It was not too long ago that it seemed difficult if not impossible to get funding and get geo off the ground. The CO2 crowd is not getting the attention it wants. Maybe it is time to to try hard for geo funding rather than complain about it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Veli Albert Kallio" <albert_kal...@hotmail.com> To: "Andrew Lockley" <andrew.lock...@gmail.com>, "global frozing" <global_froz...@yahoo.com> Cc: "Geoengineering FIPC" <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 8:01:25 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [geo] Re: Where is that geoengineering?
Hi, Brief notes. I also think that small projects do very much make sense. I think that the balloon projects as well as some of the oceanic islands that have very tall mountains can be used for releasing cloud seeding or cooling chemicals (aerosols), and lay down a pipe to pump out SO2 or alternatives at such high altitude point. Costs of these are very low. The autumn time ice breaking may also spread the growth of winter ice. The pipeline to pump cloud forming or cooling chemicals have a benefit of large quantity delivery at very low cost (though duration time is much lower). Rgs, Albert Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:37:17 +0100 Subject: [geo] Re: Where is that geoengineering? From: andrew.lock...@gmail.com To: global_froz...@yahoo.com CC: geoengineering@googlegroups.com I spoke to a representative of one of the funding organisations in the UK, and my understanding of the conversation was that there was simply an insufficient level of applications for credible, fundable geoengineering research from universities. Perhaps those with good ideas have not been aggressive enough in their search for funding? Maybe it would be worth trying unconventional approaches. Perhaps, for example, it would be worth US researchers teaming up with British counterparts to gain funding? Maybe there is an appetite for geoengineering research in other countries that have previously been overlooked. India, China and mainland Europe are obvious places to start looking. Perhaps we let the language issue stop our search? There are many sensible small-scale experiments that could be undertaken, such as Alvia's balloon project. These would likely gain worldwide attention, due to the media's current appetite for geoeng. I would like to think we've left no stone unturned in our efforts to get such ideas funded. A 2009/8/9 global_frozing < global_froz...@yahoo.com > Can we here make some special page with organizations which can really do something about geoengineering? For example, I can suggest Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmdius.htm Office of Science and Technology Policy www.ostp.gov American Meteorological Society www.ametsoc.org Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E) arpa-e.energy.gov United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009 (COP15) en.cop15.dk/about+cop15/contact Copenhagen Consensus Centre www.copenhagenconsensus.com Anything else? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
