As you say, there is uncertainty, and I would disagree with anyone who had
a preferred value rather than acknowledging uncertainty. It is possible
that Lindzen's lower value is correct, it is possible that Hansen's value is
correct (whatever those might be - though I do think the available data
we
test geoengineering? Energy and Environmental Science, DOI:
10.1039/c1ee01256h.
We also made a couple of YouTube videos about this paper:
Doug MacMynowski discussing Can We Test Geoengineering?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0spy0Yn_nko
Doug MacMynowski and Ken Caldeira in discussion: Can We
Jim - at the risk of continuing a thread that's perhaps already gone on too
long, there's two of your statements that I don't understand. (I respond
only because maybe there's potential to reach consensus.)
1) I use the word implementation or full-scale to mean offsetting some
useful fraction
Hi Stephen,
I think this is just a signal to noise question, looking at the part of the
response that is correlated with the input (which means its only noise on
the same time-scales that matters). There are some fancier things that can
be done in some limited cases where a lot is known about
