I've been working in SRM for almost a quarter-century, so please put my 
name on that list.

Thanks for the heads-up,

K3

Robert G Kennedy III, PE
1994 AAAS/ASME Congressional Fellow
U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Space

On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 12:54:26 PM UTC-5 H simmens wrote:

> David Keith just posted on X that a number of forums are considering 
> sponsoring debates on SRM and is soliciting names to represent the pro SRM 
> position. 
>
> If you would like to suggest yourself or someone else please post here and 
> I will be happy to convey those names to David. 
>
> Here is a 2019 debate below that featured David and Ted Parson arguing 
> against the motion that engineering solar radiation is a crazy idea. 
>
> By the way Ted Parson, who is one of the most thoughtful and knowledgeable 
> of those in the cooling space, just yesterday on a Climate Overshoot 
> commission webinar said that the hundred or so studies of SRM have shown 
> “shockingly strongly favorable” results. 
>
> Note that neither he nor any of the other panelists were willing to 
> declare that SRM is actually needed, demonstrating once again the absence 
> of social acceptance for cooling. 
>
> Herb 
>
>
> [image: solar_radiation_-_4x3_compressed.png]
>
> Engineering Solar Radiation Is a Crazy Idea 
> <https://opentodebate.org/debate/engineering-solar-radiation-crazy-idea/>
> opentodebate.org 
> <https://opentodebate.org/debate/engineering-solar-radiation-crazy-idea/>
> <https://opentodebate.org/debate/engineering-solar-radiation-crazy-idea/>
>
>
> Herb Simmens
> Author of *A Climate Vocabulary of the Future*
> “A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson
> @herbsimmens
> HerbSimmens.com
>
>

-- 
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/a61093ce-2508-4290-9be5-1af5efb89d01n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to