Re: [geo] Help Appreciated

For what it is worth, there are a lot of upsides for dumping silica of the proposed particle size into the atmosphere. It is an important diatom nutrient for many fresh waters (think fish food). d. On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:35 AM, John Gorman wrote: > The problem of particle size, coagulation

Re: [geo] Re: Can solar radiation management be tested?

"a rigorous showing that the proposed test is not likely to result in any serious consequences" This is Washington DC double-speak. Words such as "rigorous" and "serious" are ambiguous. David H. is setting them up as though they were bright line tests upon which a decision maker could rely. Ne

Re: [geo] Can solar radiation management be tested?

Although I generally agree with Ken in this discussion, I can't agree that Mt. Pinatubo provided even an imperfect empircal test. It wasn't a test at all. It was merely an imperfectly observed event. A test, imperfect or otherwise, presumes a panoply of scientific steps no one took, an perhaps c

Re: [geo] Re: SEA ICE LOSS STUNS SCIENTISTS - open letter to John Holdren

The North Pole webcam below<http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/webphotos/noaa1.jpg> shows that the meltponds are frozen over. Temperatures have been below -5°C this week <http://psc.apl.washington.edu/northpole/POPS13_atmos_recent.html>. Very cold for July. <http://climateinside

Re: [geo] SEA ICE LOSS STUNS SCIENTISTS - open letter to John Holdren

The current extent of ice coverage is no different than it was 20 years ago: And, it appears to be tracking the 2006 decline, which makes sense as the wind patterns are about the same, and wind has far more to do with the extent of ice coverage than temperatures of the kind we have today. As

Re: [geo] Does everyone agree with everything in the Solar Radiation Management section of National Academy's America's Climate Choices report

Ken: There is now a substantial bureaucracy associated with climate change (inside and outside of government). Like many in this group, they have a hard core, unshakable belief that it is now too late to prevent climate change, and thus they need to put their attention elsewhere. Indeed, a shift

Re: [geo] Re: Arctic Council Strategy

If we need any carbon sequestration at all, sequestration which also provides an economic benefit would be most desirable, if still cost efficient. This is the major value of biochar. When used on crop lands, including reforestation, nutrients remain fixed within the soil structure instead of bec

Re: [geo] SRM geoengineering: how to deal with the losers?

Pete: My sense is that who will be a winner or loser is an unknowable unknown. While I agree with Professor Salter that we could take a stab at it, and indeed others on this list have made some preliminary attempts to look at precipitation issues, the sad reality is that models are dreadfully inad

[geo] Carbon mineralization

I have previously mentioned sequestration through mineralization as a promising element response to alarms about CO2. It isn't free, but it may well be the most permanent capture mechanism. Here's a blurb about the formations that are available for use in the US. Keith, this is the kind of work

Re: [geo] The Etc Geoeng report

This belongs on Clim, not geo. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Dec 30, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote: > Diane, > > > > I note Etc group report on geoengineering. > http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/pdf_file/Retooling%20the%2

[geo] Study of MayonVolcano?

Is anyone prepared to conduct measurements and examine the effect of "natural" SRM from Mayon Volcano? We needto view these as large scale tests of SRM theories, to include not only temperature reduction, but the many other potential effects that some view as important risks of SRM. d. For the

Re: [geo] Re: Nathan Myhrvold argues for geoengineering

B. Can you identify some papers on use of diatom algae on dead zones (fresh and salt water)? Thanks, d. On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 5:37 AM, M V Bhaskar wrote: > We have been using Diatom algae to increase dissolved oxygen levels in > fresh water lakes. > Our observation is that Cyanobacteria decr

Re: [geo] Saving the Tibetan Glaciers

t-in-a-teapot/ Cheers, d. On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Manu Sharma wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:26 PM, David Schnare wrote: > >> According to the Indian glacier experts, the glaciers are experiences a >> net gain at the moment, and have been stable (n

Re: [geo] Stewart Brand/NYT Op-Ed: Four Sides to Every Story

Gosh John, what are those of us who simply accept the observations as just what they are (and accept the models as no more than they are) and admit there is rather a great deal of uncertainty. Oh, I know. We are SCIENTISTS. /sarcasm off d. On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 8:35 PM, John Nissen wrote

Re: [geo] Re: Alternet/Mooney: Will Copenhagen Lead to Radical Climate Experiments?

