An outside-the-box plan to fight climate change - Opinion - Chinadaily.com.cn

[Renaud de RICHTER]

Both SAI and MCB got a strong supporter:  Bjorn Lomborg

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202202/12/WS620712e7a310cdd39bc8634f.html?mc_cid=3dc934fe46&mc_eid=2decfaafd5 

[Alan Robock ☮]

That's not exactly right.  What he wrote is:

"We should not commence geo-engineering now, since the technology is not ready and we don't yet know enough about it. But we simply cannot afford to not research it. It might just prove to be Earth's best backup plan."

I think we all agree with this.  I debated him once on CNN.  It feels uncomfortable to agree with him.

Alan

Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor
  Chair-Elect, AGU College of Fellows
  Associate Editor, Reviews of Geophysics
Department of Environmental Sciences         Phone: +1-848-932-5751
Rutgers University                            E-mail: rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu
14 College Farm Road            http://people.envsci.rutgers.edu/robock
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551     ☮ https://twitter.com/AlanRobock

On 2/24/2022 2:26 PM, Renaud de RICHTER wrote:

Both SAI and MCB got a strong supporter:  Bjorn Lomborg

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202202/12/WS620712e7a310cdd39bc8634f.html?mc_cid=3dc934fe46&mc_eid=2decfaafd5 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn9_A6T_kjUzp42cpiX6ZDKcWmFtnR_LTztTA%2Bnopr-YkHQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Renaud de RICHTER]

You are right.

I'm curious of this:

Research by Copenhagen Consensus shows that just $9 billion spent building 1,900 seawater spraying boats could prevent all of the temperature increase projected in this century. ...//...

[Alan Robock ☮]

I don't agree with that.  We certainly don't understand enough about marine stratocumulus to know where and when and what to spray.  And even if true, it ignores all the associated risks.

Alan

[pf1...@gmail.com]

I might agree with Lomborg that geoengineering research “might just prove to be Earth’s best backup plan” if he meant it as a backup to aggressive mitigation and adaptation. But Lomborg has long called out mitigation as costly and unnecessary as he does again in this piece (and also, e.g. here)

 

So I remain entirely comfortable continuing to disagree with him.

 

Peter Frumhoff

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/2fefaab0-1d24-9b8c-8e61-9e9f533b6ae2%40envsci.rutgers.edu.

[Gernot Wagner]

Agreed -- on the continued disagreement with Lomborg, that is.

His framing as "Plan B" is precisely the kind of framing we need to get away from. See e.g. Pete Irvine's excellent recent talk on that point.

Gernot Wagner, New York University (on leave at Columbia Business School, spring 2022)
gwagner.com
Keep in touch: gwagner.com/#newsletter 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/005b01d829b8%246faab790%244f0026b0%24%40gmail.com.

[Hawkins, David]

Without trying to be ad hominem, I must say that based on all of Lomborg’s publications and talks that I am familiar with, he needs to be viewed as a provocateur, rather than a serious contributor to effective policy.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJK3vz2yboWUM3V_wP-fTQz2is%3D-uSvwoDZp82Mqu_DGmEB4xw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Alan Robock ☮]

I agree with you, and I only agreed with him on the need for research. 

In the past Lomborg actually claimed that economists have shown the SRM is a solution to global warming, and I published this in response on RealClimate:

https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/08/a-biased-economic-analysis-of-geoengineering/

Alan

[Jonathan Marshall]

For what it is worth, I completely agree. Lomborg seems to be completely against mitigation. He does not think there is a pressing problem, and while some of his suggestions are definitely worthwhile, geoengineering without mitigation is likely to be disastrous...

jon

________________________________________

I might agree with Lomborg that geoengineering research “might just prove to be Earth’s best backup plan” if he meant it as a backup to aggressive mitigation and adaptation. But Lomborg has long called out mitigation as costly and unnecessary as he does again in this piece (and also, e.g. here<https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-change-adaptation-panic-exaggerating-disaster-11634760376>)

So I remain entirely comfortable continuing to disagree with him.

Peter Frumhoff

From: geoengi...@googlegroups.com <geoengi...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Alan Robock ?
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 2:32 PM
To: renaud.d...@gmail.com; geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: Stephen Salter <S.Sa...@ed.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [geo] An outside-the-box plan to fight climate change - Opinion - Chinadaily.com.cn

That's not exactly right. What he wrote is:

"We should not commence geo-engineering now, since the technology is not ready and we don't yet know enough about it. But we simply cannot afford to not research it. It might just prove to be Earth's best backup plan."

I think we all agree with this. I debated him once on CNN. It feels uncomfortable to agree with him.

Alan

Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor
Chair-Elect, AGU College of Fellows
Associate Editor, Reviews of Geophysics
Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-848-932-5751

Rutgers University E-mail: rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu<mailto:rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu>
14 College Farm Road http://people.envsci.rutgers.edu/robock<http://people.envsci.rutgers.edu/robock>>
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 ☮ https://twitter.com/AlanRobock<https://twitter.com/AlanRobock>>

[Signature]

On 2/24/2022 2:26 PM, Renaud de RICHTER wrote:

Both SAI and MCB got a strong supporter: Bjorn Lomborg

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202202/12/WS620712e7a310cdd39bc8634f.html?mc_cid=3dc934fe46&mc_eid=2decfaafd5<http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202202/12/WS620712e7a310cdd39bc8634f.html?mc_cid=3dc934fe46&mc_eid=2decfaafd5>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn9_A6T_kjUzp42cpiX6ZDKcWmFtnR_LTztTA%2Bnopr-YkHQ%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn9_A6T_kjUzp42cpiX6ZDKcWmFtnR_LTztTA%2Bnopr-YkHQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/2fefaab0-1d24-9b8c-8e61-9e9f533b6ae2%40envsci.rutgers.edu<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/2fefaab0-1d24-9b8c-8e61-9e9f533b6ae2%40envsci.rutgers.edu?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/005b01d829b8%246faab790%244f0026b0%24%40gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/005b01d829b8%246faab790%244f0026b0%24%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>>.

UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email.