[geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Geoengineering and the politics of science, by Clive Hamilton Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, April 16, 2014, doi: 10.1177/0096340214531173 http://bos.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/15/0096340214531173.abstract.html The latest reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

As far as I can tell, Hamilton provides no citation in this work to support the following assertion, other than his own book: *Already, conservative forces in the United States are promoting it as a substitute for emissions reductions.* I further note the incongruity of reading a section titled "

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Alan and list: 1. This is to ask for a clarification on your sentence from below: > Hamilton correctly explains my arguments against a gradual ramp up of > geoengineering as proposed by David Keith, and the lack of a rebuttal in > Keith's book. Do you support the ramp up of

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Dear Ron, All the discussion was about SRM geoengineering. I support CDR if it can be done safely. Alan Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor Editor, Reviews of Geophysics Director, Meteorology Undergraduate Program Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-848-932-5751 R

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Ken, Alan, List: Thanks for the lead on the "Science" story. I learned a little more. Apparently the week's political negotiations resulted in the deletion of five figures and considerable text. It sure would be interesting to have a separate "pirate" publication that only sh

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

These figures should appear in the underlying chapters, which, unlike the Summary for Policy Makers, is not tampered with by politicians. The underlying chapters can be found here: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/ It would be interesting to do a comparison of the initial draft of the SPM and t

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

I kind of object to the idea that the SPM process constitutes "tampering by politicians". First: it's the process, an intergovernmental process, that gives the IPCC heft. It was baked into the design by Bert Bolin in order to create a document that would fulfill politcal functions. If you don't

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Oliver etal 1. I support everything you say below. 2. I learned a bit about Bolin at http://www.bolin.su.se/index.php/about-bert-bolin . Thanks for using his name. 3. The current issue is how much of the week of political discussions should be in "Executive Session"

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

As far as I am concerned all IPCC plenaries should be in open session, and I have made this point on a number of occasions. The IPCC seems to feel differently, but there are enough people who agree and are inside the meetiongs that a pretty good account of what went on would probably be possible, i

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Oliver etal Some more detail on the excised charts and the "why" from one person (David Stern) whose charts were removed from the SPM is at: https://theconversation.com/censored-ipcc-summary-reveals-jockeying-for-key-un-climate-talks-25813 Ron On Apr 24, 2014, at 9:04 AM, Oliv

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

On the other hand, Robert Stavins has published his call to the three Co-chairs of the AR5 WGIII ( cc'd to Pachauri) that the IPCC should tell all people interested in this latest IPCC effort that the

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

Alan Robock >; Geoengineering ; >kcalde...@carnegiescience.edu >Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2014 2:20 PM >Subject: Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton > > > >On the other hand, Robert Stavins has published his call to the three >Co-chairs of the AR5 WGIII ( cc

Re: [geo] new article by Clive Hamilton

OOps - thought this went out three days ago. Apologies if this duplicative. List and ccs: 1. Thanks to David for this lead on Prof. Stavins letter (found at http://www.robertstavinsblog.org/2014/04/25/is-the-ipcc-government-approval-process-broken-2/) 2. Since this p