Luke thank you for your websites clarification of  your January flight 
plans:

*Lift Gas:*
*These flights will utilize helium.*


*Clouds:We will utilize sulfur dioxide generated by burning sulfur in the 
presence of oxygen. Each launch will include between 10g and 500g of clouds 
(target 100g+).*

Does this mean on the ground? 

A. Ritchie and E. B. Ludlam note in

*The Oxidation of Sulphur at Low Pressures*
(Proc. Royal Society of London. Vol. 138, No. 836 , pp. 635-643)

that at the O2 pressures prevailing at elevations in excess of  50,000  feet
" below 200° C. there was no appreciable reaction… between sulphur vapour 
and oxygen."  


*Flight Body: We're running this body 
<https://www.highaltitudescience.com/products/eagle-pro-near-space-kit>, 
and we'll likely add pool noodles for floatation (in case of a water 
landing).*

As Baja California is a peninsula this seems entirely prudent, as long as 
you warn any  hungry sea turtles or whales about not to eat the pool 
noodles.


Given these difficulties, have you considered a location at a similar 
latitude where pre-oxidized sulfur  is freely available:

https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-next-big-thing-in-tequila-sunsets.html




On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 12:51:51 PM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote:

> Again: can we please not assume I'm an evil AI hoax?? 
> In spite of having been born in the U.S., I spend 4+ months per year in 
> Baja and intend to be based here as much as I can. I bought land here over 
> a year before contemplating starting Make Sunsets. The nefarious reason to 
> launch from here is that I love it and happened to already have a place 
> here.
> Oliver: as "someone with an interest in developing-country solar 
> geoengineering research," please consider researching where to launch from 
> for maximal cooling effect. *I want to launch in/near the tropics 
> for greater cooling per gram via increased particle residence time 
> <https://presentations.copernicus.org/EGU21/EGU21-12131_presentation.pdf> 
> (another 
> source 
> <https://www.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/media/file/Sensitivity%20of%20Aerosol%20Distribution%20and%20Climate%20Response%20to%20Stratospheric%20SO2%20Injection%20Locations.pdf>).*
> I agree that we should prioritize the voices of those in the developing 
> world, and I dream of growing Make Sunsets to where it can provide 
> meaningful economic opportunities to some residents of island nations whose 
> very existence is threatened by climate change.
> Personally, I find it "completely indefensible" to place the onus on those 
> most harmed by climate change to initiate work on measures to buy us more 
> time. 
>
> --------------------
> Luke Iseman
> make sunsets <https://makesunsets.com/> : global cooling
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 3:37 AM 'Oliver Morton' via geoengineering <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> As Russell points out, helium is far too valuable to be used for this. As 
>> Daniele points out, hydrogen does chemistry with alacrtity -- and thus at 
>> very least wets the stratosphere to a degree which would seem disturbing. 
>> In suggesting methane i think Andrew has chosen...poorly.
>>
>> And Josh has his finger on something absolutely crucial. As someone with 
>> an interest in developing-country solar geoengineering research via my 
>> relationship with Degrees, I think doing this work in Mexico without 
>> seeking to involve Mexican researchers or investigation of permitting is 
>> completely indefensible. As far as I can see, Luke has not provided an 
>> account for why the flights were launched from Mexico rather than the US, 
>> and in the absence of such an account it is very hard not to see this as 
>> developed world actors choosing a developing country venue for nefarious 
>> reasons. 
>>
>> best, o
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 2 January 2023 at 19:15:40 UTC Andrew Lockley wrote:
>>
>>> I don't understand your first question. And no, Reviewer 2 doesn't do 
>>> any background research / verification. It would be dumb to lie about it. 
>>>
>>> Andrew 
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023, 19:14 Russell Seitz, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Technically, there's no there there,  and their podcast performance 
>>>> makes one doubt the intellectual seriousness of their investors 
>>>>
>>>> As a matter of due diligence , have you contacted  the VC's whose 
>>>> allegiance Make Sunsets claims ?
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 12:24:55 PM UTC-5 Andrew Lockley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Could you please clarify how you think I've been "punked"? I 
>>>>> interviewed the founders for 2h, they weren't chatbots. 
>>>>> https://open.spotify.com/episode/2Fr15fdX20qyyfVX8VCF3Q?si=5Hq3ikM2QS6MVilqYvPZig
