I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

[Neil Farbstein]

I'm thinking about starting up a nonprofit geoengineering foundation.
We will study the problems of greenhouse warming and geoengineering
type ways of slowing it down or reversing it and the circumstances
under which this would be desirable. We will fund research and
development of a variety of means to accomplish those goals. If you
are interested contact Neil Farbstein at pro...@att.net
or at 516-921-5058

[Ken Caldeira]

Where will the money come from ?

[VNBC INC]

I saw your webpage. Would the Carnegie Foundation fund my foundation
if it was dedicated to devising potential theoretical solutions then
testing them? The emphasis will be on geo-engineering as opposed to
climactic research and ecology.

> > or at 516-921-5058- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Ken Caldeira]

... and I was hoping I could ask you for money !!

[VNBC INC]

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 your institute.
Can you give me some start up funding?

On Oct 12, 1:22 am, Ken Caldeira <kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu>
wrote:

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[David Schnare]

Please take this discussion private.  It's too painful to read for the rest of us.

 

d.

--
David W. Schnare
Center for Environmental Stewardship

[Ken Caldeira]

Carnegie Institution is a consumer of funds, not a provider of funds.

___________________________________________________
Ken Caldeira

Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA

kcal...@ciw.edu; kcal...@stanford.edu
http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab
+1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968  

[Dan Whaley]

Thanks david-- you had me laughing there.

[VNBC INC]

Why do you say that David? I asking all group members to help me raise
money for my foundation to promote the same causes as the
geoengineering group. Unless we have reason to go private in our
conversation, I want the whole group to participate. Can you explain
what you mean "its too painful for the rest of us?" If you don't want
to read it avoid our discussion. It's clearly labelled.

> Center for Environmental Stewardship- Hide quoted text -

[Eugene I. Gordon]

I think David was being gentle. For my taste 'disgusting' would have been a
better descriptor.

[David Schnare]

Neil:

 

I'm loath to write anything to you, given your propensity for bringing cases for slander and libel.  I note, however, you claimed "

[David Schnare]

Neil:

 

I'm loath to write anything to you, given your propensity for bringing cases for slander and libel.  I note, however, this group has discussed raising money on multiple occasions.  Due diligence review of this group's postings would have resulted in an understanding that the only 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.

[Tom Wigley]

The emphasis will be on geo-engineering as opposed to
> climactic research and ecology.

CLIMACTIC RESEARCH !!!! WOW.

Tom.

++++++++++++++++++++

Ken Caldeira wrote:
>
> ... and I was hoping I could ask you for money !!
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:19 PM, VNBC INC <pro...@worldnet.att.net
> <mailto:pro...@worldnet.att.net>> wrote:
>
>
> I saw your webpage. Would the Carnegie Foundation fund my foundation
> if it was dedicated to devising potential theoretical solutions then
> testing them? The emphasis will be on geo-engineering as opposed to
> climactic research and ecology.
>
> On Oct 11, 11:31 pm, Ken Caldeira <kcalde...@gmail.com

> <mailto:kcalde...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > Where will the money come from ?
> >
> > On Oct 11, 7:56 pm, Neil Farbstein <pro...@worldnet.att.net

> <mailto:pro...@worldnet.att.net>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > I'm thinking about starting up a nonprofit geoengineering
> foundation.
> > > We will study the problems of greenhouse warming and geoengineering
> > > type ways of slowing it down or reversing it and the circumstances
> > > under which this would be desirable. We will fund research and
> > > development of a variety of means to accomplish those goals. If you
> > > are interested contact Neil Farbstein at pro...@att.net

> <mailto:pro...@att.net>

[Oliver Wingenter]

Dear Tom,

I am sorry that I am getting into this discussion late. Do you know
where I send my proposal to? Or better yet how do I set up a non-
profit that will bring me easy money and lots of it?

Sincerely,

Oliver

[David Schnare]

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 agree to them or we leave the group. 

 

So, let it be.

 

David

[VNBC INC]

GUIDELINES FOR POSTING TO THE GEOENGINEERING GOOGLEGROUP

1. ALL POSTS SHOULD BE RELEVANT TO INTENTIONAL INTERVENTION IN THE
CLIMATE SYSTEM.
2. NO POST MAY MAKE AN AD HOMINEM ATTACK OR SPECULATE ABOUT SOMEBODY
ELSE'S MOTIVATION.
3. PLEASE SIGN YOUR POST WITH YOUR REAL NAME AND PREFERABLY ADDITIONAL
CONTACT INFORMATION.

