Fantastic questions! Wow!. In effect geoengineering becomes an economic weapon and potentially a weapon of war.
For sure climate zones are moving and will continue to move northward naturally but somewhat accelerated by CO2 emissions; and if global warming continues Russia and Canada will profit greatly, the U.S. weather might become somewhat tropical and possibly its desserts will enlarge as will be true of northern Africa and Australia. However, geoengineering can be used for cooling or warming. Warming is easy, just do nothing or release sequestered CO2. Cooling? It remains to be seen how much and at what risk. But have no fear geoengineers will develop useful, safe, cooling strategies. Since both options will exist and can be implemented unilaterally I suspect we won't see 'geoengineering wars at 50 paces' We may see wars of words and escalated noise from the UN but not wars. I simply point out that Russia and the U.S. hold the nuclear trump cards and won't attack one another. Countries like N. Korea and eventually Iran represent nuisances, will negotiate to gain concessions, but will never openly use such weapons. They may allow terrorists to borrow them to destroy or badly damage some country but they won't put themselves at risk. Nuclear weapons may enter the climate equation but I seriously doubt that geoengineering can or would become a weapon. Sounds like a great topic for a Revkin Dot Earth Post. -gene -----Original Message----- From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineer...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of global_frozing Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 11:51 PM To: geoengineering Subject: [geo] Re: Will Russia resist geo-eng efforts now? This is interesting and more wide question: which countries will benefit from global warming and which countries will be destroyed by it? The second part of this question is will we have the wars because of this? Can Siberia become the good place for agriculture in result of global warming? Can US agriculture be destroyed by droughts? Will the geoengineering become the weapon capabale to move the frontiers of climatic zones? Can US bury the Russian Federation under the layer of ice by overdoing the geoengineering a little bit? :-) Aleksey www.globalfrozing.com On Sep 16, 10:49 am, xbenf...@aol.com wrote: > All: > > This is a fun scenario but a fantasy. The Arctic problem should and > will be approached diplomatically through the Arctic Council. Nobody > can really stop the US from such a program, and the Russians would not > dare try, since the entire operation can be carried out from US > territory, Alaska. > > Gregory Benford > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> > To: agask...@nc.rr.com > > Cc: euggor...@comcast.net; anr...@nytimes.com; > geoengineering@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tue, Sep 15, 2009 4:46 pm > Subject: [geo] Re: Will Russia resist geo-eng efforts now? > > How easy would it be for geoengineering experiments or operations to > be stopped? I guess you could sink Stephen's boats (or just sell them > for scrap), but what about the sulfur engineering techniques? Unless > you were willing to actually invade a country, then I assume that it > would be very hard to stop a country doing sulfur aerosol projects. > > That's quite an interesting situation, because it means that > nations/firms/individuals can cool the planet, and whoever has the > will and the money to keep cooling last gets to choose the > temperature. We're going to auction off the global temperature to the > lowest bidder. This 'lowest bidder' will have to pay much less than > anyone else, because the hard work will already have been done. All > they're paying for is the difference between their chosen temperature > and the next-lowest temperature. > > That's kinda like an auc > tion where you can bid $2200 for a car, and if > someone's previously bid $2000, then you only have to pay $200 to > close the deal and buy the car. That's a very strange auction. > > Do we really want every crackpot and selfish nation to have the right > to move the thermostat - but only one way? What could be done to stop > it? If you look at the situation in the Russian Arctic alone, you can > clearly see that there's a lot of money at stake here, so there may > well be a few small wars over this. Countries have fought over much > less. The one thing we can be fairly sure of is that the madcap > lowest bidder won't be caring too much about anyone else's opinion of > what the temperature should be. > > A > > 2009/9/12 Alvia Gaskill <agask...@nc.rr.com>: > > To stop private experiment: > > > a. planes- shoot them down > > b. boats- sink them > > c. oxcarts- I'll let you figure that one out > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene I. Gordon > > To: agask...@nc.rr.com ; anr...