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think using AI to create content is irresponsible, provided 
>>>>> it's checked for accuracy. 
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew 
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023, 17:09 Russell Seitz, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Has Andrew Lockley  been punked along with James Temple?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Legal Planet '* s sober fisking of Make Sunsets failed to notice 
>>>>>> its executives most interesting potential  liability defense —   the 
>>>>>>  ChatGPT AI did it !
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Iseman & Song's  offering website ran the following  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Author's note: 99% of this blog post and title was written using the 
>>>>>> help of ChatGPT <https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/> and the hero image 
>>>>>> was 
>>>>>> generated using DreamStudio <https://beta.dreamstudio.ai/dream>. The 
>>>>>> title 
>>>>>> was generated based off the content of the blog post.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 11:34:05 AM UTC-5 Chris Vivian wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Edward Parson has posted a commentary on Legal Planet about the Make 
>>>>>>> Sunsets concept - see - A Dangerous Disruption - Legal Planet 
>>>>>>> (legal-planet.org) 
>>>>>>> <https://legal-planet.org/2023/01/02/a-dangerous-disruption/>   
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chris.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sunday, 1 January 2023 at 02:34:52 UTC Russell Seitz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I was at MIT, "War Surplus " stores abounded in $5 canned 
>>>>>>>> hydrogen  generators designed to fill radiosonde or  life raft rescue 
>>>>>>>> balloons. The gizmo opened with a can of sardines key  to expose  the 
>>>>>>>> calcium hydride within to sea water, and  filled  the attached 1- 
>>>>>>>> meter 
>>>>>>>> balloon in about 15 minutes. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whereupon, it being sunset on the 4th of July on an easterly beach 
>>>>>>>> with a westerly wind, we attached a slow  magnesium ribbon fuse and 
>>>>>>>> let it 
>>>>>>>> go . it traveled some miles downwind  and rose perhaps one before 
>>>>>>>> exploding 
>>>>>>>> with a pale flash, but no audible pop
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The current  low cost balloon record seems to be held by   the 22 
>>>>>>>> meter Le Ballon Air de Paris,  filled with 6,000 m3 (210,000 cu ft) 
>>>>>>>> of helium <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium> and  terthered 
>>>>>>>> with a cable winch.  It can board up to 30  tourists, max  total 
>>>>>>>> weigh 2,500 kg (5,500 lb) whom it takes to  150 m (490 ft) above 
>>>>>>>> Paris. 
>>>>>>>>  for 15 minuteas a apsesent fare of sixteen Euros a head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Though hardly stratospherics, that works out to $194  a tonne 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thursday, December 29, 2022 at 6:18:14 AM UTC-5 
>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrew,
>>>>>>>>> I used Hydrogen for 20 years to use for weather balloons.  No 
>>>>>>>>> problem , even when one exploded fir a colleague in a balloon shed ( 
>>>>>>>>> he has 
>>>>>>>>> the doors firmly closed and there was a leak , which he knew about). 
>>>>>>>>> Probably millions of radiosondes were launched with hydrogen. We had 
>>>>>>>>> a 
>>>>>>>>> fusion lab where hydrogen was piped around the facility.  However, in 
>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>> Falklands they had a hydrogen making device … ( solid + water).  Now 
>>>>>>>>> that 
>>>>>>>>> was dangerous.   There was one hole in the ground in africa where a 
>>>>>>>>> hydrogen plant as above had been sited, but using the stuff is a 
>>>>>>>>> safe.  
>>>>>>>>> obviously , if you plant a bomb nearby , little is safe ( what was 
>>>>>>>>> the actual cause of the hind disaster?) 
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i predict trains / trucks / cars will soon be using the stuff. Far 
>>>>>>>>> greener than Li batteries and I think safer.  Never mind the Co2 
>>>>>>>>> output.  
>>>>>>>>> An electric car costs more to produce as regards Co2 than a small 
>>>>>>>>> petrol 
>>>>>>>>> car does ( + 70,000) miles of petrol.  i should have bought an H2 
>>>>>>>>> car, but 
>>>>>>>>> the problem is there are / were on 11 charging stations in the YK and 
>>>>>>>>> 8 of 
>>>>>>>>> them were in the M25
>>>>>>>>> A. 
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> T ---
>>>>>>>>> Alan Gadian, UK.
>>>>>>>>> Tel: +44 / 0  775 451 9009 
>>>>>>>>> T ---
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 29 Dec 2022, at 11:05, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Large weather balloons don't have much over pressure relative to 
>>>>>>>>> volume, so venting is a challenge. Valves and pumps add weight. 
