A general question about the thermal response of the Earth's oceans..

[Gregory Slater]

Hello All,

If we managed to reach 'net zero' by, say, 2050, so that, to zeroth
order, the concentration of CO2 ceased to increase due to human
activities after that time, how would the (mean) ocean temperature
respond (over years, decades)?

I am happy to be directed to any published papers or group threads which
discuss this.

Thanks, in advance, for any help.

Greg Slater, East Palo Alto, CA

[Ron Baiman]

Hi Greg, 

Recent modeling suggests that the oceans will gradually release heat to the atmosphere but not sure at what rate.

This is from the HPAC cooling paper: https://essopenarchive.org/doi/full/10.22541/essoar.169755546.65919302/v1

"Failure to begin deployment of direct cooling influence in the very near-term necessarily
will lead to greater harm and increased risk, at least until net-zero global GHG emissions are
achieved and legacy concentrations of GHGs are removed from the atmosphere and oceans.
Recent modeling suggests that, in the absence of direct climate cooling, if (anthropogenic and
natural) net-zero emissions were to be achieved after 3667 Gigatons of CO2 eq GHG (or 1000
Gigatons of carbon estimated to result in global warming of about 2.0°C) were accumulated in
the atmosphere, global warming would remain at roughly 2.0° C for at least another 50 years due
to continued thermal rebalancing from legacy ocean warming, even with continued ocean uptake
of legacy CO2 from the atmosphere (MacDougall et al., 2020; Hausfather, 2021). This suggests
that even after net-zero is achieved, a combination of continued direct climate cooling and
drawdown of legacy GHG would be necessary to expeditiously restore and regenerate a stable
climate and healthy ecosystem (Schuckmann et al., 2020; Baiman, 2021, footnote 9)."

Best,

Ron

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-planet-action...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/53b39682-29d1-4fc7-a0ee-c3814acdeb50%40gmail.com.

[Gregory Slater]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for the link.  I had not read this, though I am sure you and others announced it when it came out.

My question reflects my interest in understanding the likely net zero 'end-state' that is the focus of the vast share of discussion around global warming and climate change, and your paper discusses that.  Certainly I regard even the current state of the Earth with regard to atmospheric CO2 to be unacceptable, let alone where ever we 'land' at net zero.  My specific interest in the question is where sea level ends up upon reaching the (still quite hypothetical) 'net zero'.  But of course, where ever we 'land' at net zero, that's not the end of the story, nor of humanity's suffering.  The ice sheets are melting, and the ocean are rising due to that melt, even where we are now.  Net zero does not in any way stop that melting and sea level rise (on any timescale that matters for the stability of states and civilization).  Nor of course, does the entire spectrum of other increasingly catastrophic global warming-induced effects stop at 'net zero'.  This disconnect seems to pervade the global debate. Of course, you and most people on this forum are more aware of all this than me.  Without one or more (or better, all) of the proposed methods of climate intervention, we will definitely be 'giving up' on the coastal cities of the world, and astonishingly, that fate seems increasingly to be being actively embraced by activists, scientists, and leaders (at least in the industrialized world).  But I have absolutely no intention of docilely embracing the inundation of the coastlines, complete with all of the catastrophies, death, and suffering (to be borne by the poor and disenfranchised alone!) that that 'embrace of death' entails.  To hell with the global warming accommodators.  I refuse to give up on the coastlines.  I'll say it again.  I refuse to give up on the coastlines!  That's insanity.  It is this decision!, to abandon the coastlines, It is this decision! and not the decision to seriously begin testing all forms of climate intervention, that is being made by the rich and powerful right now, the class that can protect itself from the consequences, without any involvement of the billions of poor and disenfranchised of the world, who will be forced to suffer as a result.  As Thucydides so presciently wrote about global warming 2500 years ago, the rich will resist global warming intervention and the poor will be forced to 'suffer what they must'.

When it comes to the 'debate' about whether to employ climate intervention technologies, it's a totally rigged game, with the established powers in science and politics playing the role of 'the house'.

I believe that those of us who understand that intervention is not only doable but absolutely essential, that stabilizing the global mean temperature is the single most important thing to be done right now, today, should organize our own conference on how we must proceed, rather than begging the Davos-and-COP-attending activists, scientists, socialogists, political 'scientists', celebrities, and politicians to 'please, pretty please' at least consider what we say.  It is we, not they, who speak on behalf of the poor and disenfranchised!