Dan: My bet is that there is not going to be signifiant field testing (full scale) until the temperatures go up to a significant level (e.g., 1.5 deg C). Prior to that, there simply won't be sufficient concern. In addition, that 1.5 deg C increase is going to have to happen quickly (within 3 yea

Re: [geo] Saving the Tibetan Glaciers

Manu, that studies published in the West on Himalayan melt are not very accurate and there's no cause for alarm. d. On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Manu Sharma wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:26 PM, David Schnare wrote: > >> According to the Indian glacier experts,

Re: [geo] Recent meetings

Hey, Eli - But for you, we in the U.S. could have been the ones with the million buck and leading these meetings. Make you feel warm? On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:18 AM, David Keith wrote: > Here are notes on a three recent meetings > > > > 1. Video’s and slides of the October 30th MIT symp

Re: [geo] When is the "last resort" moment for SRM?

John raises an extremely important policy point. Here's my point of last resort: When you can paddle a canoe across the north pole, you're pretty much beyond the point of last resort. Since SRM, used aggressively over the poles, could refreeze the caps, we could pull back from utter destruction.

Re: [geo] keep the money rolling in!!!

opinions to a hole in the ground and leave it there. I expect to see an apology to the group for your comments. David Schnare On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Oliver Wingenter < oliver.wingen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Group, > > I remember back in the 60's and 70's big

Re: [geo] One of the leaked emails...

It is called satire Manu, and it is a sad effort to get past what even Monbiot has to admit, which he does in the opening paragraphs of his blog entry, which read: ** *"Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, som

Re: [geo] Geoengineers - it's showtime!

geoengineering. The only ways to avoid using geo are either to willing partake of the catastrophe or to revisit the core AGW assumption. You simply have no other choices. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Nov 18, 2009, at 8:49 PM, "Eugene I. Gordon" wrote:

Re: [geo] Geoengineers - it's showtime!

Albert Read the Knorr paper. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Nov 18, 2009, at 8:16 PM, Veli Albert Kallio wrote: > Hi David, > > I think you may have overlooked on this. The temperature had > followed the CO2 trend definitely since the industrial revolut

Re: [geo] Geoengineers - it's showtime!

on models and which one is based on observations. Then ask yourself it that's important to you as a scientist. David Schnare *Public Release: 10-Nov-2009* Geophysical Research Letters *Controversial new climate change data*<http://www.bris.ac.uk/news/2009/6649.html> New data sh

Re: [geo] Re: [clim] On the difficulty of cutting emissions (ERL thread plus Ken's bet)

s feedback effects kick in. > > Whilst recovering and remediating methane from sources such as landfill, > etc, is perfectly sensible, it can't hope to solve the problem of methane in > the long run. We need to address the presence of methane in the atmosphere, > the sources whic

[geo] Re: [clim] On the difficulty of cutting emissions (ERL thread plus Ken's bet)

the only sources that cannot be captured and reused are from cows and the like and rice crops. David Schnare On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:27 AM, David Keith wrote: > It's not so blindingly obvious to me. Pretending that we can't cut > emissions is a way to hide from the moral imp

[geo] Re: Jamais Cascio-- on the problematic idea of 350

p return to the days when we discussed the technology and science of GEOENGINEERING. David Schnare On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Dan Whaley wrote: > > John Nissen, > > I might recommend Susan Solomon's recent paper. > http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/28/0812

[geo] Enough on the Arctic Ice Alarmism

For those of you who think the Arctic ice will be gone soon, perhaps you'd like to see what the UK Met Office thinks. 2060! This is from Anthony Watt's website. UK Met Office backpedals on Arctic Ice – “…unlikely that the Arctic will experience ice-free summers by 2020.”

[geo] Re: UK Meteorological Office's Forecasts of the Regional Responses for +4C Global Warming

Real data are much more useful as the basis for discussion of policy alternatives than inaccurate and out of date model outputs. We ARE NOT looking at +4 degree temperatures increases. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to th

[geo] Re: Arctic ice free in 10yrs?