>>>>>>>>> Hydrogen 
>>>>>>>>> has ground handling risks, due to flammability (Hindenberg), and any 
>>>>>>>>> leaks 
>>>>>>>>> risk buoyancy loss and the canopy descending loaded. The most extreme 
>>>>>>>>> scenario is that an out of control failed balloon descends into an 
>>>>>>>>> enclosed 
>>>>>>>>> building through an open door, skylight, or Courtyard. In windy 
>>>>>>>>> conditions, 
>>>>>>>>> drift into a small industrial unit is perfectly possible, through the 
>>>>>>>>> roller shutter doors - which could be automatically or accidentally 
>>>>>>>>> closed 
>>>>>>>>> behind, trapping the balloon and its flammable payload. This could 
>>>>>>>>> allow a 
>>>>>>>>> loaded canopy to leak out into a fully enclosed space, with ignition 
>>>>>>>>> risks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> While such scenarios appear outlandish, with thousands or millions 
>>>>>>>>> of launches, they become real risks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrew 
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2022, 10:19 Stephen Salter, <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I do not understand the bit about bursting. Control of a venting 
>>>>>>>>>> valve protects the balloon and allows release at the chosen altitude.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Helium is irreplaceable and needed for super cooling. Is there a 
>>>>>>>>>> reason not to use hydrogen? 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Stephen
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *School of Engineering*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *University of Edinburgh*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Mayfield Road*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Edinburgh EH9 3DW*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Scotland*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *0131 650 5704 or 0131 662 1180*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *YouTube Jamie Taylor Power for Change*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>>> *On Behalf Of *Daniele Visioni
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* 28 December 2022 23:51
>>>>>>>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* geoengineering <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [geo] Make Sunsets: Clarifications!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *This email was sent to you by someone outside the University.* 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You should only click on links or attachments if you are certain 
>>>>>>>>>> that the email is genuine and the content is safe.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Luke,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will keep finding this rather murky as long as you keep being 
>>>>>>>>>> so hand-wavy about your numbers and then claiming you can offset a 
>>>>>>>>>> “substantial amount of warming” in your homepage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Weather balloons have different bursting altitudes depending on 
>>>>>>>>>> 1) payload 2) amount of helium used to inflate 3) material.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You can find an example here with a calculator down below that 
>>>>>>>>>> lets you calculate max bursting height based on inflation
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.highaltitudescience.com/products/near-space-balloon-1200-g
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which balloons did you use?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How much did you inflate them?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Did you check with the producer if the mix of SO₂ and He in the 
>>>>>>>>>> balloon would affect their calculations, and if so how?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The forcing we’re talking about changes depending on altitude of 
>>>>>>>>>> release as well: at 19 it’s different than at 25 (and depending on 
>>>>>>>>>> your 
>>>>>>>>>> definition, sometimes the tropopause is above 18km..), and above 
>>>>>>>>>> 29km 
>>>>>>>>>> sulfate aerosols evaporate because temperatures are too high to form 
>>>>>>>>>> liquid 
>>>>>>>>>> aerosols. If the balloon doesn’t burst at the right altitude, what 
>>>>>>>>>> would 
>>>>>>>>>> happen to the oxidized S is not so simple - frankly I don’t know the 
>>>>>>>>>> answer 
>>>>>>>>>> off the top of my head, there are a few factors that could influence 
>>>>>>>>>> this. 
>>>>>>>>>> Do you have studies showing what would happen there based on lack of 
>>>>>>>>>> water 
>>>>>>>>>> vapor and different temperature and OH levels?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you don’t - and you don’t have any tools to measure it yet - 
>>>>>>>>>> maybe you should at least tone down the claims already present on 
>>>>>>>>>> your 
>>>>>>>>>> website?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For some ranges of stratospheric releases of sulfate we have some 
