As written yesterday in another post by Phil Williamson (Science Coordinator: UK GGR programme), the UK recently-started a *Greenhouse Gas Removal *research programme (http://www.nerc.ac.uk/researc h/funded/programmes/ggr/).
Hopefully in the *sixth IPCC report*, they will state that to stay below 2degC warming (unfortunately it will already be to late to say below 1.5degC warming), both emissions reduction *and GGR* are required, not either/or, and should include both the continents *and the oceans*. Concrete, realistic and feasible CE methods to remove CH4 and other non-CO2 GHGs from the atmosphere at a climatically significant scale have been proposed [1] <http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/8/1/2017/esd-8-1-2017.pdf> and [2] <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128516300569>, and still wait for honest evaluation, critics and discussion from the scientific community. And sadly, in the *seventh IPCC report*, they will state that to stay below *3degC warming*, both complete cessation of anthropogenic emissions due to the burning of fossil fuels and GGR are required, not either/or, and that *other technologies able to enhance outgoing longwave radiation to the outer space* should be developed and applied, like radiative cooling by the atmospheric window (8-13 µm), or reducing the coverage of high cirrus clouds. “*Earth radiation management*” technologies have already been proposed [3] <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032113008460> and still wait for honest evaluation, critics and discussion from the scientific community. 2017-08-22 21:14 GMT+02:00 Greg Rau <[email protected]>: > Thanks, Peter. Just to amplify, the IPCC states that to stay below 2degC > warming and esp below 1.5degC warming, both emissions reduction and CDR are > required, not either/or. So how about the concept that emissions reduction > presents a "moral hazard" to (required) CDR development? > > In any case, if even thinking about CDR (let alone doing it) is perceived > by humans as a threat to emissions reduction (Campbell-Arvai et al., 2017), > it's game over. We have to do both. I seriously doubt that humans are > truly incapable of doing 2 things at once, but if they are we're toast > (IPCC). > Greg > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Peter Eisenberger <[email protected]> > *To:* Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> > *Cc:* geoengineering <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 22, 2017 1:40 AM > *Subject:* Re: [geo] The influence of learning about (CDR) on support for > mitigation policies > > > > > > > -- 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.