@nytimes.com ; > > geoengineering@googlegroups.com > > Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 1:38 PM > > Subject: [geo] Re: Will Russia resist geo-eng efforts now? > > > You have to click on Comment at the top of the comments section and > if your > > name appears in light print it won’t work. If your contact name is > dark it > > will work. Terrible and frustrating situation. > > > I think the Russians will block geo over the Arctic but20I sincerely > hope you > > are right. I am not sure how a world body stops a private experiment > not > > sponsored by a nation. > > > From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com > > [mailto:geoengineer...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alvia Gaskill > > Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 10:24 AM > > To: anr...@nytimes.com; geoengineering@googlegroups.com > > Subject: [geo] Re: Will Russia resist geo-eng efforts now? > > > I submitted this one and it appears it went through. The blog > doesn't tell > > you if your comment has been submitted. I learned this after > repeatedly > > hitting the submit key until it told me I would have to wait to submit > > another comment. Another gliche for the seer of computer science at > NYT to > > solve. BTW, at realclimate, you can review and edit your comment > before > > posting, so maybe adding that feature would help. > > > ----- > > > As I commented on a related article the other day at the > geoengineering > > group,http://www.adn.com/news/environment/warming/story/924593.html, > the > > opening up of the NW passage(s) is still only a benefit to the > petroleum and > > mining industries, regional trade and tourism. The opening of these > > passages are of minor significance to international commerce, but of > more > > importance to Russia. > > > You asked at the geo group for comments about whether Russia would > object to > > attempts to control or restore Arctic sea ice by20geoengineering. You > didn't > > specify sea ice, but that's what you meant. > > > The greater benefit to Russia from reduced sea ice is access to > petroleum > > and minerals below the sea floor. So there might be some resistance > on > > their part decades from now if these resources become important to > them. > > Nations will always make decisions that they believe are in their self > > interest. > > > In the case outlined above, Russia and perhaps Canada and the U.S. > would > > find benefits in reduced sea ice. But the risks and downsides of > > unmitigated global warming will be much greater. If the food supply > is > > impacted by climate change that could be prevented by restoring the > sea ice, > > the answer is easy. You can't eat oil. Not in Russia. Not in > Canada. And > > definitely not in the U.S. > > > Any geoengineering strategy will have to be approved and I believe > will be > > approved by international consensus and will include the support of > Russia. > > Climate change has the potential to destabilize nuclear armed nations > on > > Russia's borders and that alone represents a greater threat to them > than > > inconvenience in shipping or access to oil. > > > The groups or people that keep arguing much to the delight of leftwing > > bloggers and reporters that unilateral attempts at geoegineering are > > possible or likely, either don't under > stand the complexity of the > > technologies involved or do and and are simply scaremongering. The > most > > prominent of these early trick or treaters has been the Council on > Foreign > > Relations which assembled a scare panel last year for this purpose. > Say, > > didn't the CFR help George and Dick warn us of the dangers of WMD in > Iraq? > > Like the chimps and the million typewriters, I guess they will > eventually > > produce some Shakespeare if given enough time. And enough chimps. > And > > enough typewriters. > > > Your question, though, dealt with the opposite scenario. What if all > the > > other countries agreed on a geoengineering strategy and the Russians > > didn't. This is the argument that Alan Robock keeps making, that > > geoengineering could never be used because countries could never > agree on a > > global temperature. I guess Alan et al. never heard of Kyoto and the > 2 > > degrees goal for 2050. The Russians, however, I am sure have heard of > > India, Pakistan and China. > > > Original Message ----- > > > From: Andrew Revkin > > > To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com > > > Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 8:53 AM > > > Subject: [geo] Will Russia resist geo-eng efforts now? > > > The big question remains, who gets to set the planet's (or even > Arctic's) > > temperature. > > > Given this news, will Russia resist? > > > http:/ > /www.nytimes.com/2009/09/11/science/earth/11passage.html > > > comments welcome here: > > http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/asia-europe-voyage-via-a... > > > -- > > > Andrew C. Revkin > > The New York Times / Environment > > 620 Eighth Ave., NY, NY 10018 > > Tel: 212-556-7326 Mob: 914-441-5556 > > > Fax: 509-357-0965 > > >http://www.nytimes.com/revkin > > > <BR- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