>>>>>>>>>> numbers for SAI we can be somewhat confident about - not just in 
>>>>>>>>>> term of 
>>>>>>>>>> the forcing but in terms of downstream effects on the stratospheric 
>>>>>>>>>> composition - but this may not be true for what you are proposing or 
>>>>>>>>>> claiming you are doing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Lastly, in your Twitter account you claimed in a post 2 days ago 
>>>>>>>>>> that there are “supporters and scientists who believe in you”.  I 
>>>>>>>>>> would 
>>>>>>>>>> avoid claiming you have the support of scientists if you don’t - or 
>>>>>>>>>> show 
>>>>>>>>>> proofs if you do.  As far as any scientist I know is concerned they 
>>>>>>>>>> don’t 
>>>>>>>>>> seem particularly impressed - and your lack of clarity goes against 
>>>>>>>>>> any of 
>>>>>>>>>> the calls for open and transparent research (not to mention 
>>>>>>>>>> inclusive 
>>>>>>>>>> decision making) this community has asked in previous public 
>>>>>>>>>> statements.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Daniele 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 28 Dec 2022, at 18:09, Luke Iseman <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Andrew, Olivier, Bala, and everyone else for diving in 
>>>>>>>>>> with critiques here. I'm a cofounder of Make Sunsets and want to 
>>>>>>>>>> clarify a 
>>>>>>>>>> few things: 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Honesty: *
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We have no desire to mislead anyone. If we make a mistake (which 
>>>>>>>>>> we will), we'll correct it. 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Radiative Forcing:*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I didn't make this "gram offsets a ton" number up. It comes from 
>>>>>>>>>> David Keith's research:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "a gram of aerosol in the stratosphere, delivered perhaps by 
>>>>>>>>>> high-flying jets, could offset the warming effect of a ton of carbon 
>>>>>>>>>> dioxide, a factor of 1 million to 1." 
>>>>>>>>>> <https://keith.seas.harvard.edu/news/whats-right-temperature-earth>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and, again: "Geoengineering’s leverage is very high—one gram of 
>>>>>>>>>> particles in the stratosphere prevents the warming caused by a ton 
>>>>>>>>>> of 
>>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide." 
>>>>>>>>>> <https://longnow.org/seminars/02015/feb/17/patient-geoengineering/>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> By stating "offsetting the warming effect of 1 ton of carbon for 
>>>>>>>>>> 1 year," I was trying to be more conservative than Professor Keith. 
>>>>>>>>>> I am 
>>>>>>>>>> correcting "carbon" to read "carbon dioxide" on the cooling credit 
>>>>>>>>>> description right now, and I'm adding a paragraph at the start of 
>>>>>>>>>> the post 
>>>>>>>>>> stating that estimates vary, but a leading researcher cites a gram 
>>>>>>>>>> offsetting a ton. 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For the several hundred dollars of cooling credits we've already 
>>>>>>>>>> sold, I'll be providing evidence to each purchaser that I've 
>>>>>>>>>> delivered at 
>>>>>>>>>> least 2 grams per cooling credit. 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Olivier, or anyone else: I'd be happy to post something by you to 
>>>>>>>>>> our blog explaining what you estimate the radiative forcing of 1g 
>>>>>>>>>> so2 
>>>>>>>>>> released at 20km altitude from in or near the tropics will be and 
>>>>>>>>>> why. I 
>>>>>>>>>> will include language of your choosing explaining that you in no way 
>>>>>>>>>> endorse what we are doing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I very much hope to get suggestions from this community on 
>>>>>>>>>> instrumentation we should fly to improve the state of the science 
>>>>>>>>>> here. 
>>>>>>>>>> Again, I'm happy to do this with disclaimers about how researchers 
>>>>>>>>>> we fly 
>>>>>>>>>> things for are not endorsing our efforts. Or even without revealing 
>>>>>>>>>> who the 
>>>>>>>>>> researchers are: we'll fly test instruments and provide data, no 
>>>>>>>>>> questions 
>>>>>>>>>> asked:)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Telemetry: *
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My first 2 flights had no telemetry: in April, this was still in 
>>>>>>>>>> self-funded science project territory. After burning some sulfur and 
>>>>>>>>>> capturing the resultant gas, I placed this in a balloon. I then 
>>>>>>>>>> added 
>>>>>>>>>> helium, underinflating the balloon substantially, and let it go. 
>>>>>>>>>> There is 
>>>>>>>>>> technically a slim possibility that neither of these balloons 
>>>>>>>>>> reached the 
>>>>>>>>>> stratosphere, as I acknowledged to the Technology Review reporter. I 
>>>>>>>>>> will 
>>>>>>>>>> add Spot trackers to my next flights. These cut out at 18km, so I'l 
>>>>>>>>>> be able 
