.
Just a thought‹I imagine that studies have looked at this, though I have
none to cite.
Mike MacCracken
On 9/23/15, 10:55 PM, "Paul E. Belanger" <pebelangerro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Although I'm been on the list a long time and mostly lurking and not even
> having the tim
model simulations.
Mike MacCracken
On 9/7/15, 8:05 AM, "Andrew Lockley" <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Poster's note : title piece is a box extract, immediately below. Main article
> posted beneath, which is well worth reading for those not up to speed with the
, there is movement on all of this, but ...
Mike MacCracken
On 8/21/15, 10:43 AM, Geoengineering Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
wrote:
I agree with David and Olivier. Let's also remember that black carbon etc are
not part of carbon credit schemes exactly because they're not GHGs, even
though they have
Hi Greg--I think you have to account for the airborne fraction--it is about
4 GtC emission (or about 15 GtCO2) per ppm (assuming airborne fraction is
roughly a half).
Mike
On 8/22/15, 3:19 PM, Greg Rau gh...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
It seems to me that the value of CO2 and SRM can be interrelated
If the idea is to launch from a higher altitude and use inflatables for a
building as part of the process, why not just build a blimp or dirigible
that would lift the vehicle to altitude and then let it fly from the
elevated position of the blimp? Why build a permanent structure for this?
With
On this issue of icing, while the situation would vary depending on what it
is constructed of, the structure will be able to radiate heat away far more
effectively than the air can radiate. Thus the building surface will cool
with respect to the air. The air temperature at upper troposphere/lower
Hi Greg--A bit of a delayed response due to my travel to IUGG in Prague.
Just a note that when I was scientific adviser (as a scientist, not a
Catholic) to the panel of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops for their
climate change statement back 15 years that question came up as they
wondered if
, at 1:33 PM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Re: [geo] World Bank report highlights necessity of (BE)CCS
John H and Greg‹Sorry, I¹m running a bit behind. I want to go back to this
issue of how long the carbon sink in the ocean will continue at the magnitude
it is. Someone will have
John H and Greg‹Sorry, I¹m running a bit behind. I want to go back to this
issue of how long the carbon sink in the ocean will continue at the
magnitude it is. Someone will have a good model to actually run and see, but
I¹m concerned that the rate will not continue so large for so long.
So, the
/2015 8:29 PM, Mike MacCracken wrote:
Dear Jon‹While I think you overstate the situation with climate
engineering in terms of both uncertainties and costs (i.e., keeping the
climate roughly as it is likely has fewer uncertainties that heading to a 2
to 4 C climate with its uncertainties
and the Arctic seabed for drilling), it becomes hard
to see how at least some climate engineering is not inevitable as a means to
reduce overall suffering and loss.
Mike MacCracken
On 6/2/15, 7:46 PM, Jon Lawhead lawh...@usc.edu wrote:
As a philosopher working on this issue, it seems to me
in the six years since then.
Sent from my iPad
On May 31, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Mike MacCracken
mmacc...@comcast.netmailto:mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
See attachment
On 5/31/15, 6:05 PM, Ronal W. Larson rongretlar...@comcast.net wrote:
Mike cc List
I have a few friends deeply
, Mike MacCracken wrote:
Dear Jon‹While I think you overstate the situation with climate engineering
in terms of both uncertainties and costs (i.e., keeping the climate roughly
as it is likely has fewer uncertainties that heading to a 2 to 4 C climate
with its uncertainties; and the costs
this Russian group - that almost certainly
have relevance also on the SRM side of ³Geo².
Ron
On May 31, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Re: [geo] Re: Smart reforestation must go beyond carbon: expert | CIFOR
Forests News Blog
How are they not both important
Sciences
ERG/ESPM
310 Barrows Hall
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
jha...@berkeley.edu
On Jun 1, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Re: [geo] Smart reforestation must go beyond carbon: expert | CIFOR Forests
News Blog
Hi Ronal, Brian, John
How are they not both important‹the condensation releases the heat that
carries the air upward, creating a pressure gradient that pulls the air
ashore?
Mike
On 5/31/15, 10:09 AM, John Harte jha...@berkeley.edu wrote:
The work of Makarieva and Gorshkov (note: not Gorshkov and Makarieva; she is
and to be
rewarded for it--and I just do not think that is a wise approach (even if
that ends up to be reality over what I think should be very noisy
objections).
