Zoom link HPAC meeting this Thursday, June 29 4:30 PM EDT Oliver Morton, the science journalist and author will be our guest
H simmens
I am particularly excited to announce that Oliver Morton, the veteran British science journalist and author of several books, including an excellent book on geoengineering, will be our guest at the regular HPAC meeting this Thursday at 4:30 PM EDT 21:30 BST.
 | |
In addition to discussion on the politics, ethics, science and technology of geoengineering we expect that Oliver, because of his long experience as an editor and journalist, will be able to provide us some useful ideas and direction for our advocacy work.
H simmens
rob...@rtulip.net
Oliver Morton, Briefings Editor at The Economist and author of The Planet Remade: How Geoengineering Could Change the World, spoke with the Healthy Planet Action Coalition on 29 June.
Link to the recording with Oliver is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6ODDLIxW1k.
My notes from the discussion are below.
Robert Tulip
Oliver Morton
Interested in geoengineering since writing The Planet Remade
Ken Caldeira observes that geoengineering offers way to promptly cool.
Pete Irvine compares to not geoengineering - few are worse off
‘Showstoppers’ have not turned up since Crutzen opened the discussion in 2006 – geoengineering can prevent harm.
Big issues are not biogeophysical, but in structural worries for collective action and geopolitical conflict
Societies are less keen to take drastic steps to cut emissions.
HPAC triad of cooling, removal and reduction – three legs can push together or in different directions
Paris – CDR – emissions are fungible. Could Solar Geoengineering (SG) and Emission Reduction (ER) be trade-offs?
Moral hazard is clear and plain with CDR, ways to keep below 2 degrees require large CDR.
Both CDR and SG do have moral hazard effect, fruitless to say they don’t.
Can say we need less fast ER, either less than optimal or less than now,
Geopolitical risk, concern that it doesn’t map to climate forcing by GHGs, SG only cools by day, different latitudinal effect,
Most comes out in wash, most climate is ocean, ocean heating is the big thing
Match between SG Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) and GHG warming politics very poor, look opposite politically
Can debate how reasonable, GGR worry about free riders, SG cheap, we will get however much SG the person who wants it the most puts up,
no way to counter SG except far-fetched measures or conflict
Dynamics require acquiescence by non SG powers, would need lot to agree to cut GHGs while small number of parties can do SG, would need tacit approval of one major power
Ken Caldeira notes prompt effects of SG, unlike GGR or ER – timespan of years
Sudden, unilateral, additive, huge differences to other climate action
More complex less harmful, very different politics, now very dysfunctional, so could welcome
Could make worse, can’t discount
Q&A
Robert Tulip: How can SG advocacy get into mass media?
OM: NYT op ed saw SG as evil plot against developing world, keep thinking debate will erupt but just doesn’t, imposes load on discussions, have to caveat statements that we can’t keep under 1.5 by recognising SG could enable this. What can be done? “Possible” like “we”, unexamined assumptions about world, cut emissions as fast as possible, what are constraints on possible – hard to introduce further source of caveats – cognitive parsimony – people try to exclude SG, but that not influential – frank bierman – something will crack but grin at articles about SG for general audience – claim is it increasingly discussed – not getting invites – are others talking about it? Think this will break down – can’t underestimate proclivity for screwing things up – – inadequate - less worried than before, superfreak pivot from no need to only need is SG, real
Ron Baiman – wait for more research or do field tests, not just rely on models, gradually scale up. Bad air serious, need cooling now, should pilot SAI right now.
OM – not 1000 flowers bloom, concern about strange non linear complexities, eg MCB, CDR fungible but SG synergies worrying, who are we? Have to construct a ‘we’ before you can use it, asilomar SG conference 2011, thermostat for earth difficult but hard to create hand, how to start, can’t mess in arctic as non state actor, can’t expect to be unproblematic to restore sea ice, large nation invested in ice free coast, legitimately and convincingly act without being countered, how to quickly construct we, necessary does not mean possible
RB: ISS analogy – Canada US say save the arctic, build trust, transparent for good, save poles, testing, don’t need global governance, Russia probably would not join, type of mechanism
OM – Russia could want it not to happen, beyond not taking part. Few live in Arctic, q why fixate? Don’t care about tropics? Most suffering is in tropics, more morally defensible but even more political problems, way forward needs governance development minilateral to multilateral, first uses likely to be unilateral ineffective based on non-climate intent, wars based on domestic conditions, we over estimate relevance of idealised SG pathway
Rocio Herbert – methane removal?
