How about, sun shade for the stratosphere sunscreen-cloud brightening sun block-nuclear winter
Oliver Wingenter On Mar 31, 4:36 pm, "Hawkins, Dave" <dhawk...@nrdc.org> wrote: > And a new song, "Moon over Miasma" > > -----Original Message----- > From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com > > [mailto:geoengineer...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James R. Fleming > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 12:34 PM > To: oemor...@googlemail.com; geoengineering > Cc: janecsl...@gmail.com; andrew.par...@royalsociety.org > Subject: Re: [geo] Let's stop using the phrase "solar radiation > management" > > Don't forget the other 12 hours, which will be "starlight reduction." > > Jim Fleming > > On 3/31/10 12:00 PM, "Oliver Morton" <oemor...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > As I understand it, solar radiation management is a term that Ken > > invented at least in part as a joke when folks at NASA Ames expressed > > concern at using the term "geoengineering" in the title of a meeting > > at Ames. It was deliberately coined to look opaque, dull and > > bureacratic, and as a result it does indeed look opaque, dull and > > bureaucratic. > > > Jargon is much maligned, in that sometimes it is absolutely necessary. > > Technical discussions need technical terms for more than just > > excluding the laity. But I don't think that, in this case, the term > > actually adds anything to our conversations. "Sunshine reduction", > > used analgously to the accepted term "carbon dioxide reduction", would > > seem to me to do just fine as a replacement. (I can see that it might > > be more accurate to say "surface sunlight reduction", but I'm not sure > > it's worth bothering. We don't say "atmospheric carbon dioxide > > reduction".) > > > The best reason for sticking with SRM is that it's a term already out > > there and people sort of know what it means. But I'm pretty sure they > > will be able to grasp what "sunshine reduction" means pretty easily, > > and new entrants to the debate -- of whom we seem to be expecting, and > > indeed soliciting, a fair few -- will find the new term more > > transparent and easily grasped. After all, in common parlance sunshine > > doesn't really count as radiation. Also, terms often used only as > > initialisations can be particularly irksome to people using English as > > a second or third language. > > > To people who might worry that "sunshine reduction" sounds a bit > > ominous, I'd say a) only a bit (sales of sunscreen show that people > > are already aware that reducing sunshine can be good) and b) that's a > > feature, not a bug. Sounding slightly ominous is no bad thing for a > > geoengeering technology. > > > So is there a good reason for keeping the term SRM, rather than > > shifting to the simpler "sunshine reduction"? If not, let's make the > > change. > > > (I tried to post a shorter version of this last night, but seem to > > have failed: apologies if I end up double posting) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "geoengineering" group. > To post to this group, send email to geoengineer...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineer...@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.