Mike MacCracken
On 5/20/15, 4:08 PM, David Hawkins dhawk...@nrdc.org wrote:
Greg,
Certainly CCS should not be the only or even primary
, it is important to compare the costs of
other ways of reducing emissions by the same amount.
-Original Message-
From: Mike MacCracken [mailto:mmacc...@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 4:21 PM
To: Hawkins, Dave; gh...@sbcglobal.net; Geoengineering; Andrew Lockley
Subject: Re: [geo
they are doing this
during the fall and winter when the Sun is not up) would be to increase the
formation of sea ice.
Mike MacCracken
On 5/4/15, 11:32 AM, Alan Gadian a...@env.leeds.ac.uk wrote:
Ken,
Can I comment here please. Without negating any of your comments, I would
like to add
sunlight to reach the springtime sea ice,
and so contributing to the more rapid melt back of sea ice than many of the
models are simulating). Now all of this issue has moved to eastern and
southern Asia.
Overall, however, a wonderful example of learning from the time history of the
record.
Mike
SRM mainly in polar regions (or
over the ocean in the case of cloud brightening) is that the change in sky
conditions would be mainly over non-populated areas. So, nice to have an
article about the issue, but it would sure be nice to have more context.
Mike MacCracken
On 2/20/15, 3:52 PM, David
sunrises and sunsets seem to me far from losing the sky--a
phrase that seemed to bring on much of the discussion.
Mike MacCracken
On 2/20/15, 1:32 PM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com wrote:
Poster's note - a good, in-depth discussion about a little-discussed
element of SRM impacts
Dear Oliver‹With respect to the zero option when there is knowledge out
there of how to build a nuclear bomb and there are facilities around that
could be readily diverted to such efforts, the key question is what happens
when some party then starts to build them. The zero option argument is that
, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
wrote:
Hi Fred--I’d just suggest that it is all relative. Given that no society has
been able to vanquish human short-comings, perfection does not seem to be a
realistic possibility, so then the question is what is least bad
, the models could be useful in determining how best
to implement some set of the various approaches in ways that would hopefully
keep what happens in various regions within or near the bounds of
variability that are currently being experienced.
Mike MacCracken
On 2/14/15, 12:25 PM, Fred Zimmerman
are so far along past addressing the
issue responsibly that we need all the approaches that we have available if
we want to increase likelihood of a soft landing.
Mike MacCracken
On 2/12/15, 12:21 AM, Geoengineering Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
wrote:
Noah Deich provides a good summary
that there are social, equity, political, and governance issues,
but on the issue of uncertainties in the physical science calculations, not
readily understandable.
Mike MacCracken
On 2/11/15, 6:05 PM, Doug MacMartin macma...@cds.caltech.edu wrote:
On reflection, I think my most basic problem with his
in this manner?
Cheers,
Nathan
On Tuesday, February 3, 2015 at 7:34:01 PM UTC-5, Mike MacCracken wrote:
A bit delayed in responding to this email, but Tom Wigley had a paper in
Science (copy attached) basically indicating that one would have to go back
to preindustrial CO2 to stop sea
far, I'm not holding my breath. Hence, looking forward to that private
resilience session in Paris.
Greg
From: Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
To: Geoengineering Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Cc: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com; Bill Stahl
bstah
selecting new mine sites will help to reduce costs of transport.
So when you do some economic calculations, use realistic figures, Olaf
Schuiling, R.D. (Olaf)
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Mike MacCracken
Sent: zondag 25 januari
understand what was in the literature so I just worked it all out for
myself. Its described on pages 128 to 149 in my book: consider a spherical
cow. Maybe you will find that useful.
Sent from my iPhone
John Harte
On Jan 25, 2015, at 7:11 PM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Re
Here is another way to think of the amount of mass being talked about. The
global average per capita use of carbon today is of order 9. GtC/yr/7B
people, so about 1.3 ton per person of carbon. Multiply by 3.67 to get to
CO2, and it is about 5 t CO2 per person. Would olivine be an equal mass (or
a
hands and ideas on deck in order to
stabilize air CO2. But for reasons that continue to baffle me, that is not
happening at the policy, decision making, and RD levels it needs to.