OM: have not followed debate closely – power law characteristic makes low hanging fruit, thermodynamic, sheer air mass to move is big, worried how to decouple from tropospheric chemistry aspects we want to preserve, not complete solution, good fit for prompt timing, amount of air processing big. Moral hazard less, can’t do whole job with methane, can get trade off forcing with SG, concern messing with hydroxyl balance from methane, politically easier but hard for adaptation to get round table, need compelling technological insight into how to remove ch4
Robert Chris – everything connected, can refreeze artic by cooling tropics. Main question meddling through state actors, globally significant SG needs state engagement, can’t be led by private sector, active SRM debate among priests preaching to choir, not percolating to politicians who will make key decisions, how can decision makers be brought into debate in constructive way?
OM – would have tried if had compelling answer. Moving Overton Window, body with biggest investment in SG is small group of researchers, not popular with peers, don’t want to be seen as advocates, without strong voice saying we should try with constituency politicians won’t be interested, cannot build political movement, difficult for env mindset to get head around SG, difference between opportunity and teachable moment, Hansen, significant warming from removal of sulphur from bunker fuel termination shock could take us back to Crutzen, tradeoff between stratospheric and tropospheric sulphur, could get into unfccc, would favour ten nations convening conference of parties for geoengineering protocol, not ten now willing to move
RC: proselytising should sit on hands until so severe desperate to act?
OM: no reason to think SG will be more welcome if people go quiet, see moral problem. Trotskyite waiting for contradictions in system is not moral or practical
Herb Simmens: – any leader open or strong advocate?
OM: – have not been looking – no statements suggest so. Could look in Canada, France, Singapore. Speculation.
Herb: HPAC Action discussion for impact
Rebecca Bishop – MCB compared to SAI – assessment on technical cloud dynamics logistics or social licence, trying to understand to get funding, focus groups with indigenous in depth small group, one activist opposed to SAI, Brian von Herzen from The Climate Foundation advocates MCB as first step due to appealing nature, spiritual and ecological saleability among all people.
OM – will be people whose world view does not accept. NZ discussion on de extinction, megafauna, level of interest not there. MCB has real promise. Some funding from silicon valley, no one has tried to put in operation, misting over GBR not what Salter and Latham proposed, more saleable than SAI, can be done in region and under specific authority, eg California for mist into redwood forests much more plausible than global SAI. Twomey Latham formulation, must have stratiform clouds for brighter and longer lift, cloud banks not over coral typically, classic situation, average RF at global scale need off Chile California Africa to find cloud banks, debate over global needs 5% surface and weather moving, active disturbance of weather systems implausible global plan, able to do in eez makes MCB something nations could experiment with.
RB – much more than meets eye, working actively with Stephen, recent Cambridge conference, Economist could do article.
OM: Danny Rosenfeld keen on these ideas, ocean aerosol, global effect needed, local non linearities less appealing, teleconnected regional Kate Rickie paper, change in one place, beyond seeing MCB as local response to aridification or coral.
Andrew Lockley – boiling frog debate has not moved on. Ideas refined rather than changed. Waiting for global governance ideal to arise, who will do it? Billionaire, coalition of small countries, Bangladesh, frog cooked
OM: frog analogy - campaign to get rid of metaphor, frogs are not stupid, will jump out of hot water, obvious metaphor even if frogs not willing to play ball. Coalition need existential threatened countries such as SIS to create moral licence to operate, need tech and capital, tacit approval from at least one great power. Can’t point to one. Better forgiveness than permission strategy needs tacit approval of large and threatened. More than just ignoring. Tier Three international contacts, see vetoing SC resolution, conflict risks, world full of strategic opacity, impression not want to find out. Geopolitical threats from SG very serious.