Greg Slater

[Jim Baird]

Gregory, what is the fault in this logic?

 

The thermal coefficient of expansion of seawater is about half at a depth of 1,000 meter it is at the surface per the following graphic.

Heat moved into deep water to a median depth of 500 meters as Thermodynamic Geoengineering would provides with heat pipes produces 25% less sea level rise due to thermal expansion. And this heat would be unavailable to melt icecaps, or the glaciers that accounted for about 21% of the recorded sea level rise of the past two decades.

I share your concern with coastlines.

Jim Baird

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CD05CB11-5D11-4869-ADCD-197F07468434%40gmail.com.

[Gregory Slater]

Hello Jim,

Thank you for the reply and information about 'thermodynamic geoengineering'.  I do not know this technology.  I am still learning.  Please send links to more detailed summaries of the technology.

My bottom line is that the over-riding priorities must be to stabilize (and reduce) global mean temperature, and stabilize global mean sea level.  Immediately.  Not in years or decades.  Whatever set of technologies can realistically make that happen should be carefully but swiftly deployed, with appropriate testing, modifications, and scale up, but as quickly as possible.  It is an emergency, an actual crisis,  No time to lose.  Whatever gets this done the fastest I am in favor of.

There should be a session on this technology along with all the others at the 'effective geoengineering' conference/summit that I am proposing.

Thanks,

Greg Slater

On Feb 12, 2024, at 10:04 PM, Jim Baird <jim....@gwmitigation.com> wrote:

Gregory, what is the fault in this logic?

 

The thermal coefficient of expansion of seawater is about half at a depth of 1,000 meter it is at the surface per the following graphic.

<image002.jpg>

[Ron Baiman]

Agreed Greg!  At this point it appears that it may be very hard to reverse substantial sea level rise over next centuries but we should at least be trying to slow it down and minimize it as much as possible!

Jim's short summary of OTEC from (6/19/2023) from p. 15-16 of "The Case for Urgent Direct Climate Cooling" (slight mislabeling on the HPAC website): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yHe2Fe6fU11odfcH-4GwdYDNTCk7uB-J/view

is copied below. 

Best,

Ron

"Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) would utilize the temperature difference
between surface and deeper ocean waters to cool the planet while generating baseload
energy and removing CO2 from the atmosphere.76,77,78 Deployment of 31,000 one
gigawatt OTEC plants has been estimated to: a) displace 0.8 W/m2 of average global
surface heat from the surface of the ocean to deeper water for 200 years; b) produce 31
terawatts of electricity per year (67% more than total world use), and c) absorb about
4.3 GtCO2 per year from the atmosphere by cooling ocean surface waters.79 At an
estimated cost of $2.9 trillion per year, it would take 30 years to ramp up to 31,000

73 Nature Communications 12: 6713 (2021).
74 Sci. Rep. 6: 35070 (2016).
75 White-roofed greenhouses in Almeria have cooled the regional climate.
76 Rau, Greg and Jim R. Baird. 2018. Negative-CO2-emissions ocean thermal energy conversion. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 95:265-272.
77 Baird, Jim. 2022. The physics and economics of thermodynamic geoengineering. Available from the author upon
request at Jim....@gwmitigation.com.
78 Gleckler PJ, Durack RJ, Stouffer RJ, Johnson GC, Forest CE. Industrial-era global ocean heat uptake doubles in
recent decades.2016. Nature Climate Change: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2915
79 Renforth, Phil and Gideon Henderson. 2017. Assessing ocean alkalinity for carbon sequestration. Reviews of
Geophysics.

Healthy Planet Action Coalition Petition to World Leaders Page
16
plants.80,81,82,83 Economies of scale have been estimated to potentially reduce the cost of
OTEC electricity to about 1.1 cents per KWh.84"

[Tom Goreau]

You are completely right to be worried sick about sea level rise, none of the trajectories being discussed will reverse flooding of coastlines, even if they could actually stop and reverse warming!

 

Sea level rise will be the largest cost of climate change, but it is ignored at the policy level, nobody is doing anything serious about it, just postponing the problem to future generations.

 

NO international funding or policy making organization has any serious plans of how to adapt to sea level rise except to run away. There is no pro-active policy, only after the fact emergency disaster funding to dump rocks in the sea where beaches, roads, airports, and houses used to be.

