Thanks Peter. Unfortunately, the paper and podcast are referring to a termination shock that is potentially happening right now due to a well-intentioned regulation to cut the sulfur content of cargo ships from a prior average of 3.5% sulfur to 0.5% ( https://www.joc.com/special-topics/low-sulfur-fuel-rule ) that became fully effective Jan. 2020. Using ocean water surface temperature measurement and satellite atmospheric albedo measurements, for the north atlantic and north pacific major shipping lanes, they estimate (still in process of verification) up to (at the maximal estimate) a 50% jump in global warming (as I recall from the podcast), from the time this regulation became fully effective compared to prior years, as a direct result of the loss of sulfur emissions across these (very large) ocean regions. Best, Ron
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 6:44 PM Peter Fiekowsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Ron- > > Just so you know-When looking through a climate restoration lens, with CO2 > below 300 ppm by 2050, termination shock doesn't happen. This is because > CO2 is back to pre-industrial levels by 2050, and therefore forcing is too. > SRM or SAI would only be needed for 15 years between 2030 and 2045. > > It might be useful starting now, but politically, there is no > justification for it because it doesn't benefit the UN net-zero goal. > > You can read more about climate restoration in my book coming out in > April. The summary chapter is available for free now on my website: > PeterFiekowsky.com > All the processes for climate restoration are now getting underway, and > don't require government assistance. > > BR > Peter > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 2:52 PM Ron Baiman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Colleagues >> >> This is the podcast I've been talking about to some of you recently: >> https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ship-tracks-termination-shock-simons/id1529459393?i=1000550593731 >> >> Here's their draft paper: >> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356378673_Climate_Impact_of_Decreasing_Atmospheric_Sulphate_Aerosols_and_the_Risk_of_a_Termination_Shock >> >> When Simon et al (presumably) get some version of this paper published, >> it could be the centerpiece of, for example, strong support for MCB to >> offset the sulfur with benign sea salt aerosols, as it would provide direct >> evidence of the impact of warming/cooling effect of marine cloud >> brightening from aerosols. It also, needless to say, highlights the need >> for any and all other types of direct cooling intervention. >> >> Best, >> Ron >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "NOAC Meetings" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/CAPhUB9C_RptW6t79b8ZXEZz6dcj_f%2BZNFk9DY_P7_%2BXgqXV%3DNw%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/CAPhUB9C_RptW6t79b8ZXEZz6dcj_f%2BZNFk9DY_P7_%2BXgqXV%3DNw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > > -- > > *Peter Fiekowsky* > *Foundation for Climate Restoration <http://f4cr.org/> **Founder and > Chairman Emeritus* > Restoring a proven safe climate (300 ppm CO2 by 2050) for the flourishing > of humanity. Climate restoration 2021 > <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lnVraignEvW1n5cWhvB4AswfpCFyaZzf/view?usp=sharing> > Book summary <http://PeterFIekowsky.com> > > *(650) 776-6871 Los Altos, California* > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAPhUB9CdSnEAS08cUaypnumuEbH84%3Dy4%2BsL3VmPwigPHUgoBEA%40mail.gmail.com.
