Clive, I wa a little rude I think .. so apologies are in order.
Rob wood is right ( I would ay that as I taught him meteorology when he came to do his PhD) , so I am very biased!! Danny Rosenfeld has always argued that if we seed spray of the right size all over the oceanic high pressure areas , then it will work , not quite as well but effectively. I did some runs years ago and found that if it worked , the artic ice would come down to Iceland! Danny and I always argue about the details of cloud microphysics , butvthtv is good. I want to do a few more runs to optimise the 0.2 -0.8 micron CCN salt size. Rob W thinks we can go a lot smaller, I (agreeing with Latham) am not sure hence why I want to do some runs. In the global runs, we only assumed we were seeding 10% of the ocean, where the large patches are. But yes 25% and may be more, but good as in the calm subtropics. As for the type of CCN, I will pass as I am not knowledgeable in the difference CCN and their activation, but yes in principle, any hydroscopic CCN would do! Best wishes Alan Alan Gadian 0775 451 9009 [email protected] > On 21 Mar 2024, at 17:09, Clive Elsworth <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Alan > > No need to apologise. Your message needs to be repeated over and over until > it sinks in. > > As to the concern that MCB benefits some and not others, stratocumulus clouds > seem to form at least 25% of the time over most of the ocean. See map on p12: > https://atmos.uw.edu/~robwood/teaching/535/StratusStratocumulus_Wood_July22.pdf > > Is that a correct interpretation? > > That is the basis on which we are proposing the placement of cheap, remotely > controllable aerosol dispersal buoys in many ocean areas. That way > meteorologists will have maximum control over which areas of ocean to > brighten stratocumulus clouds in, and when. That seems to us the best way to > produce the most favourable weather patterns. Obviously it’s controversial, > but once water vapour takes over as the main warming agent we must hope that > good sense will prevail. > > Buoys can easily produce nano-sized ammonium chloride salt particles by > mixing low concentrations of ammonia and HCl gases in the air. It should also > be easy to control particle size by varying flowrates and concentrations. > > Ammonium chloride is a food additive, hygroscopic like NaCl, and is no more > toxic than NaCl. Dispersing low concentration ammonia and HCl over remote > ocean areas poses essentially no risk to any lifeforms. > > Do you see any flaws? > > Clive > > From: Alan Gadian <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 4:26 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Cc: Alan Kerstein <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; > Clive Elsworth <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; Herb Simmens <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; Mike MacCracken <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; Oswald Petersen <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; Planetary Restoration > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; Robin Collins > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Sev Clarke > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; geoengineering > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; > healthy-planet-action-coalition > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [geo] RE: [prag] [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned > atmospheric geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review > > Sorry. > > I keep emphasising this. H2O is the biggest greenhouse gas contributing ~ > 51% of the warming, CO2 is ~ 19%. So with clausius clapeyron, for each > degree C rise we have 7% more water vapour ( therefore approx a 3.5%) larger > contribution. With 3C which we will be at in about 20years at most, you can > forget any increase in CO2. The only way to get water vapour down is to cool > the planet. > > The green lobby has created this massive geo engineering experiment , which > as Lovelock said , will cause massive destruction of human life by 2040 . > > SAI will destroy much of the ozone layer. It has to be MCB > > Alan Gadian > > > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 15:50, 'Chris Vivian' via geoengineering > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: >> Oswald, >> >> It’s fine in theory to say “All we have to do is remove the GHG which cause >> Global Warming” but few people believe it can be scaled up fast enough to >> avoid tipping points, worsening climatic effects etc. How do you think it >> can be done fast enough? >> >> Best wishes >> >> Chris. >> >> From: 'Oswald Petersen' via Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC) >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:10 PM >> To: 'Robin Collins' <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; 'Sev Clarke' <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Cc: 'Alan Kerstein' <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; 'Clive Elsworth' >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; >> 'Herb Simmens' <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; 'Mike >> MacCracken' <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; 'Planetary >> Restoration' <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; 'geoengineering' >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; >> 'healthy-planet-action-coalition' >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: AW: [prag] [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned atmospheric >> geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review >> >> Hi Robin, >> >> we do not need SRM. All we have to do is remove the GHG which cause Global >> Warming. It is safe, natural and much more efficient than SRM (any variety), >> >> Regards >> >> Oswald Petersen >> Atmospheric Methane Removal AG >> Lärchenstr. 