 

Essentially all funding that had previously been allocated to shore protection projects for critically eroded tourism beaches was shelved during Covid, when nobody went to the beach, and politicians spent it all on completely unrelated political “needs”.

 

Erosion never sleeps, but policy makers and funding agencies never wake up!

 

It is going to get much worse after the extinction of coral reef crests from global warming. Large areas of Blue Carbon in mangroves, salt marshes, and sea grasses will be eroded away, and much will be oxidized to CO2…………….

 

Thomas J. F. Goreau, PhD
President, Global Coral Reef Alliance

Chief Scientist, Blue Regeneration SL
President, Biorock Technology Inc.

Technical Advisor, Blue Guardians Programme, SIDS DOCK

37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge, MA 02139

gor...@globalcoral.org
www.globalcoral.org
Skype: tomgoreau
Tel: (1) 617-864-4226 (leave message)

 

Books:

Geotherapy: Innovative Methods of Soil Fertility Restoration, Carbon Sequestration, and Reversing CO2 Increase

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466595392

 

Innovative Methods of Marine Ecosystem Restoration

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466557734

 

Geotherapy: Regenerating ecosystem services to reverse climate change

 

No one can change the past, everybody can change the future

 

It’s much later than we think, especially if we don’t think

 

Those with their heads in the sand will see the light when global warming and sea level rise wash the beach away

 

“When you run to the rocks, the rocks will be melting, when you run to the sea, the sea will be boiling”, Peter Tosh, Jamaica’s greatest song writer

 

 

From: healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com <healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Gregory Slater <ten...@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, February 12, 2024 at 11:55 PM
To: Ron Baiman <rpba...@gmail.com>
Cc: carbondiox...@googlegroups.com <carbondiox...@googlegroups.com>, geoengi...@googlegroups.com <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>, healthy-planet-action-coalition <healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [HPAC] A general question about the thermal response of the Earth's oceans..

 

Hi Ron,

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CD05CB11-5D11-4869-ADCD-197F07468434%40gmail.com.

[rob de laet]

Hi Tom, 

while very theoretical and hypothetical, reversing sea level rise is not completely impossible if we are able to cool the planet fast. The simple reason is that all that ice that is melting, got there through precipitation and we know several ways to increase precipitation through the increase of biological activity. Some examples, all still very theoretical and hypothetical, I know, but not bad to have it as a mindset that it is not completely imposssible:

For the Arctic area and Greenland increased precipitation would be possible through strategic large scale reforestation to improve the biotic pump function over the area increasing snow cover and albedo over Northern Canada, Greenland and the Arctic ice. 

For the Antarctic area the upwelling of cooler water through massive increase of phytoplankton followed by zooplankton and increased marine mamal population could burst through the increasingly stratified vertical water column and cool the surface waters that are now melting away the glaciers from the bottom up. This would also increase cloud cover and some precipitation over Antarctica, though not too much. 

Lastly a key element in cooling the planet is to regreen the continents and especially the tropical areas. While this will not have an enormous effect on SLR it could increase storage of water on land equivalent to maybe as much as 20 cm of SLR. All little bits help and the cooling through increased evapotranspiration would be a welcome way to slowly cool the oceans, 

Best, 

Rob de Laet 

Member of the EcoRestoration Alliance

Fellow of Global Evergreening Alliance

Co-founder of Senang Eco Services

WhatsApp: +55 71 992617846

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/BY3PR13MB4994FF84E4FCD438A8741883DD4F2%40BY3PR13MB4994.namprd13.prod.outlook.com.

[Gregory Slater]

Hello Ron,

Thanks for reply and link.  I'll look at this.

However. Ron. It totally depresses me when you write, "At this point it appears that it may be very hard to reverse substantial sea level rise over next centuries....".  Seriously?  Why?  The only, only reason I am interested in SAI (and the other cooling technologies) is its capability to halt global warming and sea level rise immediately.  Today.  If we but choose to do so.  Is there anyone who actually doubts that SAI can halt global warming and sea live rise immediately?  Is there anyone who does not think we have the capacity to do this?  This is my baseline assumption.  That, whether or not we have the brains and the balls to do so, we have the technology to actually halt global warming ~instantly.  We have that capacity.  Now.  Does anyone seriously disagree with that?