Greg
From: Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
To: Geoengineering Geoengineering
: Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
To: Greg Rau gh...@sbcglobal.net; Geoengineering
Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: [geo] Energy Planning and Decarbonization Technology | The
Energy Collective
Re: [geo] Energy Planning
PM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Re: [geo] Energy Planning and Decarbonization Technology | The Energy
Collective
Hi John‹So I have attached a diagram of the carbon cycle from IPCC AR4WG1
Figure 7.3 that shows natural flows (in black) and then the augmentations as
a result
policies and actions have us blowing by the pCO2 safety threshold for
decades if not centuries, or beyond if permafrost/clathrate degassing ensues?
Greg
From: Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
To: Greg Rau gh...@sbcglobal.net; Geoengineering
Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
In terms of an overall strategy, it takes of order a 90% cut in CO2
emissions to stop the rise in the atmospheric concentration, and that has to
happen to ultimately stabilize the climate (and it would be better to have
the CO2 concentration headed down so we don¹t get to the equilibrium warming
And for the record, ours was (I think we used the full word limit that was
allowable):
Session Description: Sharp reductions in short- and long-lived greenhouse
gas emissions must be the primary objective for limiting global warming.
Accomplishing this will take decades, however. Despite efforts
/removal as well. It is not yet clear if these will be treated
independently or combined. But, yes, do keep this meeting in mind and we
expect to hear more in the near future.
Mike MacCracken
On 1/21/15, 10:28 AM, Alan Robock rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu wrote:
Dear All,
Along with Ben Kravitz
before COP15, and this conference seems to be about
setting an agenda for COP21 in a similar way.
I don't suppose there is any way at this stage to move the Berlin meeting?
On Thursday, 18 December 2014 03:22:13 UTC, Mike MacCracken wrote:
This conference unfortunately directly
a
couple of geoengineering sessions. It would sure be nice if there were a bit
better checking for conflicts, etc.
Best, Mike MacCracken
On 12/17/14 9:28 AM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.spp-climate-engineering.de/the-symposium.html
Current State and Future
. is not needed‹only
that it does not seem to me appropriate to be using framings that seem to me
pejorative.
Mike MacCracken
On 12/11/14 6:33 PM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com wrote:
Poster's note : good shot from HuffPo. A recent scientific paper made similar
points, namely
Regarding the phrase:
³2) Implementing highly untested and risky solar radiation management
geoengineering techniques (such as injecting sulfates into the atmosphere)²
it would sure be nice to have authors saying ³risky² (or is it ³highly
risk²) versus what‹proceeding with climate change without
And yet another reasonable statement that in the end seems to me to
overstate (unless one thinks he intentionally used ³predicted² to mean
something different than ³projected²):
³And even at a miniscule scale engineering the climate remains a radical
step with consequences for both the climate
Hi Oliver--Yes, but quite possibly the cloud brightening effect would be far
less than the rising concentrations of GHGs over time‹you really need to be
doing a comparative analysis.
And then also there is the question of statistical significance. Just
sending this message also created a
carbon buildup.
So, once more, let¹s not circle the wagons and shoot in‹we need to be doing
everything and not letting anyone off the hook on this.
Best, Mike MacCracken
On 11/2/14 9:42 AM, Geoengineering Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
wrote:
Hi All -
I agree with Greg here, and I would
On the proposals:
1. World Environment Organization: How would this be different than UNEP
(and a few parts of UNESCO, like the IOC)?
2. UN Sustainable Development Council: How would this be different than the
UN Commission on Sustainable Development?
3. Etc.--sound nice but how would one really
University of Alberta
peter.fl...@ualberta.ca mailto:peter.fl...@ualberta.ca
cell: 928 451 4455
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Mike MacCracken
Sent: September-23-14 6:32 PM
To: Ken Caldeira; Greg Rau
Cc: Andrew Lockley
In my reading, the wording was very confusing. Reading more carefully, it
seemed to me that they were saying that there will be less CO2 in the ocean
as a result of melting back of the sea ice. An open Arctic with no sea ice
formation would imply less down-welling due to not forming dense brine
done a really careful analysis of this? Do we really
have good quantitative estimates of what might happen? And how might all of
this play out as the other sources of SO2 are changing?
