Hi Folks,
Here is a media report on study which may point to the importance of
educational outreach concerning GE.
Minority rules: Scientists discover tipping point for the spread of ideas
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-minority-scientists-ideas.html
Here is the opening paragraph:
When
Not considering everything under the sun is not a problem with our paper, it is
what makes a scientifically defensible quantification possible.
We note in the paper that in quantifying future co2 emissions from existing
co2-emitting devices, we are quantifying only a piece of infrastructural
Oliver Tickell wrote:
Another approach would be to enhance HO hydroxyl in the atmosphere - the
main destroyer of methane. I have no idea how to set about doing this. It
could be helpful to reduce emissions that utilise existing hydroxyl, such as
miscellaneous hydrocarbons. But the chemistry is
Creating OH radical is best done by leveraging existing processes.
The radical is too short-lived to be effectively distributed when
produced industrially, and energy costs are also too high.
The NOx recycling reaction series was chosen by L Zhou et al in their
recent paper, as (in dry air) NOx
Ken
I understand your position, and I wasn't attempting to suggest you and your
co-authors were guilty of 'bad science'. However, the problem with your
approach is that, in the absence of broader papers, it is not clear how
policy makers could react to the risks I've outlined. The risk is that
NY Times July 25, 2011
Blame for Extinction Spreads to Methane Gas
By SINDYA N. BHANOO
Two hundred million years ago, at the end of the Triassic period, a mass
extinction, often attributed to major volcanic activity, wiped out half of all
marine life on Earth. But new research published in the
SCIENCE: Climate change 'remobilizes' long-buried pollutants as Arctic ice
melts (07/25/2011)
Lauren Morello, EE reporter
Warming in the Arctic is causing the release of toxic chemicals long trapped in
the region's snow, ice, ocean and soil, according to a new study.
Researchers from Canada,
I totally agree with these timescales. Somewhere between 2060 and 2100 is the
timescale for very low carbon emissions worldwide. Anything earlier is simply
unrealistic.
This is the central argument for geoengineering- both SRM and carbon capture
from atmos.
john gorman
- Original
Steve (cc Geo List and more ccs - adding Dr. Wasdell)
1. Thanks for making your helpful Science paper available for all.
2. I started the latest part of this thread (because Ken kindly referenced your
joint paper a few days ago) - so hope you don't mind my carrying my interest a
bit further.