This topic is RELEVANT TO INTENTIONAL INTERVENTION IN THE CLIMATE
SYSTEM.

It seems Schnare is speculating about my reasons for posting this
topic. Thats a rule violation.

His speculation is an ad hominem attack.

He and Gordon have made other ad hominem attacks that are unrelated to
the business at hand, Geo engineering solutions to a reverse runaway
greenhouse effect.

Shnare and Gordon both seem to have chip's on their shoulders. They
would rather make ad hominem attacks than make contributions to the
topic here or to further the goals of the Geo engineering group
itself. I'm not going to speculate about what motivates them but they
are obviously violating the rules.

I 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 )

> Center for Environmental Stewardship- Hide quoted text -

[VNBC INC]

What do you mean Tom? That its an exciting topic? Can I get some
serious discussion. I'm serious about discussing it.

> >      > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[VNBC INC]

We should pool our resources. The Institute I'm planning will be a
nonprofit dedicated to geoengineering to reverse the greenhouse
effect.
Im not looking for "easy money" I feel everyone will benefit from
this research. Its a last resort but if its necessary geoengineering
solutions might be necessary. I have I've been seeking places to send
proposals too and there are few available.

On Oct 12, 8:54 pm, Oliver Wingenter <oliver.wingen...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > >      > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[David Schnare]

Neil,

 

I've made no speculation about you, or about anyone. 

 

Indeed, I'm trying to stop speculation about anyone by anyone. 

 

I don't want to see Tom, a Nobel Laureat, drawn into this quagmire; and I don't want to see you pushed around. 

 

'nuff said.

 

David.

[Veli Albert Kallio]

Hi Tom,
 
I think the geoengineering foundation is the most brilliant idea, I ever heard.
 
The Law of Diminishing Returns already affects the over-long, dragged climate negotiations and IPCC processes. Anything renewing our human pool and initiative to tackle the climate is required. The marvellous works of Charles Keeling, Michael Mannix, oft-repeated loose impact with diminishing return on policy makers, much like any new dots on a temperature graph once the fever were charted in a patient by the UK's Meteorological Office.
 
The overarching danger is that the Copenhagen Summit of "climate science movement" becomes today's Copenhagen Council, in fashion of the Medieval Conciliatory Movement that tried to tackle all the social and societal ills left over from the Medieval Scholasticism. Renaissance Movement came to relieve some of the bandages of the old orders of the dark ages, but the Renaissance was not enough to stop the soon explosion of the Reformation.
 
In the past we had human systems we argued with our vexed interests. Today, the Dark Age of the scholasticism has been replaced by the age of fossil fuels, the Renaissance goes to right direction but is wholly insufficient as a move away from the tight-rope of the fossil fuels to age of clean renewables. Today's explosion, the Reformation to Come, is centred on the subject of all human vexed interests tightened against our inanimate planet "Gaia" that protests all the climatic forcing the dark age of fossil-fuelled mankind. Argument with an inanimate object no one living can win, the earth will survive it all, but perhaps without us if need be. This second reformation of our age, will make face of the Earth without us and much of anything else living it carries.
 
The Councils of Stockholm (1973), Rio de Janeiro (1992), Kyoto, Bali, Copenhagen, it bears a striking similarity to the Medieval Conciliatory Movement trying to untangle the vexed interests of the Medieval Society that retarded its social progress. Outlook is really bad.

The geoengineering foundation will stir the political pot from new directions and we need to do all we can to make it a viable reality and make the stupid masses of scholastics in throes of dark ages of fossil fuels to see its value to tackle the global warming this way. 
 
The nuclear energy, renewables, forestation, emission cuts, home insulation, re-use, recycling, contraception, public transport and geoengineering all have their place to get us over this and provide help where the climate science movement has got stuck much like the Medieval Conciliatory Movement, unable to accomplish its reformatory work for the betterment of society by the inflexible vexed system primed to their self-destruction.
 
Whilst geoengineering offers direct benefits on its own, it is important to notice the value of our work and encouragement to people in the other fields that are generally supportive to our ideas. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, makes this idea even greater.
 
