gt; desire pre-industrial climates. That may not be the case.
>>>>
>>>> -Jesse
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Jesse L. Reynolds, PhD
>>>> Postdoctoral researcher
>>>> Research fu
tional Public Law
> Tilburg Sustainability Center
> Tilburg University, The Netherlands
> Book review editor,
> *Law, Innovation, and Technology *email: j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl <
> mailto:j@uvt.nl >
> http://works.bepress.com/jessreyn/ <http://works.bepress.com/jessreyn/&
w
>>
>> Tilburg Sustainability Center
>>
>> Tilburg University, The Netherlands
>>
>> Book review editor, *Law, Innovation, and Technology*
>>
>> email: j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl
>>
>> http://works.bepress.com/jessreyn/
>>
>>
>
* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> geoengineering@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Caldeira
> *Sent:* 31 January 2015 18:32
> *To:* cushngo...@gmail.com
> *Cc:* Motoko; geoengineering
> *Subject:* Re: [geo] Washington Post op ed
>
>
>
> Kate Ricke's model r
s.com/jessreyn/
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Ken Caldeira
Sent: 31 January 2015 18:32
To: cushngo...@gmail.com
Cc: Motoko; geoengineering
Subject: Re: [geo] Washington Post op ed
Kate Ricke's model results are often trotted out to suppor
You are completely right, Jim - there was no such declaration. Anyone
interested in revisiting the reasons for this absence can subject
themselves to some of the debate here http://www.ce-conference.org/media/214
On Saturday, 31 January 2015 19:33:28 UTC, James Fleming wrote:
>
> There was no ap
There was no approval for a "*Berlin Declaration 2014 on geoengineering." *
I was at the meeting and the session. Correct me if I am wrong.
James R. Fleming
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Cush Ngonzo Luwesi
wrote:
> I partly agree with Andy: Skepticism yes but realism is also needed.
> A
I partly agree with Andy: Skepticism yes but realism is also needed. Alvin
Toffler (1970) predicted the "future shock" that "change denial" will cause
in the anthropocene. He used an analogy from the transmission of sound
through electrical cables, which until 1875, was unconceivable by some
while
Hi, I also disagreed with the premise of this op ed, but for quite
different reasons: I have not been able to understand how someone like
David Keith has been able to
get fixated on such a notion as this bit about "Who will control the
thermostat?" of geoengineering, which he has discussed for
Great reference. I want to add the following sentence of von Neumann:
"All experience shows that even smaller technological changes than those
now in the cards profoundly transform political and social relationships."
Von Neumann could be right in assuming that climate control will change
a lo
Well, yes, but despite the Cold War era fears, nuclear war has not yet
happened in 70 years, not just because of Andrew's "common interest"
argument, but because politicians and military men apparently reached the
conclusion that nuclear bombs were an ineffective way of coercing other
nations to do
See my book Fixing the Sky (2010), chapter 7.
Jim
James R. Fleming
Professor of Science, Technology, and Society, Colby College
Research Associate, Columbia University
Series Editor, Palgrave Studies in the History of Science and Technology,
bit.ly/THQMcd
Profile: http://www.colby.edu/directory/p
As argued in 1955:
"Present awful possibilities of nuclear warfare may give way to others even
more
awful. After global climate control becomes possible, perhaps all our
present
involvements will seem simple. We should not deceive ourselves:
once such possibilities become actual, they will be e
I agree with the basic idea that the politics of this will be likely to be
very tricky (although - and partly for that reason - I remain unconvinced
by the other premise of the article that SPI has been overwhelmingly shown
to have net life-saving potential).
Andrew, why the incredulity at a
Hi All
Andy Parker's concerns about international disputes over geoengineering
might be reduced if only there was a technique which allowed a greater
degree of local control and the chance of tactical adjustments based on
day-to-day observations. It is the prospect of being stuck with an
unw
I disagree fundamentally with the premise of this article.
A decision on climate has to be made. Everyone knows it. Everyone has an
incentive to avoid chaos. Therefore, people have a very large incentive to
stick to a consensus process, because anyone who doesn't stick will
instantly break that co
Hey folks, the Washington Post just published an op ed on the messy
politics of solar geoengineering, written by David Keith and me:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-right-temperature-for-the-earth/2015/01/29/b2dda53a-7c05-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html
--
You received this m
17 matches
Mail list logo