Thanks,

Greg Slater

[Ron Baiman]

Hi Greg, The problem is that some melting processes, once set in motion, become irreversible on human time scales as reforming the ice would require extremely cold temperatures over extended periods of time. The ice will not be restored by simply going back to pre-industrial temps (technically called ‘hysteresis’ , ‘path dependency’ or simply irreversibility). 

My understanding is that we have likely started some of these irreversible tipping points.  But totally agree that slowing and stopping melting as much as possible should be a priority. I think we can restore polar sea ice for example by urgent cooling.  And if we can slow the melting down to centuries for example it would be much easier for human civilization to adapt. 

Best,

Ron 

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 14, 2024, at 4:41 PM, Gregory Slater <ten...@gmail.com> wrote:



[Oswald Petersen]

Dear Greg,

 

could you please point out who has the technology to do SAI ? I am not aware or any organization, be it a company, a government or an individual, who has such technology or claims to have it. Actually I don´t even know anyone who has a clear technical concept how to do this.

 

So, to answer your question: Yes I really disagree with that.

 

Regards

 

Oswald

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/FD047CDC-93EB-40E5-B25A-D3019EDB4361%40gmail.com.

[Gregory Slater]

Hi Ron,

Well, yes, the 'tipping point thing' is presumably key.  From my pedestrian understanding, there's ~50+ ft of sea level rise in the Greenland and the West Antarctic ice sheets alone, so if indeed we've passed whatever relevant 'tipping point' for those ice sheets (for example, undercutting the coastal structure of these sheets in some way, or whatever) then, apparently, we could now cool the earth by 40 deg C at this point, and these sheets would still inexorably melt away.  On the other hand, as you know, David Keith told HPAC staright up that ice sheet tipping points are bulls**t.  Who has the final authoratative word on whether we're past those or other tipping points?  Fas ar I can tell, it's all vapor at this point,  and that therefore 'as far as we know' SAI can stop (not just freaking 'mitigate' (hate that utterly defeatist word!) ) the inevitable 40+ feet of sea level rise - and I'm sticking to that until there's something authoratative on ice sheet tipping points.  We're still not helpless victims of the inevitable ice sheet melt.

Please correct any misinformed or delusion points in the above.

Greg 

On Feb 14, 2024, at 2:09 PM, Ron Baiman <rpba...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Greg, The problem is that some melting processes, once set in motion, become irreversible on human time scales as reforming the ice would require extremely cold temperatures over extended periods of time. The ice will not be restored by simply going back to pre-industrial temps (technically called ‘hysteresis’ , ‘path dependency’ or simply irreversibility). 

My understanding is that we have likely started some of these irreversible tipping points.  But totally agree that slowing and stopping melting as much as possible should be a priority. I think we can restore polar sea ice for example by urgent cooling.  And if we can slow the melting down to centuries for example it would be much easier for human civilization to adapt. 

Best,

Ron 

[Ron Baiman]

Dear Oswald,

My understanding (from Doug McMartin) is that there a small number of countries that have (military grade) jet propulsion technology that would be necessary for SAI, and that the US in particular has existing aircraft that could deliver small sulfur or other aerosol precursors to the stratosphere particular (though using these aircraft would not be efficient for a longer term global SAI program) in the poles where the tropopause is lower (see Wake Smith earlier papers and more recent paper with Keith).  

The more difficult issue, I believe, is how to urgently begin pilot testing so that we can gradually ramp up to larger scale implementation (if there are no major unintended adverse consequences). As you may know I have been proposing one possible scenario for this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o5xQogx1kKgD-QlM4MVPdWeL2BzBtwUm/view?usp=sharing

In any case I believe that it would be a terrible mistake to 'write off' SAI, as though other direct climate cooling (DCC) methods could also be important and useful, I believe that SAI is the only high-leverage DCC method that could deliver significant global cooling at minimal cost and resource use at the quick and urgent time scale that Ithink is imperative.

Best,

Ron

[Gregory Slater]

Hello Oswald,

Well, admittedly, my posts are designed to provoke responses on this, and shame on me for that.  However, Keith and Smith just posted their article claiming that one could do operational (subscale) SAI now at ~+33 and -33 latitude using a small fleet of existing planes.  So I am hereby offering a $25 "SAI X-Prize" (first of its kind, as far as I know), to anyone who can prove that we can't do full global SAI cooling with some kind of cobbled together, motley collection of existing aircraft.  There. I have the money in my wallet as I write, waiting for someone to claim it.  But, Oswald, the more important thing, as far as I am concerned, is, has anyone attempted to put together any plan for the 'closest to full global SAI' that we could do today if we had the dough.  Why?  If I am wrong, send me the link to the maximally current doable SAI plan, for me to kvetch about.