With kind regards,
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Veli Albert Kallio, FRGS
 
HH Plenipotentiary Scientific Ambassador
of Global Environmental Parliament Group
 
International Guru Nanak Peace Prize Nominee for 2008
(for sea level rise risks for global security & economic stability)
 
Frozen Isthmuses' Protection Campaign
of the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans
 
 
> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:02:49 -0600
> From: wig...@ucar.edu
> To: kcal...@carnegie.stanford.edu
> CC: pro...@worldnet.att.net; geoengi...@googlegroups.com

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

[VNBC INC]

Thanks you very much Mr. Kallio!

On Oct 13, 9:09 am, Veli Albert Kallio <albert_kal...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> I think the geoengineering foundation is the most brilliant idea, I ever heard.
>
> The Law of Diminishing Returns already affects the over-long, dragged climate negotiations and IPCC processes. Anything renewing our human pool and initiative to tackle the climate is required. The marvellous works of Charles Keeling, Michael Mannix, oft-repeated loose impact with diminishing return on policy makers, much like any new dots on a temperature graph once the fever were charted in a patient by the UK's Meteorological Office.
>
> The overarching danger is that the Copenhagen Summit of "climate science movement" becomes today's Copenhagen Council, in fashion of the Medieval Conciliatory Movement that tried to tackle all the social and societal ills left over from the Medieval Scholasticism. Renaissance Movement came to relieve some of the bandages of the old orders of the dark ages, but the Renaissance was not enough to stop the soon explosion of the Reformation.
>
> In the past we had human systems we argued with our vexed interests. Today, the Dark Age of the scholasticism has been replaced by the age of fossil fuels, the Renaissance goes to right direction but is wholly insufficient as a move away from the tight-rope of the fossil fuels to age of clean renewables. Today's explosion, the Reformation to Come, is centred on the subject of all human vexed interests tightened against our inanimate planet "Gaia" that protests all the climatic forcing the dark age of fossil-fuelled mankind. Argument with an inanimate object no one living can win, the earth will survive it all, but perhaps without us if need be. This second reformation of our age, will make face of the Earth without us and much of anything else living it carries.
>
> The Councils of Stockholm (1973), Rio de Janeiro (1992), Kyoto, Bali, Copenhagen, it bears a striking similarity to the Medieval Conciliatory Movement trying to untangle the vexed interests of the Medieval Society that retarded its social progress. Outlook is really bad.
>
> The geoengineering foundation will stir the political pot from new directions and we need to do all we can to make it a viable reality and make the stupid masses of scholastics in throes of dark ages of fossil fuels to see its value to tackle the global warming this way.
>
> The nuclear energy, renewables, forestation, emission cuts, home insulation, re-use, recycling, contraception, public transport and geoengineering all have their place to get us over this and provide help where the climate science movement has got stuck much like the Medieval Conciliatory Movement, unable to accomplish its reformatory work for the betterment of society by the inflexible vexed system primed to their self-destruction.
>
> Whilst geoengineering offers direct benefits on its own, it is important to notice the value of our work and encouragement to people in the other fields that are generally supportive to our ideas. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, makes this idea even greater.
>
> With kind regards,
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Veli Albert Kallio, FRGS
>
> HH Plenipotentiary Scientific Ambassador
>
> of Global Environmental Parliament Group
>
> International Guru Nanak Peace Prize Nominee for 2008
>
> (for sea level rise risks for global security & economic stability)
>
> Frozen Isthmuses' Protection Campaign
>
> of the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans
>
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:02:49 -0600
> > From: wig...@ucar.edu

> > To: kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu

> _________________________________________________________________
> Access your other email accounts and manage all your email from one place.http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/167688463/direct/01/- Hide quoted text -

[VNBC INC]

You have been speculating about my motives David. You seem to think
I'm motivated by greed and nothing else. You misunderstood what I'm
attempting here. I asked the group for advice on starting up a
geoengineering foundation. I wasnt asking for money itself. I want
information on what already existing foundations and sources of money
to promote geo engineering research are known to them. Ken thinks
there is nothing wrong with my topic and he is the moderator. The
foundation I'm talking about promotes the goals of the geoengineering
discussion group here. According to the rules I have a right to post
this topic. Tom has no ojections to my topic either.
Its news to me that Tom Wigley is Nobel Prize winner. Tom can you tell
us about your Nobel Prize? Veli, you're on the Nobel Prize Committee?
Thanks for your support.
It's important to have a foundation focused on what this group is
dedicated to discussing but with the goal of researching ways of
modifying the climate if they are warranted.