John: I don't recommend WattsUpWithThat.com as speaking gospel, nor do I defend them. I merely refer to a specific posting regarding the Catlin study - one that is explicit in citing to verifiable facts. I also note that the comments on WUWT often reflect the kind of tough peer review of the tec

[geo] Re: Arctic ice free in 10yrs?

The Catlin "survey" is a farce. Take a look at Anthony Watt's blog to understand why. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/15/top-ten-reasons-why-i-think-catlin-arctic-ice-survey-data-cant-be-trusted/ Bottomline, if you want to make a cogent statement about Arctic ice thickness, use the data from

[geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

will call you about this Ken. > > > > > > > > THIS WILL BE A LIGHTLY MODERATED EMAIL GROUP. Moderation will enforce > these two guidelines and eliminate other abuses ( advertising, foul > language, etc ) > > > > > > > > On Oct 12, 10:21 pm, David S

[geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

Gents: It is time to shut this thread down. It is not in keeping with the rules of the group. I appeal to Ken to apply his wisdom and admit we all are frustrated, but this is not a platform to allow that frustration to vent on to anyone. Anyone. Those are our rules. Ken wrote them and we all

[geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

members of this group with significant access to funds are groups like NRDC, and they have decided that they can best spend their funds elsewhere. Hence the pain of having to recognize, once again, that this part of science is at the back of the line. David. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Dav

[geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

it avoid our discussion. It's clearly labelled. > > On Oct 12, 12:24 pm, David Schnare wrote: > > Please take this discussion private. It's too painful to read for the > rest > > of us. > > > > d. > > > > > > > > > > > >

[geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

Please take this discussion private. It's too painful to read for the rest of us. d. On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:55 AM, VNBC INC wrote: > > I have to have money first. If you help me raise funding from the > Carnegie foundation or other organizations I might give you funding > for a project at

[geo] Re: Biochar

Increasing carbon in agricultural soils has an additional benefit. Studies done here in Virginia on the coastal plain demonstrate the ability to reduce nutrient run-off by over 90 percent (nitrogen and phosphorus). The Soil and Water Conservation agents in the eastern portion of the Commonwealth

[geo] Re: Manifesto for Geoengineering

Hawkins is correct, as far as geoengineering being no more than a listserv. Alan's points, however, go well beyond the listserv issue. Alan continues to fail to characterize risks associated with geoengineering in the context of not doing anything other than carbon emission reduction. d. On Wed

[geo] Re: NYTimes.com: No Climate Change Leader as Nations Prepare to Meet

Come on, Mike. Those of us who have been listening to Lester Brown's views for the past 35 years knows that he has always used the "I'm the authority" voice regardless as to whether he is any kind of authority. Les has done no better job than anyone else in picking winners over the years and he h

[geo] Re: ETC Group on Royal Society Report: The Emp eror’s New Climate: Geoengineering as 21st century fairyta le

The more you complain about ETC, the more credibility they get. Just speak to their errors and to the need for the research. If asked specifically about the ETC, simply explain that they are a politically enabled group that has not done their homework. You need thick (thicker) skin. d On Sat,

[geo] Re: Secret E-Mails from the Big White House

Must have been hard typing only with one's left hand. ;-))) On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Alvia Gaskill wrote: > John Holdren has been pilloried by the right for various things he has > said or done in the past, but I believe that people can change their views > based on new information. H

[geo] Re: Secret E-Mails from the Big White House

For those who didn't get the memo, absolutely nothing you send to a government employee (except confidentidal business information) is beyond reach of public scrutiny. Even the majority of internal governmental memos and emails are subject to the Freedom of Information Act. It isn't being "nosy"

[geo] Re: Why SRM isn't enough

Parks, quoting Doremus, wrote "Even if EPA redefines its pH criterion, the agency may not have the authority under CWA to compel states to enforce new programs for curbing the CO2 emissions that are responsible for decreased pH, says* Holly Doremus*, a professor of environmental law at the Universi

[geo] Re: Hansen Outlines His Stimulus Package

Actually, Alvia, the Senate committees are already at work on a bill. Boxer has begun with the Waxman-Markey bill. The general plan is to gut as much of it as is necessary to get it passed, and add nothing. Then the two houses go to a conference committee to find a way to meet "in the middle", w

