Andrew and List (adding Prof Martinez-Alier as cc)
Thanks for this new information below.. I have reviewed the EVOLT site and am a
bit confused. I can't find the word biochar even once. I don't want any
researcher looking at the EVOLT site to think biochar is being discussed by
EVOLT, if it
Greg and list (adding 4 ccs [authors])
1. Thanks for bringing this new wedge paper to our attention. A short informal
version - comments by the lead author (Davis) - are also at:
http://ess.uci.edu/news/news-11012
2. My man concern on the article is that the concept of wedges providing
Len and list:
Thanks for continuing the discussion on the Davis etal paper. It would appear
that we are in substantial agreement. One place I would disagree with your
draft article (cite given below, p4) is where you say: Anaerobic conversion of
'bio-waste' to 'bio-char', and burying it in
Professor Zeng:
Thanks you for both writing the cited article and attaching it for us all.
Makes reading it much easier and quicker, given usual paywalls..
I see merit in WHS, but (as someone concentrating on the biochar alternative)
want to ask a few questions especially on the total woody
Ms. Deschambault (cc geoengineering list) :
Your six page communique to this list cited below fails to take sufficiently
seriously the present climate situation - about which you make essentially no
mention. To equate all of geoengineering to artificial intelligence.and genome
mapping doesn't
Stephen and list
I have known one of the key authors of the recent black carbon (BC) report, U
Illinois Prof. Tami Bond for some years. A few weeks ago, I had a chance to
hear and talk with her more on the details of that study. You and other cloud
experts personally could help a lot in
Ken (cc List and Simon - with thanks to Simon for bringing this TR news item to
our attention)
1. I am a little disappointed that you say A nicely done article. You are
usually supportive of separating the term geoengineering into the separate
SRM and CDR components. This article never once
Greg (cc list and pboyd):
I like your paper. But I wonder if the concept of using ocean biomass for
harvest and eventual partial placement of half the carbon in soil (as
biochar) was inadvertently or intentionally omitted.
I see major advantages of using ocean biomass (macroalgae and
Chris and list:
1. Thanks for forwarding your interesting 4-pager on marine engineering. I
respond here only from the perspective of biochar.
2. On your p 2, the word biochar appears this way:
Depositing crop wastes on the deep seabed – Strand and Benford (2009) have
proposed depositing
List (cc Ken)
1. This note is to draw attention to a nice April 2011 comparison of different
CDR approaches that I had not seen before being sent to it by Chris Vivian.(see
below). For about 25 minutes of Ken Caldeira comparing most of the CDR
alternatives at an American Meteorological
Chris cc list
a. Thanks for the answers. Very helpful. Obviously, I didn't get far enough
into the citations and so your recommendation on the eight references in the
Sequestration section were very helpful.
b.. In order to save others time (especially for the biochar community to which
I
Andrew
see below
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com
To: rongretlar...@comcast.net
Cc: Chris Vivian chris.viv...@cefas.co.uk, geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:27:46 PM
Subject: Re: [geo] Brief Summary
Katherine:
Thanks for the very complete response. Almost nothing left to ask. I have
excised all below except for a few follow-ups.
- Original Message -
From: K.Ricke klei...@gmail.com
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Cc: klei...@gmail.com, Ken Caldeira kcalde...@gmail.com,
List, cc John, Ken, Josh:
1. Apologies in advance for a too-long note. I think that how best to
accelerate RD on CDR is a topic that needs to be continued on this list. It
needs to have an international side as well as a US (NASA, NOAA, etc) side. t
needs an SRM component as well. But below,
Henrik (cc list: )
Thanks for the alert:
A direct link to the 79 minute event is:
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/modevents/item/manipulating-the-planet-is-there-a-role-for-negative-emissions-technologies-in-tackling-climate-change
I found by far the most interesting (unfortunately the
Ken etal:
Below is a follow-up to your note of two days ago. . Most of my comments are in
reply to the 24 paragraphs of the following BFW screed (and thanks for that
accurate wording) in Andrew's posting
- Original Message -
From: Ken Caldeira kcalde...@carnegiescience.edu
To:
Andrew etal:
1. Again, th an ks for your key citation by Kriegler, etal, which (repeating)
is: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-012-0681-4 ; 'Is
atmospheric carbon dioxide removal a game changer for climate change
mitigation? Elmar Kriegler 1 , Ottmar Edenhofer 1 , Lena
Professor Socolow, List and several ccs
1. Thanks for the added follow-up to my note of yesterday (which [along with
Andrew's starting note] I have excised to save space - since yours is more
clear).
