Brian and others -
The recently-started UK Greenhouse Gas Removal research programme
(http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/funded/programmes/ggr/) is aiming to greatly
improve the assessment of feasibility and effectiveness of different CDR
techniques - to address the issues discussed in the
Is imposing a discipline on the CDR communiy within our reach? What about
approaching science funders asking for CDR comparison funding? Can we hope
to influence funders with arguments on need for estimation of CDR costs and
benefits?
Brian
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Peter Eisenberger <
Stephen,
Yes it is difficult to do an assessment of CDR approaches well and yes the
problem is critical. The problem as I see it in the the response that it so
critical and so diffcult that to make an assesment
that we effectively legitimize any attempt to address climate change. This
in turn
I wonder if in the development of models for
http://www.kiel-earth-institute.de/CDR_Model_Intercomparison_Project.html
if there are cost/likelihood comparisons of CDR proposals.
Brian
On Monday, August 21, 2017 at 3:48:59 AM UTC-4, Peter Eisenberger wrote:
>
> I think it would be useful to
I would like to see a chart of CDR proposals, with one axis being estimated
cost per ton, and the other being certainty/likelihood.
If anyone knows of such, please let me know.
Brian
On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 5:26:43 AM UTC-4, Schuiling, R.D. (Olaf)
wrote:
>
> Well, the message is clear,
Dear Stephen,
Many thanks for sharing this analysis: it is really interesting and full of
lessons and maybe a beginning of explanations on why the vast majority of
peer reviewed articles on SRM are on stratospheric sulphates.
Maybe somebody has a beginning of explanations on why the vast
Peter,
The idea of scoring CDR methods is, in my view, a good way forward. Your set
of criteria is a good start. I would suggest that the criteria be
qualitatively linked to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the
related targets. After all the world has agreed to pursue the SDGs
I think it would be useful to develop a scoring system for comparing CDR
approaches . One could develop a list of the desireable attributes and a
way to score each CDR approach .
The scoring approach might involve distinquished organizations like the
Royal Society or be incorporated into the IPCC
Apart from a small cohort of interested researchers, nobody has a vested
interest in questioning BECCS.
Conversely, a large number of people have accepted it as an intellectual
fig leaf to cover up the policy of continuing emissions. For many of these
people, jobs and wealth are at stake.
