Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

I'm sympathetic to some of the criticisms of technofixes, but only when other plausible fixes are available. In the case of climate change, it seems that the notion of solving the problem with interventions like recycling, energy-efficient lightbulbs, organic food and the rest of the "locally

Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

Yes, this seems to stem from a fear of technology as summarized in their closing statement: "Because of the geopolitical high-stakes, risk of weaponization,and intergenerational implications of geoengineering, theglobal community should first and foremost debate theseaspects, before allowing

[geo] "Alaska's thawing soils are unleashing a crapload of CO2"

http://www.sciencealert.com/alaska-s-thawing-soils-are-now-pouring-carbon-dioxide-into-the-air? "The study, based on aircraft measurements of carbon dioxide and methane and tower measurements from Barrow, Alaska, found that from 2012 through 2014, the state emitted the equivalent of 220

Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

Unfortunately the only real solution is probably social, political and psychological change. If we keep the current social system then people will keep gaming any solutions put forward to keep that social system, and its power and wealth distribution, going - probably one reason why you can

Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

The fossil era is ending, regardless of what happens with geoengineering. The only question is whether we attempt to limit the damage and clean up the mess. A On 12 May 2017 00:52, "Jonathan Marshall" wrote: > > Unfortunately the only real solution is probably

Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

​I like to hope that the fossil fuel era is ending. One question is whether it is ending soon enough. There is also the question of whether political resistance will slow down the end, or attempt to continue the era. There is also the question as to whether the social-political-economic system

[geo] Molecular Diversity of Sea Spray Aerosol Particles: Impact of Ocean Biology on Particle Composition and Hygroscopicity — ScienceDirect

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451929417301201?via%3Dihub Chem 11 May 2017, Vol.2(5) :655–667, doi: 10.1016/j.chempr.2017.03.007

[geo] Re: etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

Jesse has a good twitter thread debunking etc's latest batch of alternative facts https://twitter.com/JesseLReynolds/status/862566843088859138 (sent in a personal capacity) On 10 May 2017 21:08, "Andrew Lockley" wrote: > Climate change, smoke and mirrors > > Latest

[geo] smoke and mirrors

I read and skimmed the publication. If these people had their way we would still be huddling in caves cold afraid to try that new invention called fire. Too many incorrect facts to count in this publication and marked raw stupidity. Deeply flawed thinking. Dave -- You received this

[geo] Stratospheric aerosol

This paper seems relevant: Radiative forcing from anthropogenic sulfur and organic emissions reaching the stratosphere By:Yu, PF (Yu, Pengfei)[ 1,2 ] ; Murphy, DM (Murphy, Daniel M.)[ 1 ] ; Portmann, RW (Portmann, Robert W.)[ 1 ] ; Toon, OB (Toon, Owen B.)[ 3,4 ] ; Froyd, KD (Froyd, Karl D.)[

[geo] Re: Stratospheric aerosol

It will be particularly interesting to see what effect no-till agriculture, etc. have on this aerosol loading. There may be a trade-off between carbon farming and incidental SRM. Furthermore, CCN effect also needs to be considered Andrew Lockley On 11 May 2017 19:28, "Adrian Tuck"

Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

While several of the concerns expressed in the document bear some consideration, I must say I'm discouraged by the overall thinking behind a priori opposition to climate engineering technology. By analogy, it would be like opposing the development of dentistry technologies because they might allow

[geo] Webinar, May 16 2017: Briefing and Discussion on Solar Geoengineering: Science, Ethics, and Governance

https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/news/announcements/2017-05-11-a-briefing-and-discussion-on-solar-geoengineering-science-ethics-and-governance Webinar, May 16 2017: Briefing and Discussion on Solar Geoengineering: Science, Ethics, and Governance May 11, 2017 [image: CCEIA] [image: FCEA logo]

[geo] Viable and convivial technologies: Considerations on Climate Engineering from a degrowth perspective

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652617308983 Journal of Cleaner Production Available online 2 May 2017 , doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.159

Re: [geo] etc_hbf_geobriefing_may2017.pdf

Hi all It would help if the ETC people could give more detail about why putting sea surface temperatures back to where we liked to have them in the good old days should be criminal. We may be able to do this by changing the size distribution of 0.5% of the mass of a natural material, shown to

Re: [geo] Viable and convivial technologies: Considerations on Climate Engineering from a degrowth perspective

Another interesting opposition article, thanks Andrew. Unfortunately, the foundational assumption of the degrowth discourse (i.e. that technological capacities and their impacts on the human condition may be held constant for the indefinite future) is fatally flawed. -- Adam Dorr PhD Candidate

[geo] Climate Engineering Governance Project

https://law.ucla.edu/centers/environmental-law/emmett-institute-on-climate-change-and-the-environment/projects/climate-engineering-governance-project/ Climate Engineering Governance Project The Emmett Institute announces a new project to study the governance of climate engineering (CE)