Thanks for posting about this. I find this avenue of inquiry very interesting and hopeful. There is so much baked in “belief in science “ in the climate debate but precious little open inquiry and discussion of practical measures. Beggaring humanity into the dark ages seems where the “scientific consensus” on climate change is leading. Keep exploring and posting.
It was a great conference, with 400 brilliant people. I learned a lot and connected with key people, answering questions like, "How do fishery ministeries expect to measure the benefit of ocean fertilization for feeding fish and fisheries."
What could be missing in this beautiful melange? A meaningful goal, such as restoring safe CO2 levels for our children.
I heard zero conversations about that except when I brought it up. All of the sessions I visited were oriented towards how to ultimately create carbon credits that can be cashed in. The assumption, of course is that if someone came in with half the world's GDP, they could fund enough of the carbon offsets to restore the climate within 100 or 200 years.
We can restore safe CO2 levels by mid-century. Nature showed us how in 1992. But to get there we must decide it's important and then commit to doing it, no matter the political barriers. Those are the barriers that prevented the other 400 attendees from even discussing ocean fertilization at Nature's 1992 scale.
For readers who want to get involved in CO2 removal that is designed to restore safe CO2 levels by 2050, come join us at the Climate Restoration Summit at EarthX on April 24. There are only a few dozen of us explicitly working to achieve our goal--join us! Your presence will make an enormous difference to you and to the movement.
Quico, the missing key in your post is albedo. Where are the albedo people in this ecosystem? If we don’t restore albedo as the absolute first priority, nothing we do about carbon will work. Hansen has indicated that loss of albedo - the darkening of the planet - is causing about four times as much warming as GHGs. Albedo is the primary climate crisis.
Well I listened to 400 PhD oceanographers and biogeochemists presenting years’ worth of painstaking research findings and they made some good points, sure, so I thought I was convinced but then there was this one guy who spent 15 seconds writing a glib comment on Substack so on balance of reflection I’m probably better off going with what he said…
Thanks for posting about this. I find this avenue of inquiry very interesting and hopeful. There is so much baked in “belief in science “ in the climate debate but precious little open inquiry and discussion of practical measures. Beggaring humanity into the dark ages seems where the “scientific consensus” on climate change is leading. Keep exploring and posting.
It was a great conference, with 400 brilliant people. I learned a lot and connected with key people, answering questions like, "How do fishery ministeries expect to measure the benefit of ocean fertilization for feeding fish and fisheries."
What could be missing in this beautiful melange? A meaningful goal, such as restoring safe CO2 levels for our children.
I heard zero conversations about that except when I brought it up. All of the sessions I visited were oriented towards how to ultimately create carbon credits that can be cashed in. The assumption, of course is that if someone came in with half the world's GDP, they could fund enough of the carbon offsets to restore the climate within 100 or 200 years.
We can restore safe CO2 levels by mid-century. Nature showed us how in 1992. But to get there we must decide it's important and then commit to doing it, no matter the political barriers. Those are the barriers that prevented the other 400 attendees from even discussing ocean fertilization at Nature's 1992 scale.
For readers who want to get involved in CO2 removal that is designed to restore safe CO2 levels by 2050, come join us at the Climate Restoration Summit at EarthX on April 24. There are only a few dozen of us explicitly working to achieve our goal--join us! Your presence will make an enormous difference to you and to the movement.
Quico, the missing key in your post is albedo. Where are the albedo people in this ecosystem? If we don’t restore albedo as the absolute first priority, nothing we do about carbon will work. Hansen has indicated that loss of albedo - the darkening of the planet - is causing about four times as much warming as GHGs. Albedo is the primary climate crisis.
Well I listened to 400 PhD oceanographers and biogeochemists presenting years’ worth of painstaking research findings and they made some good points, sure, so I thought I was convinced but then there was this one guy who spent 15 seconds writing a glib comment on Substack so on balance of reflection I’m probably better off going with what he said…
Thanks Dr Ivermectin!