Perhaps many of you have noted this in Jim Hansen's recent presentations.
His concern about tipping points and target CO2 has moved to this point: Last night at a Stanford University "Ethics and Society" presentation, Jim stated that his concerns about various issues around ice melting meant that society might have to move towards certain geoengineering solutions after it was clear that other CO2-limiting techniques were not working (and there was a press of time). He preferred "more natural" solutions like biomass-fuel from which the CO2 was then sequestered, but he did point out to the audience that the "artificial volcano" sulfate solution should be particularly effective at the poles. (He did not seem to imply the polar-targeted sulfate ideas.) This in answer to an audience question about geoengineering. In response to a later question from the audience, Jim (of course) counseled that scientists stress the common elements of the climate-change story, and avoid allowing disagreements about nuclear energy, biomass fuel, ... (geoengineering?) cloud the message or justify inaction on limiting CO2 concentrations. Bob Dr. Robert Chatfield Earth Sciences, MS 245-5 NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA 94035 USA Ph: 650-604-5490 FAX 650-604-3625 http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sgg/chatfield --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