[VNBC INC]

I read your profile Kalio, I assumed you were on the Nobel Prize
committee not the Guru Nanak Prize Commitee. Tom it was a Feudiam
slip. I stand corrected.

On Oct 13, 9:09 am, Veli Albert Kallio <albert_kal...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> I think the geoengineering foundation is the most brilliant idea, I ever heard.
>
> The Law of Diminishing Returns already affects the over-long, dragged climate negotiations and IPCC processes. Anything renewing our human pool and initiative to tackle the climate is required. The marvellous works of Charles Keeling, Michael Mannix, oft-repeated loose impact with diminishing return on policy makers, much like any new dots on a temperature graph once the fever were charted in a patient by the UK's Meteorological Office.
>
> The overarching danger is that the Copenhagen Summit of "climate science movement" becomes today's Copenhagen Council, in fashion of the Medieval Conciliatory Movement that tried to tackle all the social and societal ills left over from the Medieval Scholasticism. Renaissance Movement came to relieve some of the bandages of the old orders of the dark ages, but the Renaissance was not enough to stop the soon explosion of the Reformation.
>
> In the past we had human systems we argued with our vexed interests. Today, the Dark Age of the scholasticism has been replaced by the age of fossil fuels, the Renaissance goes to right direction but is wholly insufficient as a move away from the tight-rope of the fossil fuels to age of clean renewables. Today's explosion, the Reformation to Come, is centred on the subject of all human vexed interests tightened against our inanimate planet "Gaia" that protests all the climatic forcing the dark age of fossil-fuelled mankind. Argument with an inanimate object no one living can win, the earth will survive it all, but perhaps without us if need be. This second reformation of our age, will make face of the Earth without us and much of anything else living it carries.
>
> The Councils of Stockholm (1973), Rio de Janeiro (1992), Kyoto, Bali, Copenhagen, it bears a striking similarity to the Medieval Conciliatory Movement trying to untangle the vexed interests of the Medieval Society that retarded its social progress. Outlook is really bad.
>
> The geoengineering foundation will stir the political pot from new directions and we need to do all we can to make it a viable reality and make the stupid masses of scholastics in throes of dark ages of fossil fuels to see its value to tackle the global warming this way.
>
> The nuclear energy, renewables, forestation, emission cuts, home insulation, re-use, recycling, contraception, public transport and geoengineering all have their place to get us over this and provide help where the climate science movement has got stuck much like the Medieval Conciliatory Movement, unable to accomplish its reformatory work for the betterment of society by the inflexible vexed system primed to their self-destruction.
>
> Whilst geoengineering offers direct benefits on its own, it is important to notice the value of our work and encouragement to people in the other fields that are generally supportive to our ideas. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, makes this idea even greater.
>
> With kind regards,
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Veli Albert Kallio, FRGS
>
> HH Plenipotentiary Scientific Ambassador
>
> of Global Environmental Parliament Group
>
> International Guru Nanak Peace Prize Nominee for 2008
>
> (for sea level rise risks for global security & economic stability)
>
> Frozen Isthmuses' Protection Campaign
>
> of the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans
>
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:02:49 -0600
> > From: wig...@ucar.edu

> > To: kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu

> _________________________________________________________________
> Access your other email accounts and manage all your email from one place.http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/167688463/direct/01/- Hide quoted text -

[VNBC INC]

I'm afraid society might be headed for another Dark Age instead of a
Renaissance. There have been a lot of signs of hope though. I think
the worst might be over. The Age of unreason is slowly ending.