[geo] Re: WSJ - Op-Ed on Global Warming Skepticism

gt; > > > > -- > *From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto: > geoengineer...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *David Schnare > *Sent:* Sunday, July 05, 2009 12:44 PM > *To:* Geoengineering@googlegroups.com > > *Subject:* [geo] Re: WSJ - Op-Ed o

[geo] Re: WSJ - Op-Ed on Global Warming Skepticism

The sun is "normal". It is at the nadir of its normal cycle. The length of the cycle is still at issue, but cycle 24 has clearly begun, just not very quickly. d. On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Andrew Lockley wrote: > Does anyone have any decent studies of what will happen when the sun gets >

[geo] Re: WSJ - Op-Ed on Global Warming Skepticism

Although I am not Ken (the group owner), I ask: And what does any of this *sturm und drang* have to do with geoengineering? On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Eugene I. Gordon wrote: > > This is all very interesting but we all know that correlation doesn't infer > but does suggest causality. It

[geo] Re: Looking for critique of NCEE comments on EPA GHG review

t; kcalde...@ciw.edu; kcalde...@stanford.edu > http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab > +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 > > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM, David Schnare wrote: > >> Ken and I part ways on whether EPA should take time to clear t

[geo] Re: Looking for critique of NCEE comments on EPA GHG review

Ken and I part ways on whether EPA should take time to clear the air on these issues. Competent people disagree, so government has a legal duty to take a look at the arguments. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Jul 1, 2009, at 12:10 AM, Ken Caldeira wrote: > That N

[geo] Re: Looking for critique of NCEE comments on EPA GHG review

the science. That violates the Administrator's stated policies and is improper for a governmental science body. David Schnare. On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Dan Whaley wrote: > > I've run across this recently. > > http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf &g

[geo] Re: WSJ - Op-Ed on Global Warming Skepticism

Oh for crying out loud. Go look at the most recent Scafetta papers which use a 30 year time scale for the correlations, and then look at the backcasted estimates. Then make your wager. David. On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Ken Caldeira wrote: > > One out of every 20 time series show spuriou

[geo] Re: WSJ - Op-Ed on Global Warming Skepticism

I'm not aware of a single person who thinks geoengineering is anything but an insurance policy. As such, the only useful question is when to deploy it, if ever. (OK, when to deploy each of the various geoengineering approaches.) The only reason a geoengineer would have in the causality of warmin

[geo] natural geoengineering

Neat photo's of natural geoengineering. More like this one at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1195215/Stunning-pictures-hole-clouds-astronauts-witness-volcano-eruption-International-Space-Station.html [image: Bird's Eye View: Safe from harm, NASA scientists look down on the Sarych

[geo] Re: NPR radio story on National Academy geoengineering workshop

some sense of fear and trepidation fail to appreciate the > complex set of issues we are facing. I believe ambivalence is an appropriate > attitude when faced with an unpleasant set of choices. > > The comment that David Schnare made in criticism of my remarks ('Here's > your c

[geo] Re: NPR radio story on National Academy geoengineering workshop

If you honestly think we are on the brink of global disaster, there is not even a little bit of room to be conflicted. Here's your choice - we all die, or we don't all die. Pick one and enough of this "conflicted" sillyness. On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:27 PM, dasilva wrote: > > What's wrong

[geo] Re: Just in Time for Hurricane Season

For those of us who have been on a ship, on the ocean and near a hurricane, much less under it, the idea of having any ship, much less many of them, flying kites and reversing engines in some kind of large circle is beyond nonsensical. It's sort of like having the government control GM - might sou

[geo] Re: Arctic sea ice - no multi-year ice found

John: Of course there is multi-year Arctic sea ice. You may want to take a look at a fascinating display of Arctic sea ice photo's arranged as a movie video on YouTube, available here, with explanation on what was done and how. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/31/arctic-sea-ice-time-lapse-from-

[geo] Re: Should albedo be taken into account in meeting CO2 emissions reduction targets?

on global temperature. These level of changes are not adequately reflected in the GCMs used by the IPCC, according to Pielke. d. On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 6:54 PM, David Schnare wrote: > Actually, land management probably should be taken into account by regional > authorities. Refores

[geo] Re: Should albedo be taken into account in meeting CO2 emissions reduction targets?

rature and precipitation. David. On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote: > Countries may well try to use such techniques as a may of meeting > obligations, or to justify not cutting GHGs. We should be prepared for the > arguments. > A > > 2009/5/15 David Schnare &

[geo] Re: Should albedo be taken into account in meeting CO2 emissions reduction targets?

