Green, Prof.
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 3:47 PM
> To: david.app...@gmail.com; geoengineering@googlegroups.com
> Subject: RE: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
>
> Not only is Alan Robock right but this discussion defies all reason.
> Comparing heat without considering dam
il.com<mailto:david.app...@gmail.com>;
geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>
Subject: RE: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
Not only is Alan Robock right but this discussion defies all reason. Comparing
heat without considering damage is nonsensical. Comparing the
Dear Alan and All,
Here is a video we produced at Colby on energy consumption (not global
warming) using lightbulbs. The tall gentleman on the library steps is
Sherry Rowland. Perhaps someone could make an array of Christmas tree
lights?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSPJOTX06JU
Jim Fleming
Dear David,
I think an array of incandescent light bulbs around the world would work
much better. If you have 100 W bulbs, and want to model an imbalance at
the surface of 1 W/m2, then you will need one light bulb every 100 m2,
multiplied by 1 over the fraction of energy emitted by each bulb
ion. But
enough is enough!!!
Chris Green
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>
[mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Appell
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 2:56 PM
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@go
is enough!!!
Chris Green
From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of David Appell
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 2:56 PM
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
Alan,
I see your point Do you (or does anyone
Alan,
I see your point Do you (or does anyone) have a more appropriate
analogy for such large amounts of heat? The tempting thing about the
"Hiro" is it's just the right amount (63 terajoules) for many global
climate numbers I have sometimes used "Civ," the power production of
all of
ngineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Alan Robock
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 2:31 PM
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
Dear All,
I think this is a terrible comparison to make and should not be used. I hear
Dear All,
I think this is a terrible comparison to make and should not be used. I
heard someone this summer who was trained by Al Gore use this and she
did not distinguish between all the effects of atomic bombs and the
energy equivalent of the atomic explosions.
Equating nuclear war and gl
t;kcalde...@carnegiescience.edu
>Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 8:57 AM
>Subject: Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
>
>
>
>The Cold War and the Apollo Program were not pursued in the expectation of
>profiting from software spinoffs, LED lighting,CAT scanners, cell pho
anic and Planetary Physics
>> Department of Physics
>> University of Oxford
>>
>> Office: +44 (0) 1865 272930
>> Mobile: +44 (0) 7935314940
>>
>> http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/contacts/people/driscoll
>>--
>> *F
that Al Gore could possibly
>> be MORE opposed to these. Given that there could be chemical surprises with
>> other particles, one could argue if Al Gore is opposed to something we have
>> a better handle on (and at least have observed a good few times), then he
>> would pr
vestment. The personal investment is related to
> career and how large is also personal. Governments seldom make financial
> investments unless politics is part of the equation.
>
> From: "Simon Driscoll" mailto:drisc...@atm.ox.ac.uk>>
> To: "Ken Caldeira"
&g
[skonem...@yahoo.fr]
Sent: 25 August 2013 13:15
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Cc: Simon Driscoll
Subject: Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
Simon,
I do understand that he assumes the SRM technique to be awful under the
consideration of injecting sulfate aerosol in the stratosphere, but
gt;
>
> Simon Driscoll
> Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics
> Department of Physics
> University of Oxford
>
> Office: +44 (0) 1865 272930
> Mobile: +44 (0) 7935314940
>
> http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/
.:7048, Bamako-Mali.
Email:skonem...@yahoo.fr
De : Ken Caldeira
À : Gene Gordon
Cc : Simon Driscoll ; Salif KONE ;
geoengineering
Envoyé le : Samedi 24 août 2013 16h46
Objet : Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
Al Gore is not opposing geoengineering
"
>
> *Cc: *"Salif KONE" , geoengineering@googlegroups.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 24, 2013 12:09:59 PM
> *Subject: *RE: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
>
>
> "If we take a portfolio view, the question is how l
n Driscoll
Cc: Salif KONE; geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
There is a pleasing simplicity to answering a question as if it were a binary,
but I suppose if you got these people in a room and spoke with them quietly,
the question could not be answered
of Physics
> University of Oxford
>
> Office: +44 (0) 1865 272930
> Mobile: +44 (0) 7935314940
>
> http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/contacts/people/driscoll
>----------
> *From:* Salif KONE [skonem...@yahoo.fr 'skonem...@yahoo.fr');>]
4 (0) 1865 272930
Mobile: +44 (0) 7935314940
http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/contacts/people/driscoll
From: Salif KONE [skonem...@yahoo.fr]
Sent: 24 August 2013 15:19
To: Simon Driscoll; geoengineering@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [geo] Al Gore on geoengineering
20 matches
Mail list logo
