Dear Ye, Sev, Dale et. al., Thank you for your responses. As I have repeatedly stated, I believe that multiple Direct Climate Cooling methods will be necessary in the short-term and possibly in the long-term future as well as, per the papers cited in the HPAC cooling paper (non-edited pre-print here: https://www.scribd.com/document/656516741/The-Case-for-Urgent-Direct-Climate-Cooling-Final-Version-6-19-2023 ), recent climate modeling suggests that even if humanity achieves anthropomorphic zero-emissions, warming will likely plateau and not decline for at least 50 years in spite of a declining stock of GHG in the atmosphere from ocean uptake and short-term species decay, due to increased warming from the oceans (where over 90% of excess heat is now accumulating). This should probably not be addressed by massive GHG draw down (to below pre-industrial levels) as when ocean and atmospheric heat finally reach equilibrium, this could result in an insufficient GHG in the atmosphere situation.
One of the points of my question to Anton would have been to suggest that any method (local or global), if effective in achieving significant cooling over a significant area of the planet, would have to take global considerations such as the need for things like hemispheric symmetry into account. Thus to the extent that significant cooling is achieved, I don't think we can avoid thinking about global impacts of cooling efforts whether or not they are initially "local" or "global". In this sense even effective polar SAI would probably not provide adequate cooling to "re-freeze" the Arctic as much of the heat is coming from ocean currents from other parts of the globe. Second, I second Dale's comment. We are in an emergency situation. We need to get beyond the conventional concern about the "extreme known, and unknown", risks of high leverage methods like SAI, and start incrementally piloting and testing them. Stratospheric Aerosol Injection is after all a "nature based" cooling method as it attempts to imitate volcanoes that have been doing this throughout geological and human history, generally without significantly harmful climate consequences. As far as I can tell the most often cited natural science "extreme risks" do not appear to be that risky (see the detailed references in my proposal: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o5xQogx1kKgD-QlM4MVPdWeL2BzBtwUm/view?usp=sharing ). We simply do not have 10 years to do "pure research" and than decades to try to roll out global SAI in a giant "hail Mary" if this becomes necessary. We should be doing pilot testing, monitoring, and gradual implementation, in addition to, and as part of, continued research. Third, for this reason, many commentators (if my memory serves, I believe this was stated in the Arctic Momentum conference as well) suggest that the major difficulties of SAI are not natural but geopolitical, i.e. problems of governance and regulation. I view the International Space Station Analogy, and incremental polar strategy as a possible way to move forward and begin to address these issues (see the last part of the proposal). Furthermore, as Mike MacCracken has often pointed out, one of these political issues, that SAI is too inexpensive and "high leverage" and thus poses a too easy a "moral hazard" or "get out of jail free" card for vested interests opposed to emissions cuts and the green transition, appears increasingly moot as with the decline in the cost of renewables, market incentives are now forcing a green economy transition even in places like Texas where the politics are still dominated by fossil fuel interests. The biggest problem we now face is time, not moral hazard. The real "moral hazard" is in not implementing Direct Climate Cooling fast enough. Finally, again I firmly believe that we should not put "all of our eggs in one or another direct climate cooling (or intervention) basket", but rather be testing and piloting, if and when prudent, the 18 DCC methods in the HPAC paper cited above, and others that folks such as Ye may propose in the future. My guess is that effective local cooling will be important even under a global cooling regime as geographic flexibility and targeting will be necessary (as Stephen Salter often points out). Best, Ron On Sat, Sep 9, 2023 at 6:01 PM daleanne bourjaily <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Ye, all, > > Last year I spoke to General Gus Perna who headed the covid vaccine task > force in the US. The scientists were reluctant to approve the science, > there was so much more research to be done. > What the general said was that he took into account the strategic risk to > health and the economy of waiting for a 100% consensus as he would do in a > conflict situation. > On those grounds he decided that 75% would translate to approval. So that > is when the vaccine was launched. To wait in a situation of that magnitude > was no longer an option. Have we not reached the same point on planetary > cooling? > So given that there are three or four nature -based/biomimetic > interventions that could be immediately deployed