If we are going to get into albedo management, then we really would have to get into land management. Pielke's work modeling the effects of land albedo in Florida and the North East demonstrate the massive effect of changing albedo. Thus, if we are going to get into white roofs, it makes no sense

[geo] Re: Geoengineering and the New Climate Denialism - response deadline today

The article is a screed, filled with misrepresentations and speculation. It doesn't deserve a "careful review" and the author has been engaged on his point of view many times in the past to no useful result. dschnare On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ray Taylor wrote: > Hi all > > Can anyone ma

[geo] Re: The Arctic Ocean Mean Ice Thickeness 177.7 cm

As well, the Wegener Polar-5 aircraft-based research done at the same time as the Catlin survey covered far more territory and came to rather different findings. " Multiple flights northwards from various stations showed an ice thickness between 2.5 (two years old ice in the vicinity of the North

[geo] Re: The Arctic Ocean Mean Ice Thickeness 177.7 cm

On May 4th, the NSIDC announcedthat “ *Arctic sea ice extent at the end of April 2009 was within the expected range of natural variability*.” and “*The decline rate for the month of April was the third slowest on record*“. Let's all revisit this in Au

[geo] Re: some eco criteria for geoengineering?

National Ambient Air Quality Standard. EPA is now in the middle of its endangerment finding. It will take a good bit of time before EPA can establish a NAAQS. David Schnare Air Enforcement Division Office of Civil Enforcement U.S. EPA On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:09 PM, dsw_s wrote: > > > (

[geo] Re: Arctic Ocean Sea Ice Shows Extensive Weake ning around the Pole of Inaccessibility‏ - Albedo

And then there is the AMSR-E data: 2009/5/5 Albert Kallio > Further to the previous: > > This image with albedo, near natural light conditions suggestive of > albedo-induced warming occurrence now being likely around the Pole of > Inaccessibility due to early (light) season. > > Rgs, Albert >

[geo] Re: Televised debate

ot as concerned about GHGs, are more agnostic on carbon reduction, but believe geoengineering should not be used as a response to the AGW alarmists' arguments. Rather, they recognize the potential need for geoengineering on other grounds, and simply discount the moral dilemma argument. David Sc

[geo] Re: Televised debate

global warming. Overall, geoengineering is intended to be a large scale response to climate change, whether human or natural. David Schnare On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Ken Caldeira < kcalde...@globalecology.stanford.edu> wrote: > It is not a distraction. A good mechanistic underst

[geo] Re: New WorldChanging Post on Geoengineering

ey wrote: > > Interesting evolution of POV here from Steffen. Given where he's come > from, this is real progress. David Schnare may have a slightly > different perspective of course... ;) > > I think most of his suggestions are already standard w/ most of us. I > would

[geo] Re: EGU meeting, April 19-24

I've obtained movie rights. Here's the current "The Pinatubo Option" casting line-up: Tom Hanks playing David Keith Paul Giamatti playing Ken Caldeira George Clooney playing Alan Robock and Darren McGavin (in his persona as Carl Kolchak) playing David Schnare. It w

[geo] Re: Earth Day/Green Week TV

Steve Goddard has provided some useful charts (and links to the sources) on Arctic sea ice. At this point in time, the Arctic sea coverage is at a 7 year high and is nearly at the 20 year average level. See: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/21/leaving-the-ice-pack-behind/#more-7248 It will be

[geo] Re: EGU meeting, April 19-24

, nations can adapt through population movement and redevelopment of appropriate land use. Keep in mind that over 80 percent of all people live near coast lines. Moving a large proportion of that 80 percent is much more expensive and destructive than moving a part of the other 20 percent. David Schnare

[geo] Re: Global Cooling

Cheers, David. On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 1:23 AM, dsw_s wrote: > > I also want to forsake patents for perpetual motion machines, and > "proofs" that the square root of two really is rational after all. > They're suppressed by money-grubbing conspiracies too. > &