Perhaps Stephen Salter, John Latham, Alan Gadian, et al. have a paper(s) on
this that I have missed.
Mike
:43, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
I was asked by a colleague about what is expected to happen as marine bunker
fuels are desulfurized over the coming several years. My first response was
that it would reduce the SO2 emissions and so the sulfate, and since sulfate
adds to cooling
.
This site has some interesting data visualization for shipping patterns.
http://sappingattention.blogspot.com/2014/03/shipping-maps-and-how-states-see.
html
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Mike MacCracken
Sent: Thursday
focused
interventions than to taking full global control.
Mike MacCracken
On 8/8/14 12:33 PM, Cush Ngonzo Luwesi cushngo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello guys, cool down. Governance is for your own good. The latin people say
Science without conscience is lethal for the soul. This is all about
governance
http://twitter.com/AlanRobock
Watch my 18 min TEDx talk at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsrEk1oZ-54
On 8/5/2014 2:39 PM, Mike MacCracken wrote:
Re: [geo] A Win-Win research program proposal on SRM (sunlight reflection
methods) Regarding
http://twitter.com/AlanRobock
Watch my 18 min TEDx talk at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsrEk1oZ-54
On 8/5/2014 2:39 PM, Mike MacCracken wrote:
Regarding this proposal for sustaining the sulfate cooling influence, the
suggestion on this that I
with it‹or
vice-versa?
Mike MacCracken
On 7/20/14 9:53 AM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130612144833.htm
A new study on the feeding habits of ocean microbes calls into question the
potential use of algal blooms to trap carbon dioxide
result from increased tanker traffic. Globe and Mail,
Ontario
Just a thought.
Mike MacCracken
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
geoengineering group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to geoengineering
I¹m a bit baffled (and late in responding. The sea water temperatures are
typically very near freezing. The idea might work in the fall but I don¹t
see how it works the rest of the year (ocean temperatures too near freezing
in the winter; air temperatures too high in spring and summer).
Mike
On
Deriving energy from the very large wintertime temperature gradient is
actually an idea I explored way back in the 1980s. I was going to use the
gradient to make a fuel (hydrogen or something similar) that could be
carried via a large submarine to lower latitudes. The problem, however, that
I
How is it that AEI, US, GE, Dutch, England, Australian, Aboriginal and
Neanderthals (and even Arctic) merit an initial capital letter, but the
planet ³earth,² among all the planets, does not get similar respect. Sorry,
it is a burr under my saddle, for I don¹t think that the convention of not
-sc
ientists.html
Mike MacCracken
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
geoengineering group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email
And then there is Holdren¹s rebuttal of Christy. See
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/03/3349411/john-holdren-roger-pielk
e-climate-drought/
Mike
On 3/4/14 4:15 PM, David Appell david.app...@gmail.com wrote:
Bart Verheggen makes a pretty good case that the Christy Spencer graph
OOPS‹wrong skeptic. But article is god in any case.
Mike
And then there is Holdren¹s rebuttal of Christy. See
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/03/3349411/john-holdren-roger-pielk
e-climate-drought/
Mike
On 3/4/14 4:15 PM, David Appell david.app...@gmail.com wrote:
Bart
, but an energy rich future is
much more attractive than the opposite.
Keith
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Agreed--it would have helped (at least conceptually) if I had said
essentially phase down and out over several decades, which I would suggest
:
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
world must totally give up fossil fuels
There is a little bit of a political problem there, which is why you
don't see sufficient action.
For the foreseeable future, giving up fossil fuel energy would result
such as loss of tens of percent of global biodiversity,
sea level rise of many meters, and more. Much less any discussion of the
various potential forms of geoengineering and adaptive application of it,
perhaps using SRM to slow in near-term and CDR drawdown of CO2 as an exit
strategy, etc.
Mike
of such a course (and the most complex of the governance issues
may well be how to maintain the SRM effort when the public has not had to
actually experience the adverse impacts that are being offset). I just think
the framing to date is well off the mark.
Best, Mike MacCracken
On 1/26/14 12:47 AM
out
in the fall and starting snow-blowing without a real strategy would seem to
me to be unlikely to be optimal.
