Oswald,
It’s fine in theory to say “All we have to do is remove the GHG which cause Global Warming” but few people believe it can be scaled up fast enough to avoid tipping points, worsening climatic effects etc. How do you think it can be done fast enough? Best wishes Chris. From: 'Oswald Petersen' via Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC) <healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:10 PM To: 'Robin Collins' <robin.w.coll...@gmail.com>; 'Sev Clarke' <sevcla...@icloud.com> Cc: 'Alan Kerstein' <alan.kerst...@gmail.com>; 'Clive Elsworth' <cl...@endorphinsoftware.co.uk>; 'Herb Simmens' <hsimm...@gmail.com>; 'Mike MacCracken' <mmacc...@comcast.net>; 'Planetary Restoration' <planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com>; 'geoengineering' <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; 'healthy-planet-action-coalition' <healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> Subject: AW: [prag] [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned atmospheric geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review Hi Robin, we do not need SRM. All we have to do is remove the GHG which cause Global Warming. It is safe, natural and much more efficient than SRM (any variety), Regards Oswald Petersen Atmospheric Methane Removal AG Lärchenstr. 5 CH-8280 Kreuzlingen Tel: +41-71-6887514 Mob: +49-177-2734245 <https://amr.earth/> https://amr.earth <https://cool-planet.earth/> https://cool-planet.earth Von: healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> <healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> > Im Auftrag von Robin Collins Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. März 2024 14:01 An: Sev Clarke <sevcla...@icloud.com <mailto:sevcla...@icloud.com> > Cc: Alan Kerstein <alan.kerst...@gmail.com <mailto:alan.kerst...@gmail.com> >; Clive Elsworth <cl...@endorphinsoftware.co.uk <mailto:cl...@endorphinsoftware.co.uk> >; Herb Simmens <hsimm...@gmail.com <mailto:hsimm...@gmail.com> >; Mike MacCracken <mmacc...@comcast.net <mailto:mmacc...@comcast.net> >; Planetary Restoration <planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com <mailto:planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com> >; geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com <mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com> >; healthy-planet-action-coalition <healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> > Betreff: Re: [prag] [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned atmospheric geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review I think Herb’s question directed at a core of environmentalists is key: Is there a point when the climate worsens so much more* that you would support the deployment of cooling if shown to be reasonably safe and effective? *Note: this can mean too late. I have raised the same question and I think the answer is that unambiguous critics of SRM methods (“anti-human interventionists”) see the question as a trap, and therefore it “shouldn’t” be answered. The only rational response to the question is, of course: a resounding Yes. But if you acknowledge that possibility, then you must deny the arguments against testing SRM. And you also have to believe (or pretend) that decarbonization-only IS sufficient, on track, and that the evidence is available to show this. If the evidence points in the opposite direction, then — to stick with your ideology — you must deny, refute or hide it. This is why the problem is now ideological and very dangerous if it spreads into governance. (UNEA!) I agree with Sev that the publication of the paper (and more of them) will be very important (although I disagree with a MCB-only approach.) I wonder if the publication will be blocked? We need bullet-proof publications to point to, to build the case in public and government circles. We need a breakthrough or two. Robin On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 6:45 PM Sev Clarke <sevcla...@icloud.com <mailto:sevcla...@icloud.com> > wrote: Herb, Grandiose solutions and strategies are appropriate only for those who can command grandiose resources. We do not. Having our DCC paper published in the Oxford Open Climate Change journal would be a good start; and persuading research organisations (following more the community consultative lead of the Great Barrier Reef MCB experiment, rather than that of SCoPEx/SAI) to model, experiment with, and publish the results from, our many proposed climate solutions would give the article both intellectual and possibly public & political support/funding. Many such experiments and modelling do not require international governance and approval if done in the confines of the EEZ waters of one or more nation states. Successful experiments, followed by gated trials, seem to me to provide our best chance of gaining widespread support for further, cautious deployment. Learning by doing should allow us to minimise any adverse effects whilst maximising the net benefit. Sev On 19 Mar 2024, at 5:20 am, H simmens <hsimm...@gmail.com <mailto:hsimm...