Beyond that, since I claim not to be a radical-SAI-ist religious nut, nor a radical-MCB-ist religious nut, nor any other kind of religious nut, I am hereby offering a (second) $25 X-Prize for the anyone who can provide the fastest-to-deployment, closest-to-totally-stopping-sea-level-rise-completely, plan, giving the date of full deployment (again, assuming the dough), and the redection factor in sea level rise over current rate.  25 smackers!  Waiting for a claimant.

Ultimately, I on the team of anyone has a credible plan to fully stop sea level rise as fast as possible (but if that's decades, then I'm not interested, because it will be done convulsively anyway in the timescale without any of us advocating for it).

Regards,

Greg

[Ron Baiman]

Hi Greg,

And as you may recall, there was enormous push back on David Keith's view, that I don't think is credible, at that HPAC meeting (see McKay, Lenton, etc. papers).  In any case, an easy response is that of Doug McMartin when asked about David's view during his (Doug's) HPAC presentation. Can we afford to risk the chance that warming above 1.5 C (or whatever warming we have now!) will (is) leading to crossing irreversible and extremely harmful tipping points (like sea level rise as you've pointed out)?  The obvious answer is that it would be (is) lunacy to assume this kind of risk for human civilization and our fellow living species - whether it pans out or not.

Best,

Ron

[Ron Baiman]

See also related thread on possible AMOC reversal this century mostly due to polar ice melt.

[Tom Goreau]

It’s more like 70 meters of sea level rise if the Ice Caps melt!

 

Those who think Ice Cap melting will end at net zero need to read recent papers on the irreversibility of melting on both the Greenland ice Cap and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, and the East Antarctic Ice Sheet is fast approaching that point too.

 

The melting of the Ice Caps will take several thousand years, and ice melting will be sucking sensible heat out of the climate system for the latent heat of melting. When the melting ends, then sensible heating will no longer be delayed!

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/FCCEBA9E-EDBC-4FBF-88BE-148E9DF12BBE%40gmail.com.

[Gregory Slater]

Well, okay, but David Keith is arguing in the opposite direction than me.  He's saying, '...so we got time'.  I'm saying we drop global mean temp by a degree today, and then we'll actually test for the existence of tipping points in the real world, rather than sit on our butts speculating about their possibly existence.

 - Greg

[Ron Baiman]

Agreed Greg! This is the HPAC position, this is from the cooling paper (bolding is mine - there is similar language in the Vision document and in the open letters):

"To moderate global warming before key impacts become irreversible, a climate
restoration plan that returns global warming to well below 1°C in the near-term needs to be
adopted and then promptly implemented. Such a plan would need to have three
complementary components:
1. Deployment of near-term direct cooling influences, particularly focused at first on
reducing amplified warming in the polar regions and the Himalayas,
2. Accelerated reductions of GHG emissions, including especially an early focus on
methane and other short-lived warming agents, and
3. Building capacity to reduce the legacy concentrations of CO2 , methane, and other
GHGs in the atmosphere and oceans."

Best,

Ron

[Oswald Petersen]

Dear Greg,

 

no shame needed, I love your posts😊

 

However I find your and Ron´s description of a dispersion technology utterly unconvincing. Doing such a job requires a company (better more than one). It requires thousands of pages of technical documents, including patents, special disperrsion devices, special planes…  and a team of at least 50 engineers, scientists, administrators … the works. Compare e.g. Climeworks for DAC. Then of course you need political actors working for you. You need a legal framework, a business case, cashflow… it is all missing.

 

I guess I would claim your first 25 $ now . But in fact I am more interested in the other 25, just like you. Let me tell you : We are working on a plan to cool the climate by 0.5 degrees. That plan will not do SAI, but it will win those 25 bucks. And it will work.

 

More on this very soon

 

Regards

 

Oswald Petersen

Atmospheric Methane Removal AG

Lärchenstr. 5

CH-8280 Kreuzlingen

Tel: +41-71-6887514

Mob: +49-177-2734245

https://amr.earth

https://cool-planet.earth

[Gregory Slater]

Okay, thanks again Ron.  Looks good...