Mike MacCracken
On 12/27/13 12:13 AM, Ronal W. Larson rongretlar...@comcast.net wrote:
Greg and list (adding Peter Flynn)
1. Thanks for bringing this NOAA report to our
that
material is on the Web, though some of us have some of it (I am not at home
at moment to go check out the potentially relevant chapters, etc.).
A good person to ask might be Joel Levy of NOAA.
Mike MacCracken
On 11/14/13 4:17 PM, Keith Henson hkeithhen...@gmail.com wrote:
I have
and Mike MacCracken, a candidate definition
now reads:
Geoengineering refers to activities
(1) intended to modify climate
(2) and that has a material effect on an international commons or across
international borders
(3) and where that material effect occurs through environmental
Belatedly, just to note I agree with Ken that what we need is action or real
commitment to strong mitigation before consider global engineering, at
least, or it will be excuse to delay or do less. This way climate
engineering is used to shave the peak warming after mitigation (of both
short and
of fighting the politicians and energy
companies.
-gene
From: Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
To: Ken Caldeira kcalde...@gmail.com, Geoengineering
Geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 4:14:43 PM
Subject: Re: [geo] Linking solar geoengineering and emissions
and acidification.
Cheers,
-Bill
On Monday, September 2, 2013 7:49:54 AM UTC-7, Mike MacCracken wrote:
A new paper by myself, Ho-Jeong Shin, Ken Caldeira, and George Ban-Weiss
that provides a conceptual look at the notion of polar SRM is available for
free download at http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net
only SRM on the jet stream would need to be
thoroughly investigated before anyone seriously proposed it.
A
On Sep 3, 2013 9:17 PM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi Bill‹That is a good question to look closely at. I would suggest, without
having done the studies, so doing so
for reducing
ocean acidification since dimming will not get rid of the growing excess of
CO2. Air capture of CO2 is the only thing I know that could back us out of
the danger zone for extreme weather and acidification.
Cheers,
-Bill
On Monday, September 2, 2013 7:49:54 AM UTC-7, Mike MacCracken
approach to limiting the amplified climate change in high latitudes
is merited.
Mike MacCracken
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
geoengineering group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to geoengineering+unsubscr
Saying it slightly differently than Greg, I was astonished that the first
call was not to limit emissions as a way to make the alternative
unnecessary. Calling for governance mechanisms for geoengineering seems to
me to make it more likely, as if it is something we will all need to do
together
Much better stated, but I would also add that there are a wider range of
possible interventions than are usually discussed, and drawing major
conclusions from looking at too small a set of possibilities seems to me
like choosing a path to take without considering all the possible routes.
Mike
of your position.
Regards, Mike MacCracken
On 8/6/13 3:31 PM, Simon Driscoll drisc...@atm.ox.ac.uk wrote:
Hi Russell,
I feel like I've been asked a couple questions on behalf of someone else's
article that I simply *posted* - the article gives his email address should
you wish to contact him
The information appears to indicate that the study is being undertaken by
the Board of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate of the National Research
Council/National Academy of Sciences. So, this is a public study and members
of panel have been announced, etc. and will all be as transparent as Academy
a continuing
stream in many directions, etc.
I'd be interested in hearing about any ideas in this regard.
Regards, Mike MacCracken
On 6/17/13 4:56 PM, Peter Flynn peter.fl...@ualberta.ca wrote:
I remain of the belief that simply creating thicker and more extensive ice
by the known and proven
Hi Greg‹Back some years ago, F Scott Fitzgerald wrote in The Crack-Up (
1936), The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two
opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to
function. One might think that we could be considering both mitigation and
Much less about misunderstanding at all about the issue of saturation, a
criticism of Arrhenius that has been addressed many, many times and kicked
out of science as an issue by Manabe and others in the 1960s.
Mike
On 5/31/13 1:33 PM, David Lewis jrandomwin...@gmail.com wrote:
According to
Some of you may be interested in this contest.
Mike
-- Forwarded Message
From: The Oceanography Society the_oceanography_soci...@mail.vresp.com
Reply-To: The Oceanography Society
reply-bb0395dbd9-5114496098-7...@u.cts.vresp.com
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:21:29 +
To: Mike MacCracken mmacc
.
From the titles of the projects, it sounds as if the analysis will be done
absent the context, which would make very little sense and be of quite
limited use. What is needed is a comparative risk analysis: global warming
with and without climate engineering.