On Oct 13, 9:09 am, Veli Albert Kallio <albert_kal...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> I think the geoengineering foundation is the most brilliant idea, I ever heard.
>
> The Law of Diminishing Returns already affects the over-long, dragged climate negotiations and IPCC processes. Anything renewing our human pool and initiative to tackle the climate is required. The marvellous works of Charles Keeling, Michael Mannix, oft-repeated loose impact with diminishing return on policy makers, much like any new dots on a temperature graph once the fever were charted in a patient by the UK's Meteorological Office.
>
> The overarching danger is that the Copenhagen Summit of "climate science movement" becomes today's Copenhagen Council, in fashion of the Medieval Conciliatory Movement that tried to tackle all the social and societal ills left over from the Medieval Scholasticism. Renaissance Movement came to relieve some of the bandages of the old orders of the dark ages, but the Renaissance was not enough to stop the soon explosion of the Reformation.
>
> In the past we had human systems we argued with our vexed interests. Today, the Dark Age of the scholasticism has been replaced by the age of fossil fuels, the Renaissance goes to right direction but is wholly insufficient as a move away from the tight-rope of the fossil fuels to age of clean renewables. Today's explosion, the Reformation to Come, is centred on the subject of all human vexed interests tightened against our inanimate planet "Gaia" that protests all the climatic forcing the dark age of fossil-fuelled mankind. Argument with an inanimate object no one living can win, the earth will survive it all, but perhaps without us if need be. This second reformation of our age, will make face of the Earth without us and much of anything else living it carries.
>
> The Councils of Stockholm (1973), Rio de Janeiro (1992), Kyoto, Bali, Copenhagen, it bears a striking similarity to the Medieval Conciliatory Movement trying to untangle the vexed interests of the Medieval Society that retarded its social progress. Outlook is really bad.
>
> The geoengineering foundation will stir the political pot from new directions and we need to do all we can to make it a viable reality and make the stupid masses of scholastics in throes of dark ages of fossil fuels to see its value to tackle the global warming this way.
>
> The nuclear energy, renewables, forestation, emission cuts, home insulation, re-use, recycling, contraception, public transport and geoengineering all have their place to get us over this and provide help where the climate science movement has got stuck much like the Medieval Conciliatory Movement, unable to accomplish its reformatory work for the betterment of society by the inflexible vexed system primed to their self-destruction.
>
> Whilst geoengineering offers direct benefits on its own, it is important to notice the value of our work and encouragement to people in the other fields that are generally supportive to our ideas. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, makes this idea even greater.
>
> With kind regards,
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Veli Albert Kallio, FRGS
>
> HH Plenipotentiary Scientific Ambassador
>
> of Global Environmental Parliament Group
>
> International Guru Nanak Peace Prize Nominee for 2008
>
> (for sea level rise risks for global security & economic stability)
>
> Frozen Isthmuses' Protection Campaign
>
> of the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans
>
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:02:49 -0600
> > From: wig...@ucar.edu

> > To: kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu

> _________________________________________________________________
> Access your other email accounts and manage all your email from one place.http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/167688463/direct/01/- Hide quoted text -

[Veli Albert Kallio]

Please do not make references! I am a man of low profile and avoid publicity! My closest to these circles would be my Scanning Tunnelling Microscope Weber Bar Graviton Resonance Particle Detector which I submitted as a proposal to youth electronics planning competition and I became co-incidentally the co-inventor of this particle detector with Professor Gerd Binnig who did win Nobel Price for Physics in 1986. However, the third generation machines, LIGO Interferometry has taken over this method since the days I was involved in Physics.
 
Please note that I was a nominee, not a winner of the 2008 Guru Nanak Peace Prize, and how could I, unless I nail iron-clad proofs that the ice sheets of the past never melted but slid when the ice age ended during the previous global warming episodes. If I could prove that Greenland's ice dome pushes through Melville Bay barrier, then I might be in line-up, but I don't want that: world with suddenly higher sea level wouldn't be good place to live.
 
(I leave climate porn publicity for Greenpeace and other writers desparate to scare us.)
 
But as per geoengineering, it is one of the most worthwhile pursuits as our world is what it is at the moment, with the Arctic losing its marine sea ice cap at fast rate. Many thanks.
 
Kr, Albert
 
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:02:32 -0700

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

> From: pro...@worldnet.att.net
> To: geoengi...@googlegroups.com

[Gus Lamb]

Dear all,

Saw this on TV the other day:

http://www.sandia.gov/news/resources/releases/2007/sunshine.html

Apparently this device can create fossil fuel equivalents from atmospheric C02 using only sunlight.

Leaving aside the fuel aspect of the project, could this technology hold potential for large-scale carbon sequestration?

Apologies if this is old news to everyone...

