I like to hope that the fossil fuel era is ending. One question is whether it is ending soon enough.
There is also the question of whether political resistance will slow down the end, or attempt to continue the era. There is also the question as to whether the social-political-economic system will continue to produce ecological devastation and planet alteration, irrespective of whether fossil fuel ends or not - if that system is not changed. There is another question of whether without political and social change, geoengineering will simply prolong the problem and add complications to any solution.... I still say if we really want to solve the problem we have to think of social change. We may need geoengineering, recycling, and energy efficient light bulbs, but they are probably not enough by themselves jon ________________________________ From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, 12 May 2017 9:56 AM To: Jonathan Marshall Cc: geoengineering Subject: Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf The fossil era is ending, regardless of what happens with geoengineering. The only question is whether we attempt to limit the damage and clean up the mess. A On 12 May 2017 00:52, "Jonathan Marshall" <jonathan.marsh...@uts.edu.au<mailto:jonathan.marsh...@uts.edu.au>> wrote: Unfortunately the only real solution is probably social, political and psychological change. If we keep the current social system then people will keep gaming any solutions put forward to keep that social system, and its power and wealth distribution, going - probably one reason why you can get support for Geoengineering from people who loudly declaim that climate change is not real. Geoengineering will simply allow the powerful to continue to pollute, plus it will likely add dangers of uncontrollable ecological feedbacks, catastrophic collapse in financial crisis, and weather warfare - or blaming people for that warfare. This is the case if we don't do geoengineering as well, although the catastrophe may come sooner and force some social change earlier.... jon ________________________________ From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com> <geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>> on behalf of Adam Dorr <adamd...@gmail.com<mailto:adamd...@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, 12 May 2017 9:33 AM To: Greg Rau Cc: s.h.sal...@ed.ac.uk<mailto:s.h.sal...@ed.ac.uk>; geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; f...@boell.de<mailto:f...@boell.de>; schnei...@boell.de<mailto:schnei...@boell.de>; n...@etcgroup.org<mailto:n...@etcgroup.org> Subject: Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf I'm sympathetic to some of the criticisms of technofixes, but only when other plausible fixes are available. In the case of climate change, it seems that the notion of solving the problem with interventions like recycling, energy-efficient lightbulbs, organic food and the rest of the "locally adapted ecologically and socially sound solutions" folks typically have in mind is every bit "speculative and distracting" (if not just plain delusional) as CDR climate engineering. On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Greg Rau <gh...@sbcglobal.net<mailto:gh...@sbcglobal.net>> wrote: Yes, this seems to stem from a fear of technology as summarized in their closing statement: "Because of the geopolitical high-stakes, risk of weaponization, and intergenerational implications of geoengineering, the global community should first and foremost debate these aspects, before allowing the development of tools that a climate-denying government or “a coalition of the willing” could use, even if all other governments would conclude it is too risky and unfair to use. Geoengineering can never be confined to a technical discussion, a matter of “developing tools, just in case” or confined just to a climate perspective. Geoengineering research should – in line with the CBD decision – be focused on socio-political, ecological, ethical questions and potential impacts and contribute to a debate about whether democratic governance of geoengineering is ever possible, and how. And even more important: funding and research on climate change needs to urgently be scaled up to support implementation of proven and locally adapted ecologically and socially sound solutions to the climate crisis – not speculative and distracting technofixes." While I'm all for debating the various actions before deciding when/if to use them, it would seem important to fully understand the benefits as well as the risks and impacts of these, and that requires research and testing. Or shall we continue to base our decisions on speculation? Case in point, while BECCS, DAC, enhanced weathering, biochar and the others on ETCs s&*t list might be risky (e.g., they don't work as advertised, too expensive, etc, -let's find out for sure), how could these be "weaponized"and "unfair"? Interestingly I see that a-/re- forestation is not on their s&*t list, despite serious concerns from ecologists (though weaponization is still not mentioned): https://ecopreservationsociety.wordpress.com/2008/02/03/does-reforestation-contribute-to-global-warming-part-1/ https://news.mongabay.com/2016/02/in-the-rush-to-reforest-are-the-worlds-old-growth-grasslands-losing-out/ https://cereo.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/95/2016/03/Joppa_Science_IPBES_2016.pdf Then there is this curious statement: "funding and research on climate change needs to urgently be scaled up to support implementation of proven and locally adapted ecologically and socially sound solutions to the climate crisis – not speculative and distracting technofixes." Am all for more funding of climate change research, but there seems to be enough scary knowledge already to warrant greatly expanded R&D funding specifically on a broad and deep search for solutions. Locally adapted ecological ones certainly are preferred, but with 7+B of us now on the planet is it likely that these solutions alone will solve the problem in the time required, while they also continue to (so how) feed, house and clothe us?? For the sake of ecology, might it be wise and less risky to also search for solutions that don't ask more from Earth's already overtaxed ecosystems? Anyway, I'll cc the ETC authors to see if we can elicit a response as to why and how we have the luxury of ignoring/castigating technology/new ideas without having a better understanding of their actual risks and benefits. Greg ________________________________ From: Stephen Salter <s.h.sal...@ed.ac.uk<mailto:s.h.sal...@ed.ac.uk>> To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf Hi all It would help if the ETC people could give more detail about why putting sea surface temperatures back to where we liked to have them in the good old days should be criminal. We may be able to do this by changing the size distribution of 0.5% of the mass of a natural material, shown to help asthmatic children, which is now being produced from breaking waves. We may be able to do this with energy coming from the wind at a cost below the climate conference budget. ETC, please explain, if possible with some numbers. Stephen On 11/05/2017 19:42, Adam Dorr wrote: While several of the concerns expressed in the document bear some consideration, I must say I'm discouraged by the overall thinking behind a priori opposition to climate engineering technology. By analogy, it would be like opposing the development of dentistry technologies because they might allow you to continue eating sugar without damaging your teeth. The thinking seems to be rooted in the notion that actions with negative side effects are morally depraved (irrespective of their concomitant benefits), and that remedying those side effects only serves to *worsen* the depravity rather than alleviate it. I suspect a psychology that valorizes self-deprivation and self-flaggelation is at work here, but that isn't my field. Regardless of whatever psychology is involved, I think it is clear that this orientation toward any specific technology cannot withstand any scrutiny since countless examples of its hypocrisy (e.g. the benefits of dentistry and all the other accouterments of modernity) immediately emerge. -- Adam Dorr PhD Candidate University of California Los Angeles School of Public Affairs adamd...@ucla.edu<mailto:adamd...@ucla.edu> adamd...@gmail.com<mailto:adamd...@gmail.com> www.adamdorr.com<http://www.adamdorr.com/> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com<mailto:andrew.lock...@gmail.com>> wrote: Climate change, smoke and mirrors Latest missive from etc group. A -- 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+unsubscribe@ googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups. com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/geoengineering<https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout<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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.<mailto:unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.> To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com.> 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ________________________________ UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- 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<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email. -- 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.