Mike MacCracken
On 5/23/13 5:28 PM
is sort of getting on the total list, but this is because of the
problems of doing everything else higher on the list, and I hope that would
be part of the discussion‹why is it that SRM is having to be considered? How
did we really get in this predicament, and what are the other ways out of
it?
Mike
and the limits and challenges of adaptation.
Mike MacCracken
On 5/11/13 2:58 PM, Ken Caldeira kcalde...@carnegiescience.edu wrote:
Solar geoengineering is arguably a form of adaptation, which is defined as:
Adaptation to climate change refers to adjustment in natural or human systems
in response
I though there might be interest in this forwarded message to a colleague.
Mike
From: Carlos Duarte [mailto:carlos.dua...@uwa.edu.au]
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 10:27 AM
To:
Subject: Re: can you tell me anything about the White House briefing no the
Arctic that reportedly took place last week?
Note the following NOAA seminar is coming up tomorrow:
Ocean Fertilization, Marine Geoengineering and the London Convention/London
Protocol
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/seminars/2013/04-apr.html#OneNOAAScienceSeminars_3
0Apr2013_NODCLIB
April 30, 2013; 12:00-13:00 Eastern Time; NOAA HQ SSMC-3
and information technology
GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net
wrote:
Sorry Gene‹While some resource extraction companies are interested in a
warmer Arctic, the people of the north have petitioned
Sorry Gene‹While some resource extraction companies are interested in a
warmer Arctic, the people of the north have petitioned for their right to be
cold, and the species that are there depend on it being cold.
Mike
On 4/15/13 11:59 AM, esubscript...@montgomerycountymd.gov
Hi Dr. D--As the article about the paper notes, this idea was explored about
40-50 years ago. It turned out then that there was a real problem in closing
the set of equations---that is, in figuring out a way to write an equation
for, for example, the statistical deviation of a flow, etc.
Even
of Engineering University of
Edinburgh Mayfield Road Edinburgh EH9 3JL Scotland s.sal...@ed.ac.uk Tel +44
(0)131 650 5704 Cell 07795 203 195 WWW.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs
http://WWW.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs
On 21/02/2013 17:28, Mike MacCracken wrote:
Re: [geo] pre-print of forth-coming paper
Hi Stephen--Interesting. I am open to models suggesting my intuition is
inadequate.
One point not very much addressed in the draft paper seemed to me to be how
long one kept the intervention going. Near as I could tell, the paper hardly
mentions, but it seems as if the intervention is running all
Just to take the issue one step further, it has come up in the area of even
doing field testing.
Let¹s suppose that we want to do a field test of the cloud brightening
approach. The field test would be done at such a low level that it would
not really generate present benefits (i.e., any
Hi Ken--My question on the definition being used would be if ³impacts² is
the right word as that usually refers to the consequences of changes in
climate, so what is covered in IPCC WG 2 rather than WG 1. I would suggest
that SRM is interested in limiting ³the amount of anthropogenic climate
Hi Adrian--Interesting question, but does not the domain of the entropy
analysis matter? Basically, one is going to be using materials to channel
solar energy (via wind power and growth of algae) into concentrated form,
that one then stores. So, letting solar energy just cause heating and then
. to get the energy transfer term) has
the potential to be very misleading.
Mike MacCracken
On 1/28/13 7:12 AM, Andy Revkin rev...@gmail.com wrote:
There's also fresh input from Richard A. (and Waleed Abdalati) on Greenland
and sea level in this new dot earth post:
Eyes Turn to Antarctica
Hi Andy‹Your agreement with the dismissive statement on Greenland seems
terribly short-sighted. Over the coming decade (if not already), we¹ll be
setting a course for Greenland that will lead to much higher sea level in
the future (and the contributions from Greenland and Antarctica will end up
REMINDER DEADLINE FOR ABSTRACTS IS 31 JANUARY 2013
Davos Atmosphere and Cryosphere Assembly DACA-13
8 12 July 2013, Davos, Switzerland
Symposium 4.4: Can deliberate intervention moderate polar climate change and
associated impacts?
With the pace of climate change increasing and the array
1 - 100 of 296 matches
Mail list logo
