Ron,
With regard to your second paragraph, you could include this graph from the Carbon Brief article by Hausfather and Forster (2023) in your reference list - https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-low-sulphur-shipping-rules-are-affecting-global-warming/. It could also be referenced in the second paragraph of the open letter: In the second point about sponsoring research I suggest you should delete ‘sulfur’ at the end of the 4th line and just leave it to refer to aerosols. Otherwise you are restricting the research to just substances containing sulphur and there may be suitable non-sulphur containing materials that could produce useful aerosols. With regard to Ron’s suggested 4th point, I think you should run it past a shipping person before including it as I think it has some potential problems including: * I doubt that “… space now needed for bunker fuel is sufficient for the less energy dense biomass”. * Ron says “Space now used for bunker fuel might be enough, but the huge multi-ocean cargo ships now using bunker fuels seem large enough to open up new space for biomass fuel”. I doubt that shipping companies would be willing to give up cargo space. Many have already had to accommodate Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems. Best wishes Chris. From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ron Baiman Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 10:20 PM To: healthy-planet-action-coalition <[email protected]>; 'Eelco Rohling' via NOAC Meetings <[email protected]>; Planetary Restoration <[email protected]>; Healthy Climate Alliance <[email protected]>; geoengineering <[email protected]> Cc: SALTER Stephen <[email protected]> Subject: Request for Feedback: Open Letter Supporting Research on Three Responses to Warming Impact of Bunker Fuel Regulations Dear Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate suggested edits and comments to this proposed open letter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ewSMGl1bnh-umD86pT0x_2-EvaZUHbe1/edit?usp=sharing <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ewSMGl1bnh-umD86pT0x_2-EvaZUHbe1/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116465941111195452408&rtpof=true&sd=true> &ouid=116465941111195452408&rtpof=true&sd=true Most importantly, does the text and the three requests (one inspired by a comment from Stephen Salter) make sense, and is the overall descriptive language accurate? Thank you! Best, Ron Baiman -- 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] <mailto:[email protected]> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/CAPhUB9BPaifrSK7A6v1WT8JZvHJGr-xO-KtHfyYk7XvKcpQF7A%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/CAPhUB9BPaifrSK7A6v1WT8JZvHJGr-xO-KtHfyYk7XvKcpQF7A%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/03b601d9d022%2457f59cc0%2407e0d640%24%40btinternet.com.
image001.png
Description: Binary data