Gus

[global_frozing]

First of all, there is no any information center for geoengineering
yet, besides this google group.
I do not think that this group can work as such a center, because
there is all mixed inside the one sequence of messages.
The information should be filtered and structured.
Some another system, like "Google sites" can be used to collaborate
and to create and manage the really good web portal.
This can be done for free or very cheap. This can be the first step
for the foundation.
No need to squabble about money to do this :-)

[Eugene I. Gordon]

I point out that the idea of forming a formal Geoengineering Society and
what its mission might be has been considerably discussed in these e-mails
going back at least a year or more. It included a publication, an online
newsletter, a meeting, a small operating staff and possibly some funding for
research. The issue was and is where do we get sufficient money to support
it? It is still THE issue. What would be the mission of a non profit
Geoengineering foundation. Where would the support come from? Remember the
Golden Rule. "He who has the gold makes the rules."


Eugene I. Gordon
(908) 233 4677
eugg...@comcast.net
www.germgardlighting.com

-----Original Message-----
From: geoengi...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:geoengi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of global_frozing
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 1:59 AM
To: geoengineering
Subject: [geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation

[Ken Caldeira]

I don't think money really is the issue.

One way to start is by developing a good newsletter.

If someone wanted to take the time to put out a quarterly (or monthly) newsletter, summarizing in a balanced way recent developments, with pointers to recently published literature, worthwhile popular press accounts, and so on, it would be good and helpful. The newsletter could take the form of a pdf and web site. (It could be more or less a monthly or quarterly distillation of the best of what appears on this email group.)

I think the key is that it would be a true service effort and would be undermined if it turned into a soapbox for the newsletter editor to opine on everything.

So, money is an issue, but doing this is mostly time -- and the key is to find somebody who has the time, ability, motivation and emotional balance necessary to undertake such a venture.

It could even start as a monthly email to this group summarizing the most important things said here in the previous month, with pointers back to the original discussion. I think there are a growing number of people who would like to follow developments but do not have the time to wade through every email on this largely unedited email group. If well done, such an effort could be a real service to many people.

___________________________________________________
Ken Caldeira

Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA

kcal...@ciw.edu; kcal...@stanford.edu
http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab
+1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968  

[Eugene I. Gordon]

Money is never THE only issue but it is by far the key issue for a successful society or equivalent. I won’t soapbox but of course you do need to have talented and dedicated people. Will they work without compensation? I doubt it. Moreover, a news letter is not enough. You need a publication medium or media. Ideally you must  find funds to support small grants since there is no current source. An annual workshop would be a great help. Having founded a major IEEE society, two IEEE journals and a major annual meeting, I can tell you for sure money is the key even though I had put in a few hours daily at no pay..

[Neil Farbstein]

Thanks for all your suggestions. I've been too busy writing a funding
request to answer everybody. My concept for the foundation would be to
fund research into methods of modifying the climate to mitigate the
greenhouse effect. We would fund efforts in house, and we would also
fund others doing meritorious research. Most of that research will be
theoretical and some will be real world tests like the groups that
fertilized the oceans with iron. We would also act as a clearinghouse
to disseminate information.

On Oct 24, 11:35 am, Ken Caldeira <kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu>
wrote:

> I don't think money really is the issue.
>
> One way to start is by developing a good newsletter.
>
> If someone wanted to take the time to put out a quarterly (or monthly)
> newsletter, summarizing in a balanced way recent developments, with pointers
> to recently published literature, worthwhile popular press accounts, and so
> on, it would be good and helpful. The newsletter could take the form of a
> pdf and web site. (It could be more or less a monthly or quarterly
> distillation of the best of what appears on this email group.)
>
> I think the key is that it would be a true service effort and would be
> undermined if it turned into a soapbox for the newsletter editor to opine on
> everything.
>
> So, money is an issue, but doing this is mostly time -- and the key is to
> find somebody who has the time, ability, motivation and emotional balance
> necessary to undertake such a venture.
>
> It could even start as a monthly email to this group summarizing the most
> important things said here in the previous month, with pointers back to the
> original discussion. I think there are a growing number of people who would
> like to follow developments but do not have the time to wade through every
> email on this largely unedited email group. If well done, such an effort
> could be a real service to many people.
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Ken Caldeira
>
> Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
> 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
>

> kcalde...@ciw.edu; kcalde...@stanford.eduhttp://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab

> +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968
>

> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Eugene I. Gordon <euggor...@comcast.net>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I point out that the idea of forming a formal Geoengineering Society and
> > what its mission might be has been considerably discussed in these e-mails
> > going back at least a year or more. It included a publication, an online
> > newsletter, a meeting, a small operating staff and possibly some funding
> > for
> > research. The issue was and is where do we get sufficient money to support
> > it? It is still THE issue. What would be the mission of a non profit
> > Geoengineering foundation. Where would the support come from? Remember the
> > Golden Rule. "He who has the gold makes the rules."
>
> > Eugene I. Gordon
> > (908) 233 4677