@gmail.com> > wrote: Alan, Robin and Clive, We all have our theories that attempt to explain and understand the almost visceral opposition to any effort to directly cool the climate. The three arguments you cite Robin certainly account for some signiicant proportion of the opposition. And as you point out Alan the lack of information about the urgency of the situation and that there are remedies that could turn things around is I believe beyond dispute. I have attempted to engage with many leading Climate scientists and activists on Twitter about cooling. I’m amazed at how superficial their responses have been to my comments and questions when they bother responding at all. (And several have blocked me entirely as I guess my questions were too inconvenient.) One question I have never been able to get ANY knowledgeable Climate scientist or activist opposed to cooling to answer is a very simple one: Is there a point when the climate worsens so much more that you would support the deployment of cooling if shown to be reasonably safe and effective? Your guess is as good as mine as to why they refuse to answer but it would sure be important to find out! What is needed to answer these and other questions at the risk again of being annoyingly repetitive is a carefully researched and developed plan of action that starts out with the development of a strategic power map that identifies who the individuals, groups and other entities are that make decisions to advance or stymie the acceptance of cooling. Perhaps those of us on these lists and our allies will be fortuitous enough to convince or persuade a person who is trusted by other key people who could then positively change the dynamic. But would any of us be willing to bet the future of humanity and the natural world on the ability of some of us - who are essentially almost totally unorganized - to achieve that? If we were a multinational corporation who developed not just a new product but a new product category (cooling) and we wanted to market it to a world that didn’t even know that there was such a product category or even the need for one we would do what virtually every entity with the means to do so would do: We would invest considerable resources in market research, in focus groups, in power mapping and In understanding the competition’s strengths and weaknesses in the greatest of detail. To do all this we would hire the brightest most experienced and most relevantly influential people on the planet including those who specialize in particular countries or institutional sectors. Only then would we determine what our strategy would be to introduce the product - Do we start in one country, do we start with one demographic do we promote the product by denigrating the competition and or by pointing out the superiority of our product or do we simply decide to invest a considerable amount of our resources in a kind of brute force campaign to persuade every potential buyer. This process - done with the ultimate professionalism - is exactly what is necessary in my view to “sell” cooling as the first order of business for a brand new NGO committed to cooling the planet in the context of a restored climate. I probably have written too long an answer. But my point is that none of us have anywhere near the information needed to determine the most effective way to change the prevailing ERA paradigm of emission reductions alone- which generates tens of millions of promotional messages every single day throughout the planet versus essentially none for cooling the planet - to a paradigm that humanity can restore a safer climate and a healthier Ecosystem through the urgent deployment of direct cooling along with continued emission reductions, large scale carbon removal and a reduction in unnecessary consumption. My comments should not be interpreted to mean that we shouldn’t be reaching out to people like Sabine as you suggest Clive and others who have potentially large influence as many of us have been doing for the past couple of years. But if we don’t do it in a way where we know exactly what we want Sabine and others to do and how we can assist them then it may be of limited value. What I would suggest be done first would be to prepare the most powerful and compelling presentation imaginable to present to people and institutions with the means or with access to others with the means to establish and generously endow such an NGO. And then systematically identify all those contacts that we individually and collectively have with people who may be able to provide access to those with the means and influence to create such an NGO. Any significant actions that are not intended to directly or indirectly lead to that result seem like little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it goes closer and closer to colliding with the largely unseen (and now dramatically shrinking) iceberg that will make all of our efforts moot. Herb Herb Simmens Author of A Climate Vocabulary of the Future “A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson @herbsimmens HerbSimmens.com <http://herbsimmens.com/> On Mar 18, 2024, at 1:07 PM, Clive Elsworth <cl...@endorphinsoftware.co.uk <mailto:cl...@endorphinsoftware.co.uk> > wrote: I agree with both of you (Alan and Robbin) Perhaps a trusted messenger might be Sabine Hossenfelder? In this video Sabine says climate scientists are probably guilty of confirmation bias on equilibrium climate sensitivity: https://youtu.be/uEZ9HFlqzms In this one she says climate engineering is a bad idea, but it’s probably going to happen anyway because it’s the cheapest solution: https://youtu.be/MZiEcx0F_CM However she only mentions SAI, and a method of removing water vapour from the stratosphere, which would make almost no difference. She appears unaware of MCB, and the many other proposals listed on the NOAC website. Does anyone have access to Sabine? Clive From: healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> <healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> > On Behalf Of Robin Collins Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 3:40 PM To: Alan Kerstein <alan.kerst...@gmail.com <mailto:alan.kerst...@gmail.com> > Cc: H simmens <hsimm...@gmail.com <mailto:hsimm...@gmail.com> >; Michael MacCracken <mmacc...@comcast.net <mailto:mmacc...@comcast.net> >; Planetary Restoration <planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com <mailto:planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com> >; geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com <mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com> >; healthy-planet-action-coalition <healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re: [HPAC] Harvard has halted its long-planned atmospheric geoengineering experiment | MIT Technology Review If we are still asking the question we need to talk to them directly, frankly, to understand. So far everything I’ve read suggests 1. they don’t think human geo-measures will work (even if they are unwilling to test to see) and/or because the human track record is abysmal; 2. they think these measures will divert from decarbonization; 3. They think decarbonization is sufficient. All these lead to the same point: #3. That’s the one to focus on. Robin On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 11:26 AM Alan Kerstein <alan.kerst...