Really shows how much rigor the editor gave to researching SRM if they somehow thought we were thinking of N2O into the stratosphere.
On Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 3:06:56 AM UTC-4, lou.delbello wrote: > > The author is also the environment editor so he probably does. > But yeah calling them out doesn't make any difference... > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 12:15, Andrew Lockley <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> To be fair, journalists often don't write the headlines. But complaining >> to the journalist/paper can't hurt. >> >> I personally don't bother, as it's rarely corrected in time to make any >> difference. If the article is deliberately misleading I sometimes complain >> to the regulator. >> >> Andrew Lockley >> >> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018, 04:47 lou del bello, <[email protected] >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> I completely agree with Andrew, >>> Incredibly misleading piece - the IPCC authors say in the document AND >>> repeated in the press conference that geoengineering is not included in the >>> pathways because the uncertainty is too big and there aren't sufficient >>> studies. >>> The journalist literally buries this fact halfway through the article, >>> suggesting the opposite in the topline. >>> >>> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 04:11, Zachary Perry <[email protected] >>> <javascript:>> wrote: >>> >>>> I am quite curious where they got nitrous oxide from in the first >>>> place. It's generally seen as a potential pitfall of OIF I thought, at >>>> least how it relates to potential geoengineering schemes. >>>> >>>> On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 5:57:29 PM UTC-4, Matthias Honegger wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Link to the article online >>>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/geoengineering-global-warming-ipcc> >>>>> >>>>> Geoengineering may be used to combat global warming, experts say >>>>> >>>>> IPCC authors suggest there is high agreement that injection of >>>>> chemicals into stratosphere could help limit rises >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jonathan Watts, the guardian, 8. Oct. 18 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The world may increasingly look to geoengineering in the wake of the >>>>> latest UN climate report, which says it could be adopted as a temporary >>>>> “remedial measure” if the world heads towards dangerous levels of warming. >>>>> The authors of the new 1.5C study by the Intergovernmental Panel on >>>>> Climate Change say there is high agreement that the injection of millions >>>>> of tonnes of sulphur dioxide or nitrous oxide into the stratosphere could >>>>> help limit temperature rises to the most ambitious target of the Paris >>>>> accord. >>>>> But the authors warn there are major uncertainties about the social, >>>>> environmental and ecological impacts, which mean the world would be far >>>>> better off if policymakers strengthened natural cooling systems such as >>>>> forest cover and accelerated efforts to reduce carbon emissions. >>>>> The lengthy document – which was approved at the weekend by all 195 >>>>> nations in the UN – mentions several options for man-made interference in >>>>> climate systems, including ocean fertilisation, carbon dioxide removal, >>>>> marine cloud brightening, cirrus cloud thinning and ground-based albedo >>>>> modification. >>>>> But it focused most on stratospheric aerosol injection, a technique >>>>> that essentially mimics the effect of a volcano by pumping gas into the >>>>> sky >>>>> that turns into aerosols, which reflect part of the sun’s heat. >>>>> Although the authors do not include such strategies in their pathways >>>>> to 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures, they raise the possibility >>>>> that >>>>> it could be used as a supplementary measure if this target is missed. >>>>> “If mitigation efforts do not keep global mean temperature below 1.5C, >>>>> solar radiation modification can potentially reduce the climate impacts >>>>> of >>>>> a temporary temperature overshoot, in particular extreme temperatures, >>>>> rate >>>>> of sea level rise and intensity of tropical cyclones, alongside intense >>>>> mitigation and adaptation efforts,” the report observes. >>>>> A search for palliatives will be necessary as the world is almost >>>>> certain to miss the 1.5C goal. Current national pledges are forecast to >>>>> lead to at least 3C of warming by the end of the century – and that is if >>>>> governments keep their commitments. >>>>> The IPCC is clearly hesitant to endorse such emergency measures in >>>>> part because this could allow government leaders to continue pushing >>>>> problems into the future, but also because of the immense risks involved. >>>>> The report notes that the injection of sulphur dioxide would change >>>>> rainfall patterns and weather circulation as well as disrupting >>>>> stratospheric chemistry and ice formation. It could also result in more >>>>> ultraviolet light exposure, which would have a negative impact on human >>>>> health. >>>>> Ethical and institutional questions also arise over who would oversee >>>>> such operations and which areas would be affected. The report suggests a >>>>> number of UN organisations as possible supervisory bodies. But authors >>>>> also >>>>> observe that there are scarcely any laws or regulations to stop any >>>>> country >>>>> that wants to push ahead by itself. The only guideline cited was the >>>>> Convention on Biodiversity which states “no climate-related >>>>> geoengineering >>>>> activity that affects biodiversity may take place.” >>>>> There are doubts also over effectiveness. While the aerosols might >>>>> constrain temperature rises, they would not stop the accumulation of >>>>> carbon >>>>> dioxide in the atmosphere and the acidification of the oceans. What >>>>> happens >>>>> when this “temporary measure” is halted is also an area of concern, as >>>>> the >>>>> planetary system might suddenly be hit by a surge in temperature. >>>>> The IPCC says these uncertainties constrain the ability to implement >>>>> solar radiation management in the near future. But with the 1.5C target >>>>> current on course to be overshot at some point between 2030 and 2052, the >>>>> urgency is likely to grow. >>>>> Johan Rockström, coauthor of the recent Hothouse Earth study, said the >>>>> IPCC report was likely to stimulate discussion of these extreme emergency >>>>> measures. >>>>> “I think this will raise solar radiation management to the highest >>>>> political level. We currently have no framework for this,” he said. “I’m >>>>> very scared of this technology but we need to turn every stone now.” >>>>> James Hansen said the tipping point in public opinion was more likely >>>>> to come at a slightly higher temperature, but by then it may already be >>>>> too >>>>> late. >>>>> “2C would force geoengineering on today’s young people. >>>>> Geoengineering, if global temperature passes 2C, would start, at the >>>>> latest, once ice sheet collapse begins,” he told the Guardian. >>>>> “Unfortunately, because of the inertia of the system, geoengineering then >>>>> would probably be too late to prevent locking in the eventual loss of >>>>> coastal cities.” >>>>> >>>>> Link to the article online >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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] <javascript:>. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >>>> <javascript:>. >>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Lou Del Bello* >>> >>> *Climate, science, diplomacy beat* >>> *Delhi, India* >>> >>> *Mobile India *+91 9319387512 >>> *Mobile UK (WhatsApp)* +44 7900632250 >>> *Twitter* @loudelbello >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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] <javascript:>. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >>> <javascript:>. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> > > -- > *Lou Del Bello* > > *Climate, science, diplomacy beat* > *Delhi, India* > > *Mobile India *+91 9319387512 > *Mobile UK (WhatsApp)* +44 7900632250 > *Twitter* @loudelbello > > > > > > > > > -- 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.