...but, you don't get my $25 X-Prize unless you specify how many aircraft, of what make(s), to what set of altitudes at what set of latitudes, with how many kg of SO2 (or whatever) per flight, at what set of flight frequencies...etc... to get the job done today.  Or if it's MCB, or whatever, or a combination of methods, what are the equivalent set of details on those to drop global mean temperature by 1 deg and reduce sea level rise rate by an order of magnitude (or whatever).  I want those details written out.  I want the detailed 'recipe' or 'prescription' that you could hand to someone and tell them to go do it, and he goes off and drops the global mean temperature by a degree in the shortest time possible from tonight.  I want the irreducibly simplest, klugiest, fastest set of directions which gets us to 1 deg C below where we are now in the shortest time from tonight.  Quickest mods to a set of existing aircraft models specified.  In the mean time, one can be building Wake Smith's super fleet or whatever, but until that's ready you're doing it with all these kluges.

Why can't we at least generate that set of specs?

Greg

[Ron Baiman]

Lol Greg!  Wake Smith's papers include many of these aircraft and deployment details. But you hit on an important problem. We really won't know how best to deploy until we start trying to do it, small scale and gradually. That is why some of us are so keen on a gradual polar pilot program and not (just) spending 10 years working in labs, models, and very small scale experiments before beginning to try to actually test this out. No need to stop researching but there is a need for a simultaneous pilot program to get this up to speed as quickly as possible (or not if it turns out that it doesn't work as well as all, or almost all, of the modeling has suggested).

Best,

Ron

[Jeff Haley]

X prize?  

How about a prize of more than $100k for developing a method for MCB that could be scaled up to eliminate one-third of Earth's energy imbalance at a cost in 2024 dollars of less than $1,500 per additional megawatt year of solar energy reflected to space, proven with an independently measured demonstration of making or brightening clouds?  

Where can I find someone who wants to fund such a prize?

Jeff Haley

[Achim Hoffmann]

It needs:

 

Entrepreneurial drive, can-do attitude,

a business plan,

a technical roll-out plan, de-risked as much as possible

a funding plan backed by funding institutions (private and public),

large scale operator support, Joint Development Agreements,

a clear view on the supply chain without any bottlenecks once you hit global scale and

most importantly to glue it all together:

Credibility.

And then it needs Speed & Momentum driven by that Can-do-attitude.

 

Below is a short post link about how to get Climate Tech financed. Appreciate that this is rarely a discussion point here and it is all about climate data and models, but at some point, we need to start talking “real world”, beyond the dreaming, guessing, and modelling.

That is how the real world thinks about funding examples like Climeworks (DAC, “Remove”), the H2 Green Steel (“Reduce”), etc. No “Restore” company out there that I know and that needs to change.

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/financing-massive-growth-climate-tech-werner-rehm-pvwuf/?trackingId=Sts1THScSyG19I02T2MXwA%3D%3D

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/000001da5fb2%24eb55b110%24c2011330%24%40hispeed.ch.

[Oswald Petersen]

Dear Achim,

 

all true. But first you need a woman or a man you does it all

 

Regards

Oswald

[Achim Hoffmann]

Hi Oswald:  (renamed the thread as this is going off topic)

It sounded like you are one of those who is taking the first active steps, perhaps I am wrong.

I am certainly trying to go down that path.

 

Here is another example: Fonger Ypma presenting his Venture https://arcticreflections.earth/

 

Very Recent TEDx Talk in Amsterdam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPSkGuehz-4  

 

Fonger is keen to get Feedback and happy to be contacted directly: Fonger Ypma fon...@arcticreflections.earth

 

Last November I presented together with Fonger and David King on an online Energy panel hosted by Hans van der Loo. He is a good guy.

 

 

Achim

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/001d01da5ff0%240e2b9d20%242a82d760%24%40hispeed.ch.

[Oswald Petersen]

Hi Achim,

 

I am an entrepreneur, correct, but I put all my thrust into AMR.

 

SAI is, in my view, too risky. I do not mean risk for myself as an investor (of skills and time), but risk for the globe. SAI would cause a myriad of unforeseeable consequences. Even though I must admit that SAI is the only other way, besides AMR, to cool the planet, I would not invest in it. I limit myself to GeoRestoration compare paper enclosed.

 

Still I wish you well. I may be wrong here, that has happened before.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/009c01da5ff2%2493bad3f0%24bb307bd0%24%40woxon.com.

