This seems pretty clear to me.
Why should dangerous geoengineering projects with almost certain large scale
unintended consequences be researched simply because they are possible in
fantasy?
In many cases, the logistics seem close to absurd, and simply deflect money
from more useful and
The point, obviously, was not to "equate" SRM or CDR with any of those
things, but to show by uncontroversial examples that your claim (i.e., that
we "must carefully evaluate all alternative options") couldn't be taken
literally. And if it can't be taken literally, then stipulating that any
It's just info@
On 2 Mar 2016 17:06, "Stephen Salter" wrote:
> Hi All
>
> The toi...@ceassessment.org gets bounced.
>
> Stephen
>
>
> Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering,
> University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland
>
Very sorry. I had no idea that geoengineering is now equated with "large-scale
nuclear war; turning off all fossil-fueled power plants, vehicles, factories,
etc., draining all the rice paddies, slaughtering all the cattle, etc.
tomorrow—literally tomorrow, with all the attendant catastrophic
This paper came about as a consequence of helping to write the recent NRC
report on Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool the Earth.
There was a question regarding whether Earth's climate would continue to
drift as ocean circulation responded to solar geoengineering.
We found that,
Hi All
The toi...@ceassessment.org gets bounced.
Stephen
Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering,
University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland
s.sal...@ed.ac.uk, Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704, Cell 07795 203 195,
WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs,
Completion of the argument from Oliver Tickell against oyster farming in
the ocean or shelf might induce the opposite result:
Oysters are filter feeders within the food chain. They remove all kind
of suspended matter from the water column inklusive phytoplankton,
phytoplankton detritus, clay
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL068079/abstract
Simulated long-term climate response to idealized solar geoengineering
Authors
Long Cao,
Lei Duan,
Govindasamy Bala,
Ken Caldeira
02 March 2016
doi: 10.1002/2016GL068079
Abstract
Solar geoengineering has been proposed as a
There seems to be a fundamental error in this analysis. Far from
sequestering CO2, this process emits CO2 to the atmosphere according to
the reaction:
Ca++ + 2HCO3- => CaCO3 + CO2
In the process depleting ocean alkalinity.
Oliver.
On 01/03/2016 22:27, Andrew Lockley wrote:
http://dcgeoconsortium.org/2016/03/01/announcing-a-new-academic-working-group-on-international-governance-of-solar-climate-engineering/
Announcing a new Academic Working Group on International Governance of
Solar Climate Engineering
The Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment (FCEA) at American
10 matches
Mail list logo