2. I googled for FEEM and eventually decided they were the host and not
particularly active
Greg and list:
I have tried to figure out whether this paper by Jaffe et al is apt to harm or
help the introduction of biochar. My perception is that Jaffe and co-authors
see a fairly strong connection to biochar, but I am not so sure. There is so
little biochar in place that what was being
List: cc Greg, Andr Fred
1. This topic is receiving viral attention in biochar circles. I understand
there will be a response soon at the site www.biochar-internatonal.org
I have been part of dialogs with several of the Science articles authors, and
do not perceive now that great concern
List:
1. I believe this article from last week's Science could be valuable to this
list, although there is (close to) zero mention of either side of
geoengineering:
Irreversible Does Not Mean Unavoidable ; H. Damon Matthews 1 and Susan Solomon
2
Science 26 April 2013 : Vol. 340 no. 6131
Greg and cc list
No, I don't recall this paper (by Professor Meadowcroft) being discussed - only
given in a list by Prof. Socolow several weeks ago.
I did get something out of this paper, but I still have to reread it. I got
stuck on one page - for his Table 1. The problem for me is
Stephen: cc list
There is at least one CDR approach taking some CDR action now in Africa:
Biochar.
I just found 262 Africa citations and more than 100 for Africa policy at
www,biochar-international .org
Unfortunately, I had great difficulty with the search engine until I logged in
as a
Andrew and list (adding Ken C)
Thanks for the alert on this new article by Jason Mark.
1. An important event tomorrow (Thursday) evening is hidden at the same Earth
Island site - a geoengineering debate between Dr. Ken Caldeira and Dr. Clive
Hamilton. There is a $10 charge to attend. It
Greg etal
Thanks for the report. Three areas of questions
1. The message below yours by Vivian Warkentin only uses the term
geoengineering - never SRM and CDR. How well did Hamilton and Caldeira
explain the differences and only use the more specific meanings of all three?
Same for audience
List and 3 ccs :
I just came across today this 2 minute video that addresses (demolishes?):the
constant recent temperature argument
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_0JZRIHFtk
I don't have the background to know if the modifications were done correctly,
but there must be many on this list
Alan cc list and Emily
Shucks. I agree with you about the SRM form of geo not being mitigation.
But I was hoping that this list might agree that the mitigation term reducing
could/should be interpreted broadly enough to include removing.
The reason to not do so is what?
Ron
-
Prof. Oschlies etal
I have visited your Geomar site and am impressed by that group's work, which
has done a lot with nitrogen, marine and biology topics. It is not clear from
what I could find there whether the CDR part of geoengineering (or climate
engineering) will also be part of this new
Andreas: cc list
Thanks for the added information.
I can support your 3 choices as being logical. Mostly you will be disappointing
the cloud whitening and biochar proponents (basing this on my perception of the
numbers of active proponents or opponents of the various geoengineering
Andrew: Thanks for spotting this message about ETC and HOME. From my readings,
they are as big a problem for biochar (and presumably all geo technologies) as
exist.