@gmail.com <mailto:alan.kerst...@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Herb, Is it plausible that the opponents of DCC are cognizant of the present danger and the urgency of action? Personally I don’t think so. Would opposition soften if they better understood the situation. I think it’s at least possible, perhaps likely. Before a doctor advises a patient to go through chemotherapy that will almost kill them, the doctor confronts the patient with the prognosis. (Of course, DCC will not do anything like ‘almost kill’ the planet, but that seems to be the mentality out there.) Sorry for repeating myself, but the circumstances call for hammering away at the prognosis until opposition to DCC softens, setting aside advocacy of DCC until then. This must be done by trusted messengers, who are few and far between these days. The needed steps go from scientific luminaries like James Hansen to trusted messengers to the general public and other stakeholders. That said, I agree about the need for the NGO that you suggest, but it needs to be cagey regarding its public pronouncements. Regards, Alan On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 7:29 AM Michael MacCracken <mmacc...@comcast.net <mailto:mmacc...@comcast.net> > wrote: Hi Herb--And yet Elon Musk et al. shoot big rockets through the stratosphere with an increasing pace, not to mention the sort of ballistic missiles that North Korea and Houtis are firing, etc. This fear of the slippery slope hangs on and on while the lowering cost of renewable energy continues to reverse the original argument. Mike On 3/18/24 9:56 AM, H simmens wrote: Harvard announced this morning the termination of the SCoPEx atmosphere geoengineering experiment that was first proposed a decade ago. It was originally planned for Arizona around 2018 and was then moved to Sweden in 2021 As many of you know due to local opposition in Sweden by the Sami people that experiment was canceled several years ago. The project itself has now been officially canceled. The explanation given was quite generic as the article details. There a link to a lengthy final report by the Harvard SCoPEx advisory committee. Whether this decade long utter fiasco is a clear signal that even micro-scale DCC direct climate cooling atmospheric research remains a non-starter or whether future endeavors - if there are any - will be more successful remains to be seen. The cancellation of SCoPEx along with the announcement of the release of reflective particles into the atmosphere by Make Sunsets leading immediately to the prohibition of such releases in Mexico and Mexican advocacy against such experimentation at the UNEA in Nairobi earlier this month demonstrates the risk of attracting immense backlash even to the most microscopic of baby steps. Which leads me to once again share my perspective that unless and until an extremely well funded international NGO with a clear mission and a superb staff focused on the deployment of DCC in the context of climate restoration is established the prospects for effective cooling in time to make a difference will remain negligible. That’s what the advocacy efforts of any group supportive of the essential need for DCC must focus on IMHO. Herb https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/03/18/1089879/harvard-halts-its-long-planned-atmospheric-geoengineering-experiment/ Herb Simmens Author of A Climate Vocabulary of the Future “A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson @herbsimmens HerbSimmens.com <http://herbsimmens.com/> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/8FDD77AD-3CC3-4350-83B4-5DB7261FEC67%40gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/8FDD77AD-3CC3-4350-83B4-5DB7261FEC67%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/382552ea-1bf4-4d54-a13a-be657abd1436%40comcast.net <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/382552ea-1bf4-4d54-a13a-be657abd1436%40comcast.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAH-gPYHrJJCfX49VWMuyhD3Zg4QWfkfC-9U5JZ-F%2B30aS-0FOg%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAH-gPYHrJJCfX49VWMuyhD3Zg4QWfkfC-9U5JZ-F%2B30aS-0FOg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnGTddjAtiH-Cm3VZ13kqo1RH92YpPgsFVBZp_xm3%2Bi6Lg%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnGTddjAtiH-Cm3VZ13kqo1RH92YpPgsFVBZp_xm3%2Bi6Lg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Planetary Restoration" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <mailto:planetary-restoration+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> planetary-restoration+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/planetary-restoration/98BA1786-5ED0-4170-82F2-267B150DE85C%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/planetary-restoration/98BA1786-5ED0-4170-82F2-267B150DE85C%40gmail.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnEr%3D8Yi7qO8fhq0V5n22vg%3DMvLFKkqZBn%2B_orjxvMkLwA%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAKes%3DnEr%3D8Yi7qO8fhq0V5n22vg%3DMvLFKkqZBn%2B_orjxvMkLwA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <mailto:healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com> . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/000601da7b99%247c86e940%247594bbc0%24%40hispeed.ch <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/000601da7b99%247c86e940%247594bbc0%24%40hispeed.ch?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/05cf01da7ba7%247a24fc10%246e6ef430%24%40btinternet.com.