[geo] Re: Global Cooling

esearch money for them." > > There's no need to read any more than that. > > On Apr 17, 9:45 am, David Schnare wrote: > > Tom: > > > > Ken eschews discussions on the underlying science of GCMs and other > > approaches to understanding the relationship

[geo] Re: Global Cooling

and variations in solar irradiance. Philosophical Transactions of the > Royal > > Society A330, 547–560. > > Foukal, P., Fröhlich, C., Spruit, H. and. Wigley, T.M.L., 2006: Physical >> > > mechanisms of solar luminosity variation, and its effect on climate. > > Na

[geo] Re: Global Cooling

Coal is a bridge technology. I predict a major new source of energy within the next 50 years. That's a safe prediction for me since I'll be dead when the prediction deadline rolls around. Anon, the predicition fits the energy development cycles of the past 100 years. Thus, with the expected 30-

[geo] Re: soil water, biochar

them, using the gases driven off by the process for the fuel needed for the process. It was quite cost-effective and a net carbon sequestor. While is was enough to power small towns, it isn't really enough to make a dent in the carbon emissions of the coal-fired power plant industry. David Sc

[geo] Re: clouds over land - collaborator wanted

o the invested carbon. David Schnare. On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 10:03 PM, dsw_s wrote: > > Wow, that sounds very promising, although we'll have to see about the > economics. > > I hadn't heard (or hadn't absorbed) that the biochar was to come from > a pyrolysis process t

[geo] Re: geoeng. article in the Virginia Quarterly Review

them their sustainability agenda. So don't try to interpret the confused blather of those like Inez Fung. They aren't interested in climate change as a problem to solve. They are interested in it as a means to an entirely different end. David Schnare On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:01 PM, das

[geo] Re: FW: AP story on geo-engineering and the White House

ministration. Hence, I repeat, geoengineering has no friends in this administration. David Schnare On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Alvia Gaskill wrote: > Seth Borenstein strikes again! > > - Original Message - > *From:* Mike MacCracken > *To:* Geoengineering > *Sent:*

[geo] Re: John Holdren puts geoengineering on the table

endorsed geoengineering research. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Apr 8, 2009, at 11:22 PM, "David Keith" wrote: > I think this comment is (a) factually incorrect and (b) unhelpful. > Holdren has know about this and paid attention for some time, > certainly

[geo] Re: John Holdren puts geoengineering on the table

o this group before. You have no friends in Washington, D.C. (i.e., the government). David Schnare On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Alvia Gaskill wrote: > Not much different than what he said in the Hot Planet documentary. Joe > Romm misrepresented Holdren's views on this in an ar

[geo] New data on aerosols and clouds

Published online 3 April 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.215 More than a silver lining Light reflected by clouds can brighten air kilometres away. Lucas Laursen There's more to clouds than meets the eye.Punchstock A study looking at why clouds make the air near them glow more brightly sug

[geo] Re: Post on geoengineering - do not keep attacking Hansen or others who disagree you

OIF is a lot more than climate engineering. Indeed, ocean fertilization to reestablish plankton stocks in order to improve the habitat for various fish stocks cannot be differentiated from climate-oriented OIF in many cases. On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Eugene I. Gordon wrote: > > Isn't a

[geo] Re: Finnish Meteorological Office: Global warming may take us to terminal climate change

Albert: Some of us view these European statements as more than creeping socialism, perhaps gallopping socialism; rather than environmentalism. They are political statements, not scientific ones. d. On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Albert Kallio wrote: > *Hi All,* > > Janne Bjorklund from Suome

[geo] Re: Post on geoengineering

a corner with no way out other than some readiness to use geoengineering when the time comes. Hence, research funding is essential, despite your utopian "other" tools, at least until the "other" tools are affordable and allow sufficient energy growth to support economic growth w

[geo] Re: Post on geoengineering

without helping whatever. David Schnare On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Hawkins, Dave wrote: > Gene says-- > "Any honest scientists will agree that you cannot prove the negative; you > cannot prove that it will not be affordable; and you cannot prove that it > will not be avai