Decision X/33, para 8 (w): “Ensure, in line and consistent with decision IX/16
C, on ocean fertilization and
Andrew etal:
1. Apologies. Not sure how the last message got out prematurely. Scratch that
in favor of this one. Apologies also for this message length, but it is mostly
about at least 4 new CBD documents and the important damper that the CBD has
placed on geoengineering RD not about ETC and
Fred, list and ccs
1. I support your efforts to put more list emphasis on HANPP. How about
HANPPropriation? (Getting at the A twice for emphasis)
But I am hoping to hear more about increasing GPP and NPP, so how about HAANPP,
with the new added A meaning Augmentation, so we can also have
List
1. The subject of ethics and morality have been key to this list discussions,
especially over the last week. .As I was further researching this list's
discussion on this topic, I came on a short message string introduced by Andrew
Lockley on April 11. Andrew, as is his welcome style,
Ken cc List:
1. Thanks for the leads - mostly related to ocean acidification - a prime
ethics subject for those on this list mostly interested in CDR .
2. The information you supplied leads one to two short videos from two months
ago,at:
Greg, list and ccs
1. I am not the best person to respond on this challenge discussion, but I
recommend going to this site for latest update:
http://www.virginearth.com/
There were 11 finalists for the $25 million prize; three were biochar
companies. I believe we are still within the 5 year
Charles and list:
1. I don't think I misinterpreted the quote. I said below
I believe one can't possibly get the ethics of either geoengineering or SRM
correct if you believe CDR has this presumed dismal future .
I am in perfect agreement with your sentence below:
This is what led my
Dr. D. and list
I am not an expert in this area, but try to follow the subject closely -
because it is a hugely important topic for biochar and you should get an
answer. You asked below My guess is that many group members here might [think]
this is among the least effective geo-engineering
Andrew:
Agreed on Net^2. It'll be quite a few years before we run out of good
locations.
I meant to get into the last message that we need to be thinking in billions,
not millions, of new trees per year. One per capita would help a lot. Chinese
schoolkids are planting I think 5 per year.
Andrew, Stephen cc list
1. Thanks to Andrew for alerting us to this paper. I think the best I have seen
combining Policy, Geoengineering and Economics. At first, it looks exceedingly
complex, but after decoding the (new-to-me) nomenclature, not bad. A well
written paper.
2. Stephen - I
Ken, cc list
I thought your annual review piece was generally good and for most
technologies, probably helpful. But I fail to understand your non-treatment of
biochar. You only used the word once - in a Table. I think Annual Reviews
lost a good many potential purchasers.
There are many
Peter etal
Thanks for the interjection - at least partially responding to me. To the best
of my knowledge, your proposed method of albedo enhancement (url given below)
has not been advanced on this list. I can't find it at AMEG. I called a
wind-friend at NREL (where I once worked), who also
List:
I recently listened to an informative series of short videos from a UK
University center on geoengineering (maybe add the word governance?). Perhaps
the first presenter showed a graph saying he (his center?) felt that the world
of geoengineering between mitigation and adaptation should
Peter, cc List Greg Rau
1. I wonder if you or anyone on the list could comment on an idea that popped
in my head today re your interesting salt water Arctic ice thickening SRM
approach. The idea following mainly changes the wind energy source over to a
biomass-biochar approach. Other
Damon cc Greg etal
My concern is not with the text of your several Science pieces, but rather with
the term irreversible It seems (below and your earlier papers) you really do
believe that human efforts (say starting with 100 Gt C afforestation ala Dr.
Hansen) can have a measurable
William :
Can you give a URL for the judges report?
Ron
- Original Message -
From: William H. Calvin william.cal...@gmail.com
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 8:10:28 PM
Subject: [geo] My big-quick-secure CO2 cleanup proposal is still alive at the
Stephen:
Very sorry to hear of the serious flooding in Freetown. But this list is not
the correct one to look to for support. I would suggest that using electricity
to turn water to steam would be a good more expensive than a wood-fired system.
Some electricity would of course be needed for
Alan:
I agree that the report was balanced, if the criterion is knowledge in 2008 -
the earliest date on the LLNL figure. To give ocean fertilization as the only
example of CDR is not being very investigative or balanced.
I have the same complaint about the CIA study behind the NPR piece,
101 - 147 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
