Hi Ron, Thanks for the link. I had not read this, though I am sure you and others announced it when it came out.
My question reflects my interest in understanding the likely net zero 'end-state' that is the focus of the vast share of discussion around global warming and climate change, and your paper discusses that. Certainly I regard even the current state of the Earth with regard to atmospheric CO2 to be unacceptable, let alone where ever we 'land' at net zero. My specific interest in the question is where sea level ends up upon reaching the (still quite hypothetical) 'net zero'. But of course, where ever we 'land' at net zero, that's not the end of the story, nor of humanity's suffering. The ice sheets are melting, and the ocean are rising due to that melt, even where we are now. Net zero does not in any way stop that melting and sea level rise (on any timescale that matters for the stability of states and civilization). Nor of course, does the entire spectrum of other increasingly catastrophic global warming-induced effects stop at 'net zero'. This disconnect seems to pervade the global debate. Of course, you and most people on this forum are more aware of all this than me. Without one or more (or better, all) of the proposed methods of climate intervention, we will definitely be 'giving up' on the coastal cities of the world, and astonishingly, that fate seems increasingly to be being actively embraced by activists, scientists, and leaders (at least in the industrialized world). But I have absolutely no intention of docilely embracing the inundation of the coastlines, complete with all of the catastrophies, death, and suffering (to be borne by the poor and disenfranchised alone!) that that 'embrace of death' entails. To hell with the global warming accommodators. I refuse to give up on the coastlines. I'll say it again. I refuse to give up on the coastlines! That's insanity. It is this decision!, to abandon the coastlines, It is this decision! and not the decision to seriously begin testing all forms of climate intervention, that is being made by the rich and powerful right now, the class that can protect itself from the consequences, without any involvement of the billions of poor and disenfranchised of the world, who will be forced to suffer as a result. As Thucydides so presciently wrote about global warming 2500 years ago, the rich will resist global warming intervention and the poor will be forced to 'suffer what they must'. When it comes to the 'debate' about whether to employ climate intervention technologies, it's a totally rigged game, with the established powers in science and politics playing the role of 'the house'. I believe that those of us who understand that intervention is not only doable but absolutely essential, that stabilizing the global mean temperature is the single most important thing to be done right now, today, should organize our own conference on how we must proceed, rather than begging the Davos-and-COP-attending activists, scientists, socialogists, political 'scientists', celebrities, and politicians to 'please, pretty please' at least consider what we say. It is we, not they, who speak on behalf of the poor and disenfranchised! Greg Slater > On Feb 12, 2024, at 2:54 PM, Ron Baiman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > Recent modeling suggests that the oceans will gradually release heat to the > atmosphere but not sure at what rate. > > This is from the HPAC cooling paper: > https://essopenarchive.org/doi/full/10.22541/essoar.169755546.65919302/v1 > <https://essopenarchive.org/doi/full/10.22541/essoar.169755546.65919302/v1> > > "Failure to begin deployment of direct cooling influence in the very > near-term necessarily > will lead to greater harm and increased risk, at least until net-zero global > GHG emissions are > achieved and legacy concentrations of GHGs are removed from the atmosphere > and oceans. > Recent modeling suggests that, in the absence of direct climate cooling, if > (anthropogenic and > natural) net-zero emissions were to be achieved after 3667 Gigatons of CO2 eq > GHG (or 1000 > Gigatons of carbon estimated to result in global warming of about 2.0°C) were > accumulated in > the atmosphere, global warming would remain at roughly 2.0° C for at least > another 50 years due > to continued thermal rebalancing from legacy ocean warming, even with > continued ocean uptake > of legacy CO2 from the atmosphere (MacDougall et al., 2020; Hausfather, > 2021). This suggests > that even after net-zero is achieved, a combination of continued direct > climate cooling and > drawdown of legacy GHG would be necessary to expeditiously restore and > regenerate a stable > climate and healthy ecosystem (Schuckmann et al., 2020; Baiman, 2021, > footnote 9)." > > Best, > Ron > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 3:14 PM Gregory Slater <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hello All, > > If we managed to reach 'net zero' by, say, 2050, so that, to zeroth > order, the concentration of CO2 ceased to increase due to human > activities after that time, how would the (mean) ocean temperature > respond (over years, decades)? > > I am happy to be directed to any published papers or group threads which > discuss this. > > Thanks, in advance, for any help. > > Greg Slater, East Palo Alto, CA > > > -- > 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] > <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition%[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/53b39682-29d1-4fc7-a0ee-c3814acdeb50%40gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/53b39682-29d1-4fc7-a0ee-c3814acdeb50%40gmail.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/CD05CB11-5D11-4869-ADCD-197F07468434%40gmail.com.
