Fwd: Re: [geo] Bioenergy with Carbon Capture: Climate Saviour or Dangerous Hype
Comments on Biofuelwatch report, forwarded from another list A -- Forwarded message -- From: rongretlar...@comcast.net Date: Nov 16, 2012 4:10 AM Subject: Re: [geo] Bioenergy with Carbon Capture: Climate Saviour or Dangerous Hype To: biochar-policy biochar-pol...@yahoogroups.com Cc: andrew lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com List: I have just finished reading the new BFW report on BECCS identified below. I write to encourage biochar policy enthusiasts to read and comment on it - as portions of the report relate to biochar (although the term and idea of biochar is only mentioned once, in an innocuous manner). The connection to biochar and our list is through the relatively small discussion on limited biomass supply. Of course, BFW dislikes this technology for the same reason they are opposed to biochar - it involves harvesting biomass for bioenergy. Because BECCS can tie up *nearly all* of the biomass' carbon content (biochar sequesters only about half, unless combined with BECCS), it has many supporters. These BECCS supporters will be faced with the same choice we have on this list - to ignore or to fight BFW. We on this list can learn a lot from future BFW discussions on BECCS, even if we are mostly on the sidelines. I do not see any reason to try to defend either BFW or BECCS. I view BECCS as the principal techncal competitor to biochar, and so I legitimately should be suspect when I say that I find much to agree with in the BFW writing this time. I am very skeptical that CCS will ever be successfully demonstrated and become commercially viable. However, as with their several prior reports on biochar, this BFW report is one-sided and cleverly written to show nothing positive at all about BECCS. There is essentially nothing (as in their reports on biochar) on climate issues - and the virtues of getting back to 350 ppm of CO2. They are clearly stating here opposition to anything smacking of geoengineering. Parts of this related to EOR could easily have been written by a pro-coal group, as they especially pan all ideas of using CCS for EOR (or enhanced gas recovery). I agree with this panning of EOR - but I do so for climate reasons (I want to quickly move away from all fossil fuels), whereas BFW seems to do it for anti-big-business and anti-bioenergy reasons. I don't believe they argued in favor of zero fossil fuel use - only zero biomass/bioenergy. Here is one example of the level of their arguments on harvesting biomass. Middle of page 7: *There is simply no guarantee that new trees will grow back.* I am not claiming that I read this carefully - as there is little here to impact biochar. But I would love to hear of how others reacted to this new piece from BFW. There are some useful cites in the 102 provided. Ron -- *From: *Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com *To: *geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com *Sent: *Thursday, November 15, 2012 1:23:17 AM *Subject: *[geo] Bioenergy with Carbon Capture: Climate Saviour or Dangerous Hype Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Sequestration: Climate Saviour or Dangerous Hype? Download at: http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/2012/beccs_report Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is being promoted as ‘carbon negative’, i.e. as a way of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and as such is proposed for “climate geoengineering”. It is referred to by many, even within IPCC, as having great potential, “essential” to achieving emissions reduction targets. Yet, on closer examination, BECCS is largely serving as a means of perpetuating fossil fuel industries. Current projects largely use CO2 captured from bioenergy facilities, mostly ethanol refineries, for “enhanced oil recovery” to extend production from depleted oil wells. The favorable economics of this practice make this form of BECCS an “early mover” to facilitate technology development of CCS for application to fossil fuels, considered a lifeline to the future for coal (so called “clean coal”). IN addition to the huge negative impacts associated with all technologies that require massive and ongoing supplies of plant biomass, storage of carbon underground presents additional new, serious risks and the potential for a new form of “underground” land grabbing as demand for storage sites increases. Some communities have already resisted having their lands injected with CO2. Based on the clearly false assumption that all bioenergy processes are “carbon neutral” and that capture and storage will render them “carbon negative”, BECCS is deeply rooted in false logic and dangerous misrepresentation. This report examines the theory behind BECCS, the likely impacts should such a technology be scaled up and the technical and economic barriers and provides a summary of BECCS-related investments, subsidies and policies. Rachel Smolker Biofuelwatch/Energy Justice Network rsmol...@riseup.net skype: Rachel Smolker --
[geo] Public Perception of Climate Geoengineering in Japan as Revealed in an Online Survey :
As someone pointed out to me, this survey was conducted just before Fukushima, so it's a good bet that opinions on geoengineering have become more hostile, at least for now. Josh Horton -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/vZ5FnuVypKMJ. 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.
