Doug

The governance challenges are not identical. MCB is local to regional in
its immediate impact, potentially of use for regional climate
modifications. SAI is hemispheric.

>From an accountability point of view, MCB is more traceable. The ships are
slow-moving and easy to spot. They don't look like any other ships.

By contrast: SAI can be done stealthily, mixed up with regular air traffic,
and with no visible plume if SO2 used.

A

On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, 20:45 Stephen Salter, <s.h.sal...@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> Andrew
>
> I must object to your claim that the rapid control of marine cloud
> brightening is risky.
>
> Control engineers will tell you that they like systems with a single,
> dominant phase lag. You are right in saying that the effects of marine
> cloud brightening fade quickly but the world's response is set by the very
> large thermal inertia of the oceans acting as a heat store.   This may be a
> bit slower than the effects of stratospheric sulphur on land.
>
> An attractive feature is that we can stop the input signal very quickly
> following an unpredicted volcanic eruption or a new ice age.  We have a
> degree of local and seasonal adjustment.  We can aslo taper off in a
> controlled way as carbon removal technologies ramp up.
>
> People who are worried about termination effects should ask whether they
> would prefer a process which was irreversible.  That would really scare me.
>
> May I repeat my previous observation that the loss of power generation is
> catastrophic in 20 milliseconds, the internet in two seconds, air traffic
> control in two minutes, water and sewage and food distribution in about two
> days.
>
> Compared with these, ten years is a long time to fix or replace spray
> vessels.
>
> Stephen
>
> On 13/03/2018 18:43, Andrew Lockley wrote:
>
> It's complicated to answer. The MCB fade out period is days not years, so
> the simple answer is that MCB is more risky. But the real answer depends in
> system vulnerability, which in turn depends on a complex interacting
> network of social, political and technical risks
>
> Andrew
>
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, 18:30 E Durbrow, <durb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Would some kind person tell me if I got these claims wrong?
>>
>> Marine Cloud Brightening and Stratospheric Aerosol SRM are *not*
>> equivalently risky.
>>
>> While both have the possibility of termination shock and regional
>> variation, these two risks are lower in MCB.
>>
>> I’m worried that the discussion on termination shock is treating all SRM
>> methods as equivalent…
>>
>> Thanks for pointing me to a publication indicating that MCB and
>> Stratospheric/High Altitude SRM are roughly equally risky.
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
> --
> 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.
>
>
> --
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to