Dear Eugene--In that the climate was cooling over the last 5-6000 years or
so until the warming during the late 19th and through the 20th century, what
is it that underpins your belief that the climate would be warming now in
the absence of human activities? And, to convince anyone, you had better
I keep saying it but you all seem to either disagree, but say nothing, or do
not understand. While a higher concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere should
increase average surface temperature through what is improperly called the
greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature would be increasin
Are you crazy? This is not the question. No-one on the geoeng "side"
is suggesting we give up on mitigation. We MUST MUST MUST do this.
Geoeng will (in my view) probably needed as well.
Please see my paper on Combined Mitigation and Geoeng in Science
a couple of years ago.
Tom.
I think you all miss a point. Warming is ongoing on average with or without
AGG. It has been warming for tens of thousands of years; slowly and not
montonically but warming from a global average base of 10 to 12 C. AGG has
hastened the pace. On that basis geoengineering ultimately becomes
essentia
Hi Dan,
This is entirely ON TOPIC, as regards what are the interests AGAINST
geoengineering to cool the Arctic and save the Arctic sea ice, etc. As I
wrote:
>>> Against this we have the concerns of those who currently benefit
>>> from a warmer Arctic:
>>>
>>> C1. Oil and mining industries,
Hi,
I would like to emphasise the term "Realpolitik" in political sciences. There
are political idealogues but like a businessman, one has to develop a good
alliances and sales strategy. The best strategy is close liaison with the
people who are trying to address same problem but face same
Dear Professor Hansen,
Congratulations on your noble efforts to persuade our UK government to adopt
CCS, which have now borne fruit [1]. However, if it becomes generally
recognised that drastic global emissions reduction, even with CCS, would be
insufficient to halt Arctic warming and sea ic
We had a discussion of Alex's post
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering/browse_thread/thread/dc2f49dc86f484b6?hl=en
On Apr 30, 8:16 am, Greg Rau wrote:
> http://www.worldchanging.com/archives//009784.html
>
> GEOENGINEERING AND THE NEW CLIMATE DENIALISM
> by Alex Steffen
> The Id
While there may be tactical reasons to support emissions reduction,
the main reason is that it is the right thing to do.
Sent from a limited typing keyboard
On Apr 30, 2009, at 10:25, Albert Kallio
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think geoeng sells itself much better when we talk supportively to
> pro
Hi,
I think geoeng sells itself much better when we talk supportively to projects
like Nobel Prize winner Wangari Maatshai's efforts to re-green Africa, this
removes loads of CO2, increases biodiversity etc. Albedo change can be
addressed by planting lighter crops and plant variants if ther
Dear Alvia and Samuel,
You're right, that was bad phrasing on my part.
In any case we would not take that university debating club approach of
debating a 'statement' - I was just trying to get the idea across...
Best,
Gus
On 30/04/2009 15:26, "Alvia Gaskill" wrote:
> Why the hell would any
http://www.worldchanging.com/archives//009784.html
GEOENGINEERING AND THE NEW CLIMATE DENIALISM
by Alex Steffen
The Idea of Geoengineering is Being Used Dishonestly
Though we spend our time here at Worldchanging focused on solutions
to the planet's most pressing problems, sometimes the politics
I got an inquiry from the Wall Street Journal asking me if I would be
willing to argue a similar position in their pages. (The answer was 'no'.)
It is odd that journalists want to see proponents of developing climate
intervention options arguing untenable positions.
Journalists seem to be the pri
Why the hell would anyone agree to a debate based on such a strawman
argument? Almost no one involved in geoengineering research or discussion
would agree with your premise. We all agree that reducing emissions must
proceeed at an expedited, but realistic pace. Geoengineering is simply to
Dear all,
We at One Planet Pictures are interested in setting up a televised debate on
geoengineering. Something on the lines of: "This house believes we should
give up trying to reduce emissions and concentrate instead on finding a
technofix".
Can anyone suggest any companies or institutions th
This scare ,that stratospheric areosols would result in an even more global
warming if stopped, has appeared in many articles. I therefore read the
relevent papers fairly carefully and my reading is that temeratures would
simply rise quickly to where they would have been without geoengineering.
16 matches
Mail list logo