5 >> CH-8280 Kreuzlingen >> Tel: +41-71-6887514 >> Mob: +49-177-2734245 >> https://amr.earth <https://amr.earth/> >> https://cool-planet.earth <https://cool-planet.earth/> >> >> >> Von: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> Im Auftrag von >> Robin Collins >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. März 2024 14:01 >> An: Sev Clarke <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Cc: Alan Kerstein <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; Clive Elsworth >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Herb >> Simmens <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Mike MacCracken >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Planetary Restoration >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; geoengineering >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; >> healthy-planet-action-coalition >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Betreff: Re: [prag] [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned atmospheric >> geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review >> >> I think Herb’s question directed at a core of environmentalists is key: >>> Is there a point when the climate worsens so much more* that you would >>> support the deployment of cooling if shown to be reasonably safe and >>> effective? >>> >>> *Note: this can mean too late. >> >> I have raised the same question and I think the answer is that unambiguous >> critics of SRM methods (“anti-human interventionists”) see the question as a >> trap, and therefore it “shouldn’t” be answered. >> >> The only rational response to the question is, of course: a resounding Yes. >> But if you acknowledge that possibility, then you must deny the arguments >> against testing SRM. And you also have to believe (or pretend) that >> decarbonization-only IS sufficient, on track, and that the evidence is >> available to show this. If the evidence points in the opposite direction, >> then — to stick with your ideology — you must deny, refute or hide it. This >> is why the problem is now ideological and very dangerous if it spreads into >> governance. (UNEA!) >> >> I agree with Sev that the publication of the paper (and more of them) will >> be very important (although I disagree with a MCB-only approach.) I wonder >> if the publication will be blocked? >> >> We need bullet-proof publications to point to, to build the case in public >> and government circles. We need a breakthrough or two. >> >> Robin >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 6:45 PM Sev Clarke <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> Herb, >>> >>> Grandiose solutions and strategies are appropriate only for those who can >>> command grandiose resources. We do not. Having our DCC paper published in >>> the Oxford Open Climate Change journal would be a good start; and >>> persuading research organisations (following more the community >>> consultative lead of the Great Barrier Reef MCB experiment, rather than >>> that of SCoPEx/SAI) to model, experiment with, and publish the results >>> from, our many proposed climate solutions would give the article both >>> intellectual and possibly public & political support/funding. Many such >>> experiments and modelling do not require international governance and >>> approval if done in the confines of the EEZ waters of one or more nation >>> states. Successful experiments, followed by gated trials, seem to me to >>> provide our best chance of gaining widespread support for further, cautious >>> deployment. Learning by doing should allow us to minimise any adverse >>> effects whilst maximising the net benefit. >>> >>> Sev >>> >>> >>>> On 19 Mar 2024, at 5:20 am, H simmens <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Alan, Robin and Clive, >>>> >>>> We all have our theories that attempt to explain and understand the almost >>>> visceral opposition to any effort to directly cool the climate. >>>> >>>> The three arguments you cite Robin certainly account for some signiicant >>>> proportion of the opposition. And as you point out Alan the lack of >>>> information about the urgency of the situation and that there are remedies >>>> that could turn things around is I believe beyond dispute. >>>> >>>> I have attempted to engage with many leading Climate scientists and >>>> activists on Twitter about cooling. I’m amazed at how superficial their >>>> responses have been to my comments and questions when they bother >>>> responding at all. (And several have blocked me entirely as I guess my >>>> questions were too inconvenient.) >>>> >>>> One question I have never been able to get ANY knowledgeable Climate >>>> scientist or activist opposed to cooling to answer is a very simple one: >>>> >>>> Is there a point when the climate worsens so much more that you would >>>> support the deployment of cooling if shown to be reasonably safe and >>>> effective? >>>> >>>> Your guess is as good as mine as to why they refuse to answer but it would >>>> sure be important to find out! >>>> >>>> What is needed to answer these and other questions at the risk again of >>>> being annoyingly repetitive is a carefully researched and developed plan >>>> of action that starts out with the development of a strategic power map >>>> that identifies who the individuals, groups and other entities are that >>>> make decisions to advance or stymie the acceptance of cooling. >>>> >>>> Perhaps those of us on these lists and our allies will be fortuitous >>>> enough to convince or persuade a person who is trusted by other key people >>>> who could then positively change the dynamic. >>>> >>>> But would any of us be willing to bet the future of humanity and the >>>> natural world on the ability of some of us - who are essentially almost >>>> totally unorganized - to achieve that? >>>> >>>> If we were a multinational corporation who developed not just a new >>>> product but a new product category (cooling) and we wanted to market it to >>>> a world that didn’t even know that there was such a product category or >>>> even the need for one we would do what virtually every entity with the >>>> means to do so would do: >>>> >>>> We would invest considerable resources in market research, in focus >>>> groups, in power mapping and In understanding the competition’s strengths >>>> and weaknesses in the greatest of detail. To do all this we would hire the >>>> brightest most