Re: [geo] Public Perception of Climate Geoengineering in Japan as Revealed in an Online Survey :
ironic if true Rejection of nuclear power probably means that future atmospheric CO2 concentrations will be higher and climate change damage worse, thus more likely that people may someday perceive deployment of solar geoengineering as less odious than not doing so. On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Josh Horton joshuahorton...@gmail.comwrote: As someone pointed out to me, this survey was conducted just before Fukushima, so it's a good bet that opinions on geoengineering have become more hostile, at least for now. Josh Horton -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/vZ5FnuVypKMJ. 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. -- 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.
[geo] FW: Free Webinar on Climate Change Geoengineering - John Hopkins Univ. - CAMEL Climate Change Continuing Education Symposium
-- Forwarded Message From: Lyle Birkey lbir...@ncseonline.org Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:48:55 -0600 To: Mike MacCracken mmacc...@comcast.net Subject: Free Webinar on Climate Change Geoengineering - John Hopkins Univ. - CAMEL Climate Change Continuing Education Symposium If you're having trouble viewing this email, you may see it online http://e2ma.net/map/view:CampaignPublic/id:1401437.12951183282/rid=7d8b9622 201487b87f98aabeff8dbbb8 . Share This: http://social.e2ma.net/next/e/1401437/ba2d49e34a6bd7fe1e94cf2db17e54b8/1295 1183282/?mrid=7d8b9622201487b87f98aabeff8dbbb8 http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238635944/1401437/goto:http://www. camelclimatechange.org/ Invitation - No Charge Webinar Event Climate Change Continuing Education Symposia November 20, 2012 - 3:00 p.m. EDT Webinar #7 - Climate Change Geoengineering REGISTER HERE http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636009/1401437/goto:http://www. eventbrite.com/event/4382299576 Presenter: Wil Burns http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636010/1401437/goto:http://adva nced.jhu.edu/academic/environmental/master-of-science-in-energy-policy-and-c limate/faculty/index.html , Associate Director Master of Science, Energy policy and Climate Program, Johns Hopkins University http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636011/1401437/goto:http://adva nced.jhu.edu/academic/environmental/master-of-science-in-energy-policy-and-c limate/ NCSE will provide a ³digital badge² of participation to registered faculty members. Each presenter will discuss a teaching resource and how to use it. The resources are designed for upper level education, but some may be modified for other levels or incorporated into hybrid teaching. The resources are found on the CAMEL (Climate Adaptation and Mitigation E-learning) site. Find webinar lineup and registration online at: www.CAMELclimatechange.org http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636012/1401437/goto:http://www .CAMELclimatechange.org Register Now for Upcoming CAMEL Webinars: November 27, 2012 - 3:00 p.m. EDT Webinar #8 - Supporting Educators: Teaching Tools from the Climate Literacy and Energy Awareness Network and a summary of the review process. REGISTER HERE http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636013/1401437/goto:http://www. eventbrite.com/event/4382437990 Presenter: CLEAN http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636014/1401437/goto:http://clea net.org/index.html (Climate Literacy Energy Awareness Network) December 4, 2012 - 3:00 p.m. EDT Webinar #9 - How Success Works: Using case studies to teach systems thinking as a way to approach eco-social problems related to climate change. REGISTER HERE http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636015/1401437/goto:http://www. eventbrite.com/event/4382514218 Presenter: Gerry Marten http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636016/1401437/goto:http://www. gerrymarten.com/index.html Deidre Duffy, EcoTipping Points http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636017/1401437/goto:http://www. ecotippingpoints.org/ 1101 17th St NW Suite 250 | Washington, DC 20036 US This email was sent to mmacc...@comcast.net. To ensure that you continue receiving our emails, please add us to your address book or safe list. manage http://e2ma.net/app/view:Manage/signupId:1405077/id:1401437.12951183282/rid :7d8b9622201487b87f98aabeff8dbbb8 your preferences | opt out http://e2ma.net/app/view:OptOut/ID:1401437.12951183282/signupId:1405077/rid :7d8b9622201487b87f98aabeff8dbbb8 using TrueRemove£ Got this as a forward? Sign up http://e2ma.net/app/view:Join/signupId:1405077/acctId:1401437/mailingId:214 211040/rid:7d8b9622201487b87f98aabeff8dbbb8 to receive our future emails. EmailNow powered by Emma http://e2ma.net/go/12951183282/214211040/238636018/1401437/goto:http://www1 .networkforgood.org/for-nonprofits/fundraising/emailnow -- End of Forwarded Message -- 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.
