national travellers to other means.
6. Moving all electricity production to renewable power and battery / reservoir 
storage of back up power.
7. Reengineering older buildings with insulation.
8. Requiring all new builds to generate own power and be zero carbon
9. Reducing shipping and flying of food by favouring local over global food 
production.
10. Ending large scale animal husbandry and moving mainstream human protein 
requirements to beans, vegetables etc.
11. Favour pedestrians, cyclists and electric bikes, segways, electric 
wheelchairs etc in all city planning and movement infrastructure

Globally these measures would generate at least a billion of jobs, reduce 
deaths from pollution, and reduce health costs of cancers, heart disease, 
obesity and air pollution, and reduce concentrations of wealth by putting 
capacity to generate power, grow food and move around back in the hands of 
householders and local communities. None of them require large scale 
totalitarian and public debt-based technologies of the kind represented by CDR.

We need moral alternatives to the present madness. We need to argue for them in 
every possible forum and embrace them ourselves. Arming the future against the 
sun is a counsel of despair.

Regards

Michael

Professor of Ethics
University of Edinburgh


On 17 Apr 2016, at 17:10, John Nissen 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Dear Professor Mann,

Most of us would like to keep global warming below 1.5C this century.  But we 
are way off course.

Nobody likes to admit in public that we are already in dangerous territory.  
But we are!

The rate of global warming (near-surface temperature rise) could now exceed 0.2 
C per decade; CO2 is above 400 ppm (an excess of 120 ppm above pre-industrial 
280 ppm) of which most will remain this century due to CO2's long lifetime in 
the atmosphere; and we have already had over 1 C anthropogenic global warming 
(AGW).  This means that, even with the most drastic cut in CO2 emissions, we 
cannot avoid an extremely dangerous 3C this century without aggressive CO2 
removal (CDR).  Indeed, if we want to keep AGW below 1.5 C this century and 
halt ocean acidification, then we need to get global warming rate down below 
0.05 C per decade, i.e. less than a quarter the current rate.

Thus climate forcing has to be reduced by 75% within a decade or two, to have a 
chance to keep below 1.5 C this century.

Thus we have to reduce the CO2 level to around 210 ppm (30 ppm above 
pre-industrial 280 ppm), and reduce methane from 1.8 ppm to around 1.0 ppm in 
order to reduce their combined forcing by 75%.  This assumes we maintain 
aerosol cooling, especially the SO2 cooling from coal-fired power stations.

This is exacerbated by climate forcing from the Arctic, at around 0.5 W/m2 and 
rising exponentially as albedo loss accelerates.

Therefore, in addition to urgent CO2 emissions reduction, we need (i) 
aggressive CDR so that CO2 is soon being removed from the atmosphere faster 
than than it is being emitted, (ii) suppression of methane emissions, 
especially fugitive methane (iii) rapid cooling of the Arctic to restore 
albedo, and (iv) maintenance of SO2 aerosol cooling, if global warming is to be 
kept below 1.5 C this century.

Do you agree or can you suggest an alternative course of action to avert 
extreme danger?

Kind regards,

John Nissen
Chair, Arctic Methane Emergency Group (AMEG)


On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Greg Rau 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/15/march-temperature-smashes-100-year-global-record


"The UK Met Office expects 2016 to set a new 
record<http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/17/2016-set-to-be-hottest-year-on-record-globally>,
 meaning the global temperature record is set to have been broken for three 
years in a row.

Prof Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State University in the US, 
responded to the March data by saying: “Wow. I continue to be shocked by what 
we are seeing.” He said the world had now been hovering close to the threshold 
of “dangerous” warming for two months, something not seen before.

“The [new data] is a reminder of how perilously close we now are to permanently 
crossing into dangerous territory,” Mann said. “It underscores the urgency of 
reducing global carbon emissions.”

GR - and the need to seriously consider additional ways of managing CO2 and 
climate.

--
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]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://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]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google 
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/geoengineering/c7_tf9XZiM4/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to