..@gmail.com"
>; geoengineering ;
>"n...@etcgroup.org" ; "j...@etcgroup.org"
>; "sil...@etcgroup.org" ;
>"k...@etcgroup.org"
>Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 6:32 PM
>Subject: Re: [geo] Why has geoengineering been legitimised by the
2013 19:21:14
To: Greg Rau
Reply-To: rongretlar...@comcast.net
Cc: r...@llnl.gov;
andrew.lock...@gmail.com;
geoengineering;
n...@etcgroup.org; j...@etcgroup.org;
sil...@etcgroup.org; k...@etcgroup.org
Subject: Re: [geo] Why has geoengineering been legitimised by the IPCC?
Greg etal
This i
ications.php?ID=472
>
> Greg
>
> From: Ronal W. Larson
> To: r...@llnl.gov
> Cc: "andrew.lock...@gmail.com" ; geoengineering
> ; "n...@etcgroup.org" ;
> "j...@etcgroup.org" ; "sil...@etcgroup.org"
> ; "k...@etcgroup.or
gt;
> *http://globaljusticeecology.org/publications.php?ID=472
>
> Greg
>
> From: Ronal W. Larson
> To: r...@llnl.gov
> Cc: "andrew.lock...@gmail.com" ; geoengineering
> ; "n...@etcgroup.org" ;
> "j...@etcgroup.org" ; "sil...@et
rom: Ronal W. Larson
>To: r...@llnl.gov
>Cc: "andrew.lock...@gmail.com" ; geoengineering
>; "n...@etcgroup.org" ;
>"j...@etcgroup.org" ; "sil...@etcgroup.org"
>; "k...@etcgroup.org"
>Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 12:56 PM
&g
Ken etal
Thanks for this insight.
From my perspective, delighted to see (unexpectedly) the word CDR in
yesterday's IPCC release, I think you are suggesting that I (maybe we) should
thank ETC - so I hereby do.
But I want to believe the IPCC team knew what they were doing (in
legitimi
Greg list, etal
1. This is to follow up on the note I wrote a few hours ago saying (about
a US government supplied statistic for SCC, the Social Cost of Capital)
> In another note soon, I will justify this $41 number.
I am not an expert on this topic and hope others can give more info
gt; approaches to different problems - climate vs CO2. In any case I am very
> glad that CDR is finally and officially on the table, hopefully as a topic
> of research and not one of engineering (yet).
>
> Greg
> --------------
> *From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com
gt; research and not one of engineering (yet).
>
> Greg
> From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [geoengineering@googlegroups.com] on
> behalf of Andrew Lockley [andrew.lock...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 11:44 AM
> To: geoengineering
> Subject: [geo] Why has g
and not
one of engineering (yet).
Greg
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [geoengineering@googlegroups.com] on
behalf of Andrew Lockley [andrew.lock...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 11:44 AM
To: geoengineering
Subject: [geo] Why has geoengineering been legitimi
http://gu.com/p/3j54t
Why has geoengineering been legitimised by the IPCC?
This morning's publication of the IPCC's summary for policymakers tells a
familiar and gloomy story of the science of climate change. The big
surprise is the decision to mention the controversial idea of geoengineering
Ja
11 matches
Mail list logo