[geo] Mooney, Pat; et al. (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth
Mooney, Pat; et al. (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth http://www.climate-engineering.eu/single/items/mooney-pat-et-al-2012-darken-the-sky-and-whiten-the-earth.html Mooney, Pat; Wetter, Kathy Jo; Bronson, Diana (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth. The dangers of geoengineering. In: What Next Forum (Hg.): Climate, Development and Equity. Uppsala (What next?, 3), pp. 210?237. Critical review of CE. -- 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.
Re: [geo] Mooney, Pat; et al. (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth
A more direct link here: http://whatnext.org/resources/Publications/Volume-III/Single-articles/wnv3_etcgroup_144.pdf I thought these nuggets were especially revealing: Why is geoengineering unacceptable? It can’t be tested: No experimental phase is possible – in order to have a noticeable impact on the climate, geoengineering must be deployed on a massive scale. ‘Experiments’ or ‘field trials’ are actually equivalent to deployment in the real world because small- scale tests do not deliver the data on climate effects. For people and biodiversity, impacts would likely be massive as well as immediate and possibly irreversible.It is unequal: OECD governments and powerful corporations (who have denied or ignored climate change and its impact on biodiversity for decades but are responsible, historically, for most greenhouse gas emissions) are the ones with the budgets and the technology to execute this gamble with Gaia.There is no reason to trust that they will have the interests of more vulnerable states or peoples in mind.There are several examples provided in Geopiracy: The Case Against Geoengineering (ETC Group, 2010: 31-32).228 Development Dialogue September 2012 | What Next Volume III | Climate, Development and EquityIt is unilateral: Although all geoengineering proposals run into tens of billions of dollars, for rich nations and billionaires, they could be considered relatively cheap (and simple) to deploy.The capacity to act will be within the hands of those who possess the technology (individuals, corporations, states) in the next few years. It is urgent that multilateral measures are taken to ban any unilat- eral attempts to manipulate Earth ecosystems. It is risky and unpredictable: The side effects of geoengineered interventions are unknown. Geoengineering could easily have un- intended consequences due to any number of factors: mechanical failure, human error, inadequate understanding of ecosystems and biodiversity and the Earth’s climate, unforeseen natural phenom- ena, irreversibility, or funding lapses. It violates treaties: Many geoengineering techniques have latent military purposes and their deployment would violate the UN Environmental Modification Treaty (ENMOD), which prohibits the hostile use of environmental modification. It is the perfect excuse: Geoengineering offers governments an alternative to reducing emissions and protecting biodiversity. Geoengineering research is often seen as a way to ‘buy time’, but it also gives governments justification to delay compensation for damage caused by climate change and to avoid taking action on emissions reduction. It commodifies our climate and raises the spectre of climate profiteering: Those who think they have a planetary fix for the climate crisis are already flooding patent offices with patent ap- plications. Should a ‘Plan B’ ever be agreed upon, the prospect of it being privately controlled is terrifying. Serious planet-altering technologies should never be undertaken for commercial profit. If geoengineering is actually a climate emergency back-up plan, then it should not be eligible for carbon credits under the Clean Development Mechanism or any other offset system. Unfortunately, the article fails to mention that non-geoengineering approaches to the CO2 problem are failing miserably. To therefore automatically vilify any untested, new technology that might have a positive, global scale impact on this problem would seem to be a little premature and short sighted if not extremely dangerous for the planet considering the lack success by more acceptable(?) strategies. -Greg From: Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, November 16, 2012 5:51:27 PM Subject: [geo] Mooney, Pat; et al. (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth Mooney, Pat; et al. (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth http://www.climate-engineering.eu/single/items/mooney-pat-et-al-2012-darken-the-sky-and-whiten-the-earth.html Mooney, Pat; Wetter, Kathy Jo; Bronson, Diana (2012): Darken the sky and whiten the earth. The dangers of geoengineering. In: What Next Forum (Hg.): Climate, Development and Equity. Uppsala (What next?, 3), pp. 210?237. Critical review of CE. -- 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. -- 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
