Tom Goreau is certainly correct that the scale of any whole ocean mitigation
through this approach would require a huge effort -- an effort that is
similar in scale to that of the global energy system.
Nevertheless, it might make sense in a possibly futile attempt to protect
some isolated reefs
Hi Michael,
Several responses here:
1. A future generation might have no choice in terminating an SRM
approach should it technologically fail; this is certainly not beyond
the pale. For example, various climatic feedback processes might
ultimately denude the effectiveness of cloud brightening or
Hi Michael and Wil--It is, of course, not one or the other. If the Earth's
temperature is to be limited to less than some value (2 C per the Copenhagen
Accord, and given what is happening at 0.8 C there is good reason to think
the ceiling should be lower), no one strategy will do--we need all that
Unfortunately, I think accepting that emissions reductions won't
happen makes this a self-fulfilling prophecy. The agreements at
Copenhagen and Cancun, at least in the maximum implementation
scenarios, get us to about 70% of what we need to avoid the 2C
guardrail; that's dramatically better than
It is my understanding that Normative Jurisprudence Law, such as treaties
and conventions, is an exercise in political philosophy. As a layperson, I
am very concerned with any political philosophy which calls for a
non emergency response to an emergency situation.
1) The Esppo Convention model
