Just a note that I sent in my comment on this really poorly done article:
The whole cartoon sequence has a huge number of errors, misconceptions,
and misportrayals. The most reasonable application would be to start
intervention small and gradually increase it with the intent of
counterbalancing future warming or just slightly more. No country wants
further warming with increasing likelihood of more intense extreme
weather events, wildfires, biodiversity loss, etc. And it is unlikely
any country wants the climate to return to the 19th century or even the
first half of the 20th century. So, the idea would be return, for
example, to conditions of the mid- to second half of the 20th century.
Assuming countries continue on their path of reducing emissions, this
would end up involving reflecting back to space less than 1% of incoming
solar radiation--something that would be pretty hard to notice without
very careful instruments. In that the climate is made up of the average
across the weather events over multiple years, it is the distribution of
weather events that would be changed, with less likelihood of the
warmest such weather events, so generally lower likelihood and intensity
of the worst weather events at locations around the world--so back
toward the distributions present in the past. The return will not be
perfect and a bit different everywhere, with research needed to check if
new, adverse conditions out of the range of weather events that have
occurred in the past would occur. As the weather system is global, to
really an approach that could be weaponized. And the main threat for
society is having global climate change continue to intensify for the
several decades, at least, that it will take to totally eliminate global
greenhouse gas emissions, during which quite catastrophic consequences
are projected. The relative risk analysis that is needed is between
climate change relying on mitigation and GHG removal with and without
intervention. That is the key choice in my view, having been a climate
change scientist for a half century.
Mike MacCracken
On 5/3/23 6:41 PM, Simone Tilmes wrote:
Dear Alan,
in addition to that this comic is completely not line with what
current model studies are showing what SRM would do in a short time to
the weather (as scientists we really need to work on setting this
straight) I am interested to understand where the number 1 deg cooling
from Mt.Pinatubo is coming from? NASA???
One of the recent IPCC reports estimated 0.3degree of warming after
Mt.Pinatubo when we remove the ocean variability.
Simone
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 3:31 PM 'Alan Robock ☮' via geoengineering
<[email protected]> wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/05/03/comic-geosolar-engineering-explained/
*See how a quick-fix climate solution could also trigger war*
By Michael Birnbaum and Tom Humberstone
Washington Post, May 3, 2023
--
Alan
Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor
Editor, Reviews of Geophysics
Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-848-932-5751
Rutgers University E-mail:[email protected]
14 College Farm Roadhttp://people.envsci.rutgers.edu/robock/
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA ☮http://twitter.com/AlanRobock
--
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/da576533-f457-3ee0-c233-52f5a70f29f5%40envsci.rutgers.edu
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/da576533-f457-3ee0-c233-52f5a70f29f5%40envsci.rutgers.edu?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
/Simone Tilmes,/
/Atmospheric Chemistry, Observations & Modeling Lab
National Center for Atmospheric Research/
/PO Box 3000/
/Boulder, Colorado 80307-3000/
/303-497-1445/
/303-497-1400 (fax)
/ /[email protected]/
--
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/CADe6QRgSkvszy0eqVXqvfF_OLt_XAZ%2BYa2GpLwQT6oBZ1cRZ2Q%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CADe6QRgSkvszy0eqVXqvfF_OLt_XAZ%2BYa2GpLwQT6oBZ1cRZ2Q%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/2a98dc68-6c76-5aa7-d214-2e35618c60b2%40comcast.net.
