In the presentations at the Royal Society on Tuesday 1st September there were
several suggestions that geoenginering would reduce or stop the Indian monsoon.
This was also mentioned in some questions, answers or subsequent discussion
that I was involved in.
My suggestion that this would
But the fatalities in early aviation were limited to voluntary
aviators, no? I don't think 10% of teh people on the ground who just
happened to be passing by got hurt...
On Sep 6, 7:30 pm, xbenf...@aol.com wrote:
Throughout these studies, few realize that this is engineering.
Learning how the
The work I've tracked on monsoon remains equivocal on overall
rainfall. Interesting 2006 study showed no change in total precip
last 50 years, but more coming in heavy downpours (familiar refrain).
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/01/world/asia/01briefs-indiafloods.html
Dear Ken,
This scheme misses a basic fact. Power, not population, determines the course
of world politics. International laws cannot allow countries to do things
which they, in fact, cannot do. The system that you propose would, if I am
understanding it correctly, create and widely disperse a
- Original Message -
*From:* John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.com
My suggestion that this would be a result of global warming anyway was
dismissed by one climate scientist so it was interesting to find the
following in the Daily Telegraph last Saturday
Two recent studies state that
My two bits into this interesting debate:
On the temperature rebound. As Ken says, there is no question that the
temperature rebound is real. Simple physics tells you it should be
there, and this is confirmed by experiments with at least three
different GCMs.
The question is: is it a bug or a
Dear David and Greg,
I would like to push back even more. Show me how you can do incremental
experiments with SRM.
You can do small-scale experiments with airplanes and nozzles, but not
with creation of aerosols of the appropriate size without already having
an aerosol cloud up there. I
Greg,
Let me push back a bit. I absolutely agree that experiments are crucial and
that by working our way up in experimental scale we will learn more and
therefore reduce risk. While we did not say this as clearly in the RS report as
we might have, and not as clearly as in Novim, I don't
Alan, David, all:
I don't pretend it's easy to do incremental work. Still, you move from
micro effects in chambers to field experiments of small scale. Look at
the Wright brothers.
First, Lab development.
This answers (on lab scales of 10 meters or so) major issues:
How do aerosols deploy
Presumably you could do a small release over 100km^2 of Alaska and fly over
it to see if there were indeed any local whitening
Maybe use some 18O2 isotope to trace where it goes to?
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Alan Robock rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu
To:
Dear Andy,
However the effects of volcanic eruptions on the monsoon are not
equivocal, and they are the best natural analog we have for SRM:
Trenberth, K. E. Dai, A. 2007 Effects of Mount Pinatubo volcanic
eruption on the hydrological cycle as an analog of geoengineering.
Geophys. Res. Lett.
Haven't we got this the wrong way round? Shouldn't we be trying to
invent ways of applying SRM without problematic side effects? And
shouldn't the first application be to halt the retreat of Arctic sea
ice?
Necessity is the mother of invention.
John
Alan Robock wrote:
Dear Andy,
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Alan Robock rob...@envsci.rutgers.eduwrote:
However the effects of volcanic eruptions on the monsoon are not
equivocal, and they are the best natural analog we have for SRM
Perhaps the best analog to SRM is the phenomenon of global dimming and its
links [1]
13 matches
Mail list logo