experienced and most relevantly influential people on the >>>> planet including those who specialize in particular countries or >>>> institutional sectors. >>>> >>>> Only then would we determine what our strategy would be to introduce the >>>> product - Do we start in one country, do we start with one demographic do >>>> we promote the product by denigrating the competition and or by pointing >>>> out the superiority of our product or do we simply decide to invest a >>>> considerable amount of our resources in a kind of brute force campaign to >>>> persuade every potential buyer. >>>> >>>> This process - done with the ultimate professionalism - is exactly what is >>>> necessary in my view to “sell” cooling as the first order of business for >>>> a brand new NGO committed to cooling the planet in the context of a >>>> restored climate. >>>> >>>> I probably have written too long an answer. >>>> >>>> But my point is that none of us have anywhere near the information needed >>>> to determine the most effective way to change the prevailing ERA paradigm >>>> of emission reductions alone- which generates tens of millions of >>>> promotional messages every single day throughout the planet versus >>>> essentially none for cooling the planet - to a paradigm that humanity can >>>> restore a safer climate and a healthier Ecosystem through the urgent >>>> deployment of direct cooling along with continued emission reductions, >>>> large scale carbon removal and a reduction in unnecessary consumption. >>>> >>>> My comments should not be interpreted to mean that we shouldn’t be >>>> reaching out to people like Sabine as you suggest Clive and others who >>>> have potentially large influence as many of us have been doing for the >>>> past couple of years. >>>> >>>> But if we don’t do it in a way where we know exactly what we want Sabine >>>> and others to do and how we can assist them then it may be of limited >>>> value. >>>> >>>> What I would suggest be done first would be to prepare the most powerful >>>> and compelling presentation imaginable to present to people and >>>> institutions with the means or with access to others with the means to >>>> establish and generously endow such an NGO. >>>> >>>> And then systematically identify all those contacts that we individually >>>> and collectively have with people who may be able to provide access to >>>> those with the means and influence to create such an NGO. >>>> >>>> Any significant actions that are not intended to directly or indirectly >>>> lead to that result seem like little more than rearranging the deck chairs >>>> on the Titanic as it goes closer and closer to colliding with the largely >>>> unseen (and now dramatically shrinking) iceberg that will make all of our >>>> efforts moot. >>>> >>>> Herb >>>> >>>> Herb Simmens >>>> Author of A Climate Vocabulary of the Future >>>> “A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson >>>> @herbsimmens >>>> HerbSimmens.com <http://herbsimmens.com/> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 18, 2024, at 1:07 PM, Clive Elsworth >>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> I agree with both of you (Alan and Robbin) >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps a trusted messenger might be Sabine Hossenfelder? >>>>> >>>>> In this video Sabine says climate scientists are probably guilty of >>>>> confirmation bias on equilibrium climate sensitivity: >>>>> https://youtu.be/uEZ9HFlqzms >>>>> >>>>> In this one she says climate engineering is a bad idea, but it’s probably >>>>> going to happen anyway because it’s the cheapest solution: >>>>> https://youtu.be/MZiEcx0F_CM However she only mentions SAI, and a method >>>>> of removing water vapour from the stratosphere, which would make almost >>>>> no difference. >>>>> >>>>> She appears unaware of MCB, and the many other proposals listed on the >>>>> NOAC website. >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone have access to Sabine? >>>>> >>>>> Clive >>>>> >>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of >>>>> Robin Collins >>>>> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 3:40 PM >>>>> To: Alan Kerstein <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> Cc: H simmens <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Michael >>>>> MacCracken <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; >>>>> Planetary Restoration <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>; geoengineering >>>>> <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>; >>>>> healthy-planet-action-coalition >>>>> <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned atmospheric >>>>> geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review >>>>> >>>>> If we are still asking the question we need to talk to them directly, >>>>> frankly, to understand. So far everything I’ve read suggests 1. they >>>>> don’t think human geo-measures will work (even if they are unwilling to >>>>> test to see) and/or because the human track record is abysmal; 2. they >>>>> think these measures will divert from decarbonization; 3. They think >>>>> decarbonization is sufficient. >>>>> >>>>> All these lead to the same point: #3. >>>>> That’s the one to focus on. >>>>> >>>>> Robin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 11:26 AM Alan Kerstein <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> Dear Herb, >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it plausible that the opponents of DCC are cognizant of the present >>>>>> danger and the urgency of action? Personally I don’t think so. Would >>>>>> opposition soften if they better understood the situation. I think it’s >>>>>> at least possible, perhaps likely. >>>>>> >>>>>> Before a doctor advises a patient to go through chemotherapy that will >>>>>> almost kill them, the doctor confronts the patient with the prognosis. >>>>>> (Of course, DCC will not do anything like ‘almost kill’ the planet, but >>>>>> that seems to be the mentality out there.) Sorry for repeating myself, >>>>>> but the circumstances call for hammering away at the prognosis until >>>>>> opposition to DCC softens, setting aside advocacy of DCC until then. >>>>>> This must be done by trusted messengers, who are few and far between >>>>>> these days. The needed steps go from scientific luminaries like James >>>>>> Hansen to trusted messengers to the general public and other >>>>>> stakeholders. >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, I agree about the need for the NGO that you suggest, but it >>>>>> needs to be cagey regarding its public pronouncements. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Alan >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 7:29 AM Michael MacCracken <[email protected] >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Herb--And yet Elon Musk et al. shoot big rockets through the >>>>>>> stratosphere with an increasing pace, not to mention the sort of >>>>>>> ballistic missiles that North Korea and Houtis are firing, etc. This >>>>>>> fear of the slippery slope hangs on and on while the lowering cost of >>>>>>> renewable energy continues to reverse the original argument. >>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>> On 3/18/24 9:56 AM, H simmens wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Harvard announced this morning the termination of the SCoPEx >>>>>>>> atmosphere geoengineering experiment that was first proposed a decade >>>>>>>> ago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It was originally planned for Arizona around 2018 and was then moved >>>>>>>> to Sweden in 2021 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As many of you know due to local opposition in Sweden by the Sami >>>>>>>> people that experiment was canceled several years ago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The project itself has now been officially canceled. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The explanation given was quite generic as the article details. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There a link to a lengthy final report by the Harvard SCoPEx advisory >>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Whether this decade long utter fiasco is a clear signal that even >>>>>>>> micro-scale DCC direct climate cooling atmospheric research remains a >>>>>>>> non-starter or whether future endeavors - if there are any - will be >>>>>>>> more successful remains to be seen. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The cancellation of SCoPEx along with the announcement of the release >>>>>>>> of reflective particles into the atmosphere by Make Sunsets leading >>>>>>>> immediately to the prohibition of such releases in Mexico and Mexican >>>>>>>> advocacy against such experimentation at the UNEA in Nairobi earlier >>>>>>>> this month demonstrates the risk of attracting immense backlash even >>>>>>>> to the most microscopic of baby steps. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Which leads me to once again share my perspective that unless and >>>>>>>> until an extremely well funded international NGO with a clear mission >>>>>>>> and a superb staff focused on the deployment of DCC in the context of >>>>>>>> climate restoration is established the prospects for effective cooling >>>>>>>> in time to make a difference will remain negligible. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That’s what the advocacy efforts of any group supportive of the >>>>>>>> essential need for DCC must focus on IMHO. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Herb >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/03/18/1089879/harvard-halts-its-long-planned-atmospheric-geoengineering-experiment/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Herb Simmens >>>>>>>> Author of A Climate Vocabulary of the Future >>>>>>>> “A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson >>>>>>>> @herbsimmens >>>>>>>> HerbSimmens.com <http://herbsimmens.com/> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> 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:[email protected]>. >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/8FDD77AD-3CC3-4350-83B4-5DB7261FEC67%40gmail.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/8FDD77AD-3CC3-4350-83B4-5DB7261FEC67%40gmail.com?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] >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/382552ea-1bf4-4d54-a13a-be657abd1436%40comcast.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/382552ea-1bf4-4d54-a13a-be657abd1436%40comcast.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] >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAH-gPYHrJJCfX49VWMuyhD3Zg4QWfkfC-9U5JZ-F%2B30aS-0FOg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAH-gPYHrJJCfX49VWMuyhD3Zg4QWfkfC-9U5JZ-F%2B30aS-0FOg%40mail.gmail.com?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] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnGTddjAtiH-Cm3VZ13kqo1RH92YpPgsFVBZp_xm3%2Bi6Lg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnGTddjAtiH-Cm3VZ13kqo1RH92YpPgsFVBZp_xm3%2Bi6Lg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "Planetary Restoration" 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/planetary-restoration/98BA1786-5ED0-4170-82F2-267B150DE85C%40gmail.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/planetary-restoration/98BA1786-5ED0-4170-82F2-267B150DE85C%40gmail.com?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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnEr%3D8Yi7qO8fhq0V5n22vg%3DMvLFKkqZBn%2B_orjxvMkLwA%40mail.gmail.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnEr%3D8Yi7qO8fhq0V5n22vg%3DMvLFKkqZBn%2B_orjxvMkLwA%40mail.gmail.com?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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/000601da7b99%247c86e940%247594bbc0%24%40hispeed.ch >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/000601da7b99%247c86e940%247594bbc0%24%40hispeed.ch?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] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/05cf01da7ba7%247a24fc10%246e6ef430%24%40btinternet.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/05cf01da7ba7%247a24fc10%246e6ef430%24%40btinternet.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/069E77B7-D931-4722-8FB6-4856EA338483%40gmail.com.