> > euggor...@comcast.net

> >www.germgardlighting.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: geoengi...@googlegroups.com
> > [mailto:geoengi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of global_frozing
> > Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 1:59 AM
> > To: geoengineering
> > Subject: [geo] Re: I am Planning A New Geoengineering Foundation
>
> > First of all, there is no any information center for geoengineering
> > yet, besides this google group.
> > I do not think that this group can work as such a center, because
> > there is all mixed inside the one sequence of messages.
> > The information should be filtered and structured.
> > Some another system, like "Google sites" can be used to collaborate
> > and to create and manage the really good web portal.
> > This can be done for free or very cheap. This can be the first step
> > for the foundation.
> > No need to squabble about money to do this :-)
>
> > On Oct 12, 11:56 am, Neil Farbstein <pro...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> > > I'm thinking about starting up a nonprofit geoengineering  foundation.- Hide quoted text -

[Andrew Lockley]

The main role of a geoeng institute would not be to disseminate information - that's very easy.  The main role is to give people something to belong to.  This is far harder, as people can be picky, (not to mention lazy or tribal) with their memberships.  The last thing we want is to start an organisation which splits the nascent geoeng community.

I gave up on my efforts to start such an organisation when Ken spoke out against it on this list.  I sought to unite, not divide - and when that wasn't possible I backed down.

A

2009/10/26 Neil Farbstein <pro...@worldnet.att.net>

[Ken Caldeira]

Andrew Lockley <andrew....@gmail.com>: I gave up on my efforts to start such an organisation when Ken spoke out against it on this list.

I'm not even aware of having spoken out against the idea of an organization.

There are many possible organizations that can and will (and some probably should) develop around this issue, ranging from professional service organizations to political advocacy organizations.

I am all for letting 1000 flowers bloom.

We should just not fool ourselves into thinking that there will be one organization to fit all needs, or that there is a broad consensus on issues across this entire distribution list.

The key to success is to add value, to provide a service, to fill a need. If someone starts doing something that others perceive as valuable, and it is done in an open, thoughtful, and inclusive way, it will attract other people.

Please do not take anything I said to inhibit you from attempting to do something you perceive as valuable.

___________________________________________________
Ken Caldeira

Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA

kcal...@ciw.edu; kcal...@stanford.edu

http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab
+1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968  

[M V Bhaskar]

Interesting discussion about money, so here is my 2 cents worth :) -

I have posted about Diatom Algae and Nualgi yesterday and day before,
so I will not repeat the contents.
Nualgi can be used on any scale and is profitable from day 1.
The profits can be used for research into Geoengineering.

Nualgi is invented, patented, tried and tested, certified, production
capacity is in place, etc.
We are just seeking support to answer the usual questions people have
about any new technology and to meet working capital and marketing
expenditure requirements.
Samples of Nualgi are already available with a few people in US and 11
other countries.
Inventor is visiting US from Nov 24 th to Dec 24th, and anyone
interested can meet him, he will be in TN, CA and AZ.

So if anyone is interested in a very serious and profitable solution
to air and water pollution please do contact me.

best regards

Bhaskar
www.kadambari.net
www.nualgi.com/new

On Nov 1, 5:06 pm, Ken Caldeira <kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com>: *I gave up on my efforts to start

> such an organisation when Ken spoke out against it on this list.

> *

> I'm not even aware of having spoken out against the idea of an organization.
>
> There are many possible organizations that can and will (and some probably
> should) develop around this issue, ranging from professional service
> organizations to political advocacy organizations.
>
> I am all for letting 1000 flowers bloom.
>
> We should just not fool ourselves into thinking that there will be one
> organization to fit all needs, or that there is a broad consensus on issues
> across this entire distribution list.
>
> The key to success is to add value, to provide a service, to fill a need. If
> someone starts doing something that others perceive as valuable, and it is
> done in an open, thoughtful, and inclusive way, it will attract other
> people.
>
> Please do not take anything I said to inhibit you from attempting to do
> something you perceive as valuable.
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Ken Caldeira
>
> Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
> 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
>

> kcalde...@ciw.edu; kcalde...@stanford.eduhttp://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab
> +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968
>