in field trials, should we > not together identify and choose the ones that have the most potential > right now? That will allow us to seek funding and priorities for both > governance and the trials themselves. > Looking forward to your advice, as many of you as possible. > Best regards, > Dale Anne > > > > > > > Op za 9 sep. 2023 01:15 schreef Ye Tao <[email protected]>: > >> Dear Ron, >> >> First, I also applaud Anton for an excellent presentation and thank the >> whole team at Operatioo Arktis for being excellent hosts. I thank you, Ron, >> for your enthusiasm, which I sadly find problematic. >> >> A major learning, or rather realization, for many of us at Arctic >> Momentum is how little we understand the science of SAI, MCB, and any of >> the many proposed regional techniques presented at the conference. Some >> discussion groups also mentioned that we don't yet have a clear idea on how >> to decide among various climatic outcomes, *even if assuming* the >> science and engineering eventually advance to such a point that climate and >> weather could be designed with high fidelity. Our general state of >> ignorance inspired my recent post about starting to develop "figure of >> merit function(s)" to evaluate climate outcomes based on globally agreed >> upon targets ultimately stemming from a set of morally robust values. >> Given ubiquitous chasms in knowledge gaps, we would be mistakenly putting >> the horse before the cart try leveraging the moment for the specific end of >> getting SAI implemented. >> >> There is no skipping steps to good science and engineering, and SAI and >> MCB are a couple decades of research away from acceptable scientific >> understanding and technical readiness. There are so many known unknowns >> and known problems with SAI, some of which I have mentioned before here on >> this forum and which have yet to be addressed. >> >> In the interim, there are a variety of local geoengineering methods that >> need to be given priority. Global safety must be prioritized in our line >> of work. Promising local methods include mechanically slowing down ice >> melting by raising kinetic barriers, MEER for adaptive mitigation to help >> victims of our excesses here and now, ice thickening methods to preserve >> annually average albedo, and targeted preservation of Arctic ice by new >> methods I will hopefully soon share in a HPAC talk. >> >> While collaboration and support by Finland, Norway, Canada, the US, >> *[RUSSIA*], and Arctic indigenous peoples would be critically important, >> they are insufficient for ensuring that modifying global climate is done in >> a factually democratic fashion, by the people and for the people. While we >> know very little about SAI, what we do know is that anything SAI with polar >> impact would have a global impact elsewhere. All sovereign states need to >> be included in this conversation, at the very beginning. >> >> Since the science is simply not there. Let's start here. Experimental >> science is where priority must be place, not computer simulations which not >> event the coders trust. It is insufficient to appear to be inclusive. I >> see a growing trend towards building a facade of inclusiveness. It is >> suspect to fund a selected few high profile and visible Global South >> researchers to participate in research using computer codes developed by >> academics from the Northern, studying specific methods proposed by a >> handful of individuals from the North. If we were truly undertaking this >> endeavor for justice and a future worth fighting for, we must do much more >> and much better. >> >> Best >> >> Ye >> On 9/8/2023 6:08 PM, Ron Baiman wrote: >> >> Dear Anton et al., >> >> Excellent meeting! I'm really sorry that I missed it! I got the time >> wrong but just finished viewing the recording! >> >> I was going to ask a question related to a proposal to begin to test the >> SAI polar approach (proposed by the "Cornell SAI group") - direct cooling >> of the Arctic (and Antarctic - as they both need to tackled together for >> symmetry - see Bala reference in the paper) based on the International >> Space Station model. >> This could be approached as a method to try to quickly slow down or >> reverse Arctic and Antarctic melting and restore previous conditions as >> much as possible - along with other possible Direct Climate Cooling and >> intervention approaches. My thinking is that collaboration and support by >> Finland, Norway, Canada, the US and Arctic indigenous peoples would be >> critically important. It could be framed as a "save the poles" effort but >> could potentially be the platform to start a serious global climate cooling >> effort. >> >> Suggested comments to this proposal welcome!: >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o5xQogx1kKgD-QlM4MVPdWeL2BzBtwUm/view?usp=sharing >> >> Thank you all! >> >> Best, >> Ron >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 10:20 AM <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The recording of this meeting is at https://youtu.be/unPOcBY3idU >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank you very much Anton for joining us. >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> >>> *On Behalf Of *[email protected] >>> *Sent:* Monday, September 4, 2023 9:00 PM >>> *To:* healthy-planet-action-coalition < >>> [email protected]>; 'Planetary >>> Restoration' <[email protected]>; NOAC < >>> [email protected]>; 'geoengineering' < >>> [email protected]>; 'Anton Keskinen' < >>> [email protected]> >>> *Subject:* [geo] HPAC this week: ARCTIC MOMENTUM Conference >>> >>> >>> >>> The Healthy Planet Action Coalition welcomes Mr Anton Keskinen, >>> organiser of the just completed Arctic Momentum Conference in Finland, as >>> our guest speaker this week. >>> >>> >>> >>> Date: Thursday 7 September >>> >>> Time: 10pm Finland (=3pm EST, 8pm UK, 5am Friday Australia AEST) >>> >>> Duration: 90 minutes >>> >>> Link: >>> https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88954851189?pwd=WVZoeTBnN3kyZFoyLzYxZ1JNbDFPUT09 >>> >>> >>> >>> Anton will explain key outcomes from the Conference followed by >>> discussion with meeting participants. All welcome. >>> >>> Operaatio Arktis (operaatioarktis.fi/en) organized the public event >>> ARCTIC MOMENTUM on 31st August in Helsinki, Finland, about the state of the >>> Arctic, and why we should conduct more research on climate interventions. >>> >>> Event page with more information on the high level goals, as well as the >>> program: https://www.operaatioarktis.fi/arcticmomentum >>> >>> Description >>> >>> “We are a group of climate activists, turned from the street movement to >>> advance and lobby for climate intervention research. Our goal is to >>> preserve the Arctic Summer Sea Ice. For that we urge the Finnish government >>> to take lead on the research needed. We are open for the possibility of >>> finding several complementing methods to achieve this – perhaps some direct >>> sea ice growth manipulation and SRM combined with the obvious emission >>> reductions and GHG removal. Part of our mission is to bring different >>> stakeholders and research teams together to enable visioning how climate >>> intervention methods could complement each other, instead of focusing on >>> debating which one is better or worse idea. >>> >>> The public session on 31st August is part of a larger three-day >>> gathering, where we bring together indigenous leaders, activists, >>> scientists, government officials and policy makers, to discuss who, if at >>> all, should we move forward with preserving the Arctic. >>> >>> One of our main messages is that we must shift from the old climate >>> paradigm (Climate Mitigation) to a new climate paradigm (Climate Repair). >>> The old paradigm is about reducing emissions, accepting the damage that's >>> unavoidable with emission cuts, and adapting when possible. The new >>> paradigm states that we must reduce emissions, and try to prevent and >>> repair the damage that's unavoidable even with sharp emission cuts, and >>> adapt when possible. While the old paradigm presents what we call in our >>> publication Arctic Endgame "politics of accepted victims", the new paradigm >>> is antidote for this. >>> >>> We aim to change this climate paradigm first in Finland, and then in the >>> whole World. >>> >>> You can read Arctic Endgame here: >>> https://www.operaatioarktis.fi/en/arctic-endgame >>> For those of you (I assume most) who cannot attend our public event on >>> 31st in person, the event will be streamed on our Youtube page: >>> https://www.youtube.com/@operaatioarktis2193 >>> >>> Follow us on >>> >>> Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/operaatioarktis/ >>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/OperaatioArktis >>> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/OperaatioArktis >>> >>> Subscribe our newsletter on the bottom of our website: >>> operaatioarktis.fi/en >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Robert Tulip >>> >>> https://www.healthyplanetaction.org/ >>> >>> -- >>> 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/024001d9df1e%24fb765730%24f2630590%24%40rtulip.net >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/024001d9df1e%24fb765730%24f2630590%24%40rtulip.net?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/147901d9e268%240929c9b0%241b7d5d10%24%40rtulip.net >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/147901d9e268%240929c9b0%241b7d5d10%24%40rtulip.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" 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/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAPhUB9DTULJvQO1eFgeTxsw%3DsHxMQuFw0UL6eWXdDxWNqS_ayg%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAPhUB9DTULJvQO1eFgeTxsw%3DsHxMQuFw0UL6eWXdDxWNqS_ayg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> -- >> 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/192e2074-8cb9-91ab-2910-c7209f89b602%40rowland.harvard.edu >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/192e2074-8cb9-91ab-2910-c7209f89b602%40rowland.harvard.edu?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/CAPhUB9BJDXjwxsAeFc5--kXwNAhxFJfX9vExyz%2BGDqS1NJtJog%40mail.gmail.com.