[geo] Funding

For those of you wondering where the money for geoengineering is going to come from, you might be interested in this story about who is going to be incharge of "adaptation" research. I have the full report if someone wants it. You will not find any mention of geoengineering in this. EPA Fears P

[geo] Re: Mineral sequestration of CO2

olid) + CO2 (gas) ---> iron/mag/cal > >Carbonate(solid -chalk) + SiO2 (solid-sand) > > > >and its exothermic! If we can get it going it doesnt need energy. The > >silicates -peridotite- are magma when it comes to the surface volcanicly. > > > >We letter

[geo] Re: Mineral sequestration of CO2

-chalk) + SiO2 (solid-sand) > > > >and its exothermic! If we can get it going it doesnt need energy. The > >silicates -peridotite- are magma when it comes to the surface volcanicly. > > > >We letter signatories believe that A,B and C are not alternatives. All are > &

[geo] Re: Shock and Thaw? Civil Society says "No" as geo-engineers mount shock bid to hack the planet.

ve one, and I can find no gracious way to forgive that in you and your press release. David Schnare On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Diana Bronson wrote: > ETC Group > > News Release > > http://www.etcgroup.org > > March 10, 2009 > > > Shock and Thaw? > > Civil S

[geo] Mineral sequestration of CO2

If there is anyone left on this group that is actually looking for politcally acceptable solutions to excessive atmospheric CO2, you may be interested in this report, out recently on locations where mineral sequestration resources are available in the U.S. http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/414/downloads/D

[geo] Re: New geoengineering blog

Well, I asked him on his (her?) blog site. We'll see if a response offers some insight into the background of the blog owner. d. On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Dan Whaley wrote: > > Does anyone know who this is? > > http://geoengineering.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/ > > Dan > > > -

[geo] Re: State-manufactured snowfall closes 12 highways

And consider the increased use of coal to deal with the colder temperatures occasioned by the weather manipulation. :-o On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Hawkins, Dave wrote: > Whoops. > (but consider the mitigation due to a day or so of no driving) :>) > > CHINA: State-manufactured snowfall

[geo] Re: runaway climate change

Andrew No one cares what the wiki people like. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Feb 2, 2009, at 6:50 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote: > > I have an alternative theory as to why we don't see too many instances > of runaway climate change from the 'clathr

[geo] Re: Runaway climate change as Good and pop as "Black Hole"

TW, I guess there is no such thing as runaway climate change > B > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Andrew Lockley > wrote: > > > I have been unable to find any citations in 'hard' climate science > literature. Is the term therefore ONLY a pop-science concept? &

[geo] Re: Crop residue ocean permanent sequestration

griculture only, and give credit for soil sequestration where that's as good as is available? David Schnare On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Stuart Strand wrote: > By straw we are referring to the stalks of agricultural plants, wheat > stalks and corn stover. The water and nutrients were

[geo] Re: runaway climate change

The concept, as applied to climate change, was introduced to discuss loss of ice shelves, an "irreversible" event over the short run, and one with large consequences. Then, the concept was expanded to the speed of the event, also as applied to the ice shelves. Then it was expanded to the "fat tai

[geo] Re: is geoeng mitigation?

I stand corrected. Thank you David. d. David Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship On Jan 31, 2009, at 2:55 PM, "Hawkins, Dave" wrote: > David Schnare wrote: Carbon sequestration (eg. OIF) is a form of > mitigation, but is not mitigation as defined by climate activis

[geo] Re: is geoeng mitigation?

We have discussed this before. Solar radiation management is not mitigation. It is a form of adaptation of limited use (several decades to centuries) and no prevention to harm to oceans. Carbon sequestration (eg. OIF) is a form of mitigation, but is not mitigation as defined by climate activists

[geo] Re: methane air capture

discussing. In a regulatory state, nothing is as easy as it seems. David Schnare On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote: > > You don't need a combustible fuel-air ratio provided that the > combustion doesn't need to be self-sustaining. Once the correct > tempe

[geo] Re: CO2 lifetime

Alan has made a valuable point, but I think misses another. Geoengineering would sensibly be used within a three-pronged program; and, if you accept the hypothesis that CO2 emissions are the only significant causal factor in global warming (which we are not seeing lately), it would be necessary to

  1   2   >