I hope that Michael isn’t implying that olivine weathering needs geological time scales!. There are people who think that the rate of weathering is what is determined in sterile laboratories with distilled water, whereas in fact we know that the weathering of olivine in nature is 1000 to 10.000 times faster than in the abiotic clean laboratory, and we can choose the best environments, and make the olivine grains move in rivers and even better in the surf! Olaf Schuiling
From: Michael Hayes [mailto:voglerl...@gmail.com] Sent: zaterdag 17 september 2016 1:03 To: geoengineering Cc: Mike MacCracken; Ken Caldeira; Ronal Larson; Greg Rau; Schuiling, R.D. (Olaf); christopher.rodg...@ncl.ac.uk Subject: Re: Distinguishing morale hazard from moral hazard in geoengineering Andrew, On first glance, I'm confidant in saying that many of your opining premises are simply wrong or are clearly and simply cherry picking to support your private views. As such, the overall paper has nether scholarly merit nor even common sense. As a prime example, you claim that negative emissions technologies are presumed to be "only decades away". That bit of information would, I'm sure, be somewhat confusing to Drs. Rau and Larson as both of their respective negative emissions technologies are currently being used at the industrial level. The use of olivine, as Dr. Schuiling has tried to explain on many occasions, has geological time scales of use as a natural NET!! Further, marine biomass production by humans dates back roughly 5 millennium, if not further. To avoid putting a too sharp of a point on my take away, I will forever hold your paper up as a prime example of how one can, at least attempt to, bring an opponent (i.e. non-SAI concepts) down through 'clarifying' certain words and terms in what supposedly is a peer reviewed journal. The lack of integrity, much less accuracy, in this so called peer reviewed paper should be of concern to all 'Independent' and/or other species of scholars. Warmest regards, Michael On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 8:54:03 AM UTC-7, Andrew Lockley wrote: Distinguishing morale hazard from moral hazard in geoengineering Andrew Lockley Independent scholar D’Maris Coffman CPM, UCL Bartlett, London, UK Abstract Geoengineering is the deliberate modification of the climate system. It has been discussed as a technique to counteract changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Speculation has occurred that the possibility of geoengineering will reduce or delay efforts to mitigate AGW. This possible delay or reduction in mitigation has been described as ‘moral hazard’ by various authors. We investigate the definitions and use of the term ‘moral hazard’, and the related (but significantly different) concept of ‘morale hazard’, in relevant law, economic and insurance literatures. We find that ‘moral hazard’ has been generally misapplied in discussions of geoengineering, which perhaps explains unexpected difficulties in detecting expected effects experimentally. We clarify relevant usage of the terms, identifying scenarios that can properly be described as moral hazard (malfeasance), and morale hazard (lack of caution or recklessness). We note generally the importance of correctly applying this distinction when discussing geoengineering. In conclusion, we note that a proper consideration of the risks of both moral and morale hazards allows us to easily segment framings for both geoengineering advocacy and the advocate groups who rely on these framings. We suggest mnemonics for groups vulnerable to moral hazard (Business as Usuals) and morale hazard (Chicken Littles) and suggest the development of an experimental methodology for validating the distinction thus drawn. Keywords Geoengineering, moral hazard, morale hazard, carbon dioxide removal, greenhouse gas removal, negative emissions technology, solar radiation management (SRM) -- 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