>>>>>>>>>> to confirm that I achieve at least this altitude. If (and this is a 
>>>>>>>>>> big if) 
>>>>>>>>>> I'm able to recover the balloons, I'll have a lot more data from the 
>>>>>>>>>> flight 
>>>>>>>>>> computer 
>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.highaltitudescience.com/collections/electronics/products/eagle-flight-computer>.
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> I will eventually switch to Swarms 
>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.sparkfun.com/products/19236?utm_campaign=May%206%2C%202022&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=212205037&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9EyQOQ6C-9XuSOHa7CggOC8Pf2tEow_Fppo5pXgTHO8-7gV-aHrrYpnPcliws6Ju8j2PBAX3Tkog0oVpwk8XqWX2xo0w&utm_content=212206499&utm_source=hs_email>,
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> which should let me transmit more data regardless of balloon 
>>>>>>>>>> recovery.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Pricing: *
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bala, you're totally right that this should be priced much lower. 
>>>>>>>>>> We're trying to make enough with our early flights to stay in 
>>>>>>>>>> business 
>>>>>>>>>> until we get meaningful traction with customers, and we plan to 
>>>>>>>>>> eventually 
>>>>>>>>>> drop prices to $1 per ton or less.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Reuse: *
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We are not yet reusing balloons, and Andrew is correct that latex 
>>>>>>>>>> UV degradation will limit our ability to do so with weather 
>>>>>>>>>> balloons. Given 
>>>>>>>>>> that balloon cost is our main expense per gram, even a few uses per 
>>>>>>>>>> balloon 
>>>>>>>>>> will dramatically improve the economics here.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I expect to disagree with some of you, but I hope we can do so 
>>>>>>>>>> politely and assuming good intentions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> 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/550ec54e-4b36-4b6e-b4be-834229c870cen%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/550ec54e-4b36-4b6e-b4be-834229c870cen%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> 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/9942AB80-E648-4DCE-8E51-B7FC7EFF1352%40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/9942AB80-E648-4DCE-8E51-B7FC7EFF1352%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in 
>>>>>>>>>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. Is e buidheann 
>>>>>>>>>> carthannais a 
>>>>>>>>>> th’ ann an Oilthigh Dhùn Èideann, clàraichte an Alba, àireamh 
>>>>>>>>>> clàraidh 
>>>>>>>>>> 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 [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/AM8PR05MB80359D6D052CF2BA3940E360A7F39%40AM8PR05MB8035.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/AM8PR05MB80359D6D052CF2BA3940E360A7F39%40AM8PR05MB8035.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> 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/CAJ3C-05k%2BYfdjymwSQ2o%3D4J0fpnYJ%3D03r8OtiorsaAT2mSiKJQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-05k%2BYfdjymwSQ2o%3D4J0fpnYJ%3D03r8OtiorsaAT2mSiKJQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> 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/f0172e2d-15f9-451a-ab0c-b070d594f41an%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/f0172e2d-15f9-451a-ab0c-b070d594f41an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>> 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/c807ddc3-faf6-4663-acb4-1574b2fa6a40n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>  
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/c807ddc3-faf6-4663-acb4-1574b2fa6a40n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>
>> *This e-mail may contain confidential material. If you are not an 
>> intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. It may 
>> also contain personal views which are not the views of The Economist Group. 
>> We may monitor e-mail to and from our network.*
>>
>> *Sent by a member of The Economist Group. The Group's parent company is 
>> The Economist Newspaper Limited, registered in England with company number 
>> 236383 and registered office at The Adelphi, 1-11 John Adam Street, London, 
>> WC2N 6HT. For Group company registration details go 
>> to http://legal.economistgroup.com <http://legal.economistgroup.com> *
>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
>> Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/geoengineering/l5fmgzA34HY/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/5f214d89-8168-47b6-8d88-f535d3f44562n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/5f214d89-8168-47b6-8d88-f535d3f44562n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
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/c3df5078-c038-44e8-a8a6-7d349a221923n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to