Clive Elsworth: Iron Salt Aerosol for methane and other things, worry SAI ozone depletion and more UV, most climate control in troposphere, oxidation, ocean dust fertilization increased phytoplankton, more whales in ice age, DMS, nucleation for CC, keen on tropospheric cooling to mimic nature. Version 2 used calcs from Salter on clouds for tiny particles to deplete methane and nucleate clouds and enhance troposphere – diffuse iron fertilization in ocean
OM London convention sets out OIF procedure, easier in eez of small island nation, find one who is willing. Many think constraints are pretty restrictive and experiment is difficult for materials and monitoring, need $ ten millions, find place to do
Jonathon Cole: Ordered book, delightful writing style, philosophy, figurative imagery, enjoyable, write another book. How to monetise activity, reward investment for cooling?
OM: GGR market mechanism, ability to quantify biomass growing, monetizing RF by selling as service hard, profit motive, example of making sunsets unfortunate, brings out some ideas, political risks depend on state action, could marketise CDR but SG really difficult, liability issues could be big hit, legal jurisdictional risk high, not likely or good idea.
Herb: terminology, accurate clear influential, some terms direct climate cooling rather than SRM, climate triad, well below 1 degree, climate restoration. Effective ways to communicate? Advice on how to get articles in media?
OM: don’t need new terminology, eg Wanzer climate intervention, nuclear debates show changing name doesn’t help. Restigmatises term. Geoengineering. Can waste money on consultants for branding, do not like direct climate cooling. Like triad – can have two of three in trilemma, have to have all three legs. Placing articles, not sure, tend not to want to do, have not worked as op ed editor, by going to editor, pitching, know as writer, how to get standing, from activist viewpoint, have to cultivate or piggyback connection, science adviser to cabinet easier than civilian.
Stephen Salter: ‘beast from the east’ (cold conditions in UK) – wind and currents are efficient at moving of temperature.
OM: can advect but taking forcing from 10% surface needs lot of change to weather patterns. Concerns more than SAI.
SS: how to sell – governments around gulf want sea surface temperature lower when hurricanes not as bad, after bad season would be supported, pay according to how well achieved.
OM: reproducing low hurricane season might make drought in sahel. Aerosol cooling in mid Atlantic from sulphates dampened hurricane season and caused drought, can’t disentangle effects. Memory from climatologists is problem.
SS: Norwegians nuclei in areas of low cloud benign to help stop drought.
OM: wish someone would build MCB kit to show how it would work. 14 years since met SS in Edinburgh no proof of concept, distressing
SS engineering nearly complete
From: healthy-clim...@googlegroups.com <healthy-clim...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of H simmens
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 8:42 AM
To: healthy-planet-...@googlegroups.com; Planetary Restoration <planetary-...@googlegroups.com>; Healthy Climate Alliance <healthy-clim...@googlegroups.com>; via NOAC Meetings <noac-m...@googlegroups.com>; geoengineering <geoengi...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [HCA-list] Zoom link HPAC meeting this Thursday, June 29 4:30 PM EDT Oliver Morton, the science journalist and author will be our guest
|
I am particularly excited to announce that Oliver Morton, the veteran British science journalist and author of several books, including an excellent book on geoengineering, will be our guest at the regular HPAC meeting this Thursday at 4:30 PM EDT 21:30 BST.
Oliver’s 2008 classic The Planet Remade is as fresh and provocative as ever.
|
In addition to discussion on the politics, ethics, science and technology of geoengineering we expect that Oliver, because of his long experience as an editor and journalist, will be able to provide us some useful ideas and direction for our advocacy work.
Those who have read or watched Oliver speak know that he is highly literate, highly knowledgeable and quite witty.
Please invite your friends and colleagues to this extra special HPAC meeting.
Herb
Herb Simmens
@herbsimmens
Author A Climate Vocabulary of the Future
“A Sciencepoem, an Inspiration, A prophecy, also hilarious. Dive in and see.”
Kim Stanley Robinson
Author The Ministry For the Future
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Healthy Climate Alliance" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to healthy-climate-al...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-climate-alliance/02AE46E2-A52D-4DD1-A8B8-2A2B5D81D167%40gmail.com.