[Oswald Petersen]

Hi Achim,

 

this Fonger Ypma thing is too expensive…

 

Regards

Oswald

 

Von: healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com <healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com> Im Auftrag von Achim Hoffmann

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. Februar 2024 10:37
An: 'Oswald Petersen' <oswald....@hispeed.ch>; 'Gregory Slater' <ten...@gmail.com>

Cc: 'Ron Baiman' <rpba...@gmail.com>; 'Jim Baird' <jim....@gwmitigation.com>; geoengi...@googlegroups.com; 'healthy-planet-action-coalition' <healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com>
Betreff: [HPAC] Climate Entrepreneurship

 

Hi Oswald:  (renamed the thread as this is going off topic)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/009c01da5ff2%2493bad3f0%24bb307bd0%24%40woxon.com.

[Gregory Slater]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for continued discussion on this.  I appreciate it.  However, what interests me is hearing detailed proposals of plans which drop global mean temperature by a degree in the shortest time possible, complete with (as I said) how many planes, boats or whatever, payloads, flight schedules, routes...daily manifests, and an actual timeline, day by day, week by bloody week, culminating in a final steady state temperature 1 degree lower, after 'x' number of days from the starting day.  I haven't seen this anywhere.  For SAI in particular, Wake Smith's work is important, but he's entirely focused on a general overview of the development of a megafleet of megaplanes, and he's talking about 10 years (minimum) of intense work (after getting the enormous funding) before putting a single gram of SO2 (or whatever) in the stratosphere..... but his end point is at the start of deployment.  An if there a are series of initial 'ramp up' tests involved, then I want the frickin' detailed plans for every one of the initial experiments, at the same granular resolution.  If somebody's put this out, and I missed it, then I am sorry, but then please send me the link to it.

Details, Ron.  dettails, details, details, details, details.....my kingdom (such as it is) for the details.........

Greg Slater

(ps - Here, I am not touching how you get the money, how you market your plan, how you find entrepreneurs, how you get the imaginery world government to approve your plan, (or for that matter how you create this imaginary world government) or any of that.  I just want to hear what the hell the actual plan is....details details details, that's where the devil lies.  Send me that detailed plan)

[Gregory Slater]

Hello Oswald, 

Thank you for your continued discussion.  I do appreciate it.  Obviously, you are an experienced businessman pursuing a serious enterprise.  The only way I can respond is how I responded to Ron.  You say that any discussion of an 'actual plan' has to have thousands of pages of documents, hundreds of blueprints of modified gulfstream or whatever jets, patests (do we have to patent ??), so many engineers, so many scientists, lawyers, office staff, etc., etc...but, Oswald, what is the actual plan that all that is supporting?

What I want is a detailed deployment plan.  deployment of ....whatever is your 'cooling agent' by whatever mechanism, leading on what time period to one degree (if you can do 0.5, why not 1? To make sure sea level rise is halted) below current.  What I am hearing is there is no such plan after 40 years of geoegineering activism, and that it would be stupid to even outline such a plan without having first lined up $100 billion, an army of lawyers, etc.  But is it really so stupid, Oswald, to ask for as detailed plan of deployment as something work from, compete against other plans with, build on, correct, improve....I see that as not insane, but the essential first step...even before you set up a world government to say no to you.

Regards,

Greg

[daleanne bourjaily]

Dear Oswald, all,

In general I ageee with Achim and also with you. There are not many scientists with entrepreneurial drive and quality. But there is a solution. Most will need a partner or licensee.

What the inventions require is a standard pitch deck for venture philanthropy or pre- seed investment and for each technology an entrepreneur who will license it from the scientists and develop it as a business.

Once there is a proof of concept in the field there should be a specialised SRM accelerator that invests in the seed phase and can help the initiatives to develop.

Copying to my colleague Sander Epema at BCI with a background in banking and venture capital.

I wonder if we -I also assist startups - could start such an accelerator here.

Best regards,

Dale Anne

Op do 15 feb 2024 10:19 schreef 'Oswald Petersen' via Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC) <healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com>:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/001d01da5ff0%240e2b9d20%242a82d760%24%40hispeed.ch.

[Oswald Petersen]

Dear Greg,

 

it will all come in time. Just watch this place,

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/C31CC6B6-30B2-43C2-BDAC-71C7944A5A9E%40gmail.com.