Saturday, August 23, 2014 5:10 AM
Subject:
Re: [geo] Reassessment of satellite-based estimate of
aerosol climate forcing - Ma - JGR Atmospheres - Wiley
To Greg,
This is somewhat off the topic of categorizing geoengineering approaches, but I
need to respond to your warnings about considering biological remedies for
climate. The remedies being considered in this category are almost without
exception simply reversals of damage done by humans, so
estimate of aerosol climate
forcing - Ma - JGR Atmospheres - Wiley
To Greg,
This is somewhat off the topic of categorizing geoengineering approaches, but
I need to respond to your warnings about considering biological remedies for
climate. The remedies being considered in this category
6:59
AM
Subject:
Re: [geo] Reassessment of
satellite-based estimate of
Hi Ken -
Clearly you're raising important points. As one who likely falls into your
category of somebody who believes that a certain class of experiments
requires exceptional treatment by virtue of being a 'climate engineering
experiment' or 'geoengineering experiment,' I'll try to respond.
, August 23, 2014 5:10 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] Reassessment of satellite-based estimate of aerosol climate
forcing - Ma - JGR Atmospheres - Wiley
Hi Ken -
Clearly you're raising important points. As one who likely falls into your
category of somebody who believes that a certain class
Poster's note : those pesky clouds are still proving a source of much
debate. Dealing with changes in forcings as aerosols are cleaned out in
coming decades will be a major challenge. This could be the tipping point
for SRM adoption.
Isn't all of this excessive political correctness over potential
geoengineering experiments likely to make it more difficult to do
experiments aimed at better understand aerosol forcing?
Can somebody who believes that a certain class of experiments requires
exceptional treatment by virtue of
