It was announced yesterday that the testbed has been delayed.
http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2011/Pages/spiceupdate.aspx
This decision was prompted by the stagegate panel, who recommended the delay which was supported, I would like to clarify, by the SPICE scientists and engineers. This is in order to undetaker an upstream stakeholder engagement exercise. Several people (mostly science journalists) have contacted me and expected me to be upset, dismayed or 'gutted', as one put it. I feel none of that - I've long realised that engagement is important and I am genuinely looking forward to having sensible, grown up conversations with people with strong opinions, most of whom resonate with my own personal framing.
Friday, 30 September 2011
Thursday, 22 September 2011
News on CO2 emissions
http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/C02%20Mondiaal_%20webdef_19sept.pdf
Please read this carefully...
Please read this carefully...
Friday, 9 September 2011
really amazing...
I'm not sure where the data come from (or how reliable they are), but this is incredibly thought provoking...
http://www.breathingearth.net/
http://www.breathingearth.net/
Wednesday, 31 August 2011
Sceptical realist
I think I've formalised my position on geoengineering...
I am skeptical realist: I know, unequivocally, that reducing carbon emissions is the right thing to do. I believe that CDR has the best long term outcome if we can’t do that, as it deals with the problem at source, but it’s not a free ride. There are some serious technical and ethical challenges there too. However, if we suddenly find ourselves in a period of rapid-onset climate instability the only way out is SRM. It’s the only thing we could do in a short timeframe to mitigate the effects of such an event. Given that, it has be on the table as an option to be investigated. That is all we are doing.
I am skeptical that geoengineering is the right option (I am pretty green at heart, really) but realistic enough to know that it may be required.
I want to make it clear that I have no vested interest in making SPICE work. I do not stand to profit from it and I will report any scientific findings honestly, transparently and without bias.
Sunday, 28 August 2011
Interesting ideas from the blogosphere....
I am in the midst of developing a 'sticky questions' brief for EPRSC. For that, I've been trawling the web for ideas/prompts and I'm heartened by the fact that there are some very good ideas, well-articulated, floating in the ether. Roger Pielke's is still my favourite I think - he appears to manage to have deep insights into a spectacularly broad range of subjects...
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/
With focus a bit more on the job in hand, as it were, are two orthogonal perspectives from 'futarists' of different flavours - Mark Lynas's (we're going to have to talk at some point about the 'hush-hush' barb in his blog - I guess soon that won't be a criticism soon)
http://www.marklynas.org/
and George Dvosrky's (although the title annoys me :) )
http://www.sentientdevelopments.com/2010/08/create-future-myth.html
Given that they are almost polar opposites in terms of their crystal ball reading, I suppose that instinctively I side with Dvosrky. Odd that, given what I am doing you could argue. I digress (meaninglessly) as I've not crystalised this feeling yet. If/when I do, I'll let you know...
The brief itself is in preparation for any media interest in SPICE over the next few weeks. It is not, I hasten to add, designed to subvert or spin, simply to prepare for the challenge and to fully develop a personal framing. I guess, given what I decided to call the blog, my internal conflict is apparent - although it is resolving itself through the strong assertion that you can see the importance of research into geoengineering without being an advocate of deployment...
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/
With focus a bit more on the job in hand, as it were, are two orthogonal perspectives from 'futarists' of different flavours - Mark Lynas's (we're going to have to talk at some point about the 'hush-hush' barb in his blog - I guess soon that won't be a criticism soon)
http://www.marklynas.org/
and George Dvosrky's (although the title annoys me :) )
http://www.sentientdevelopments.com/2010/08/create-future-myth.html
Given that they are almost polar opposites in terms of their crystal ball reading, I suppose that instinctively I side with Dvosrky. Odd that, given what I am doing you could argue. I digress (meaninglessly) as I've not crystalised this feeling yet. If/when I do, I'll let you know...
The brief itself is in preparation for any media interest in SPICE over the next few weeks. It is not, I hasten to add, designed to subvert or spin, simply to prepare for the challenge and to fully develop a personal framing. I guess, given what I decided to call the blog, my internal conflict is apparent - although it is resolving itself through the strong assertion that you can see the importance of research into geoengineering without being an advocate of deployment...
Tuesday, 26 July 2011
A period of reflection
I've been doing a lot of thinking about geoengineering, not all of it completely coherent, over the last month. Some of this was prompted by an interesting article published in GRL, looking at the impacts of tropical volcanism on climate...
Vernier, J.-P., et al. (2011), Major influence of tropical volcanic eruptions on the stratospheric aerosol layer during the last decade, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L12807, doi:10.1029/2011GL047563.
This is exceptionally relevant for SPICE, particularly the modellers, as it is an observation of the aerosols being transported by Brewer-Dobson circulation. The bottom line of the article is that the recent increase in stratospheric aerosol loadings, otherwise postulated to be sourced from industry in SE Asia, is in at least part in due to the eruptions of Soufriere Hills, Manan and Reventador.
Global events too play on my mind. Events in Norway strongly underscore the fact that extremism, in any form, is abhorrent.
Vernier, J.-P., et al. (2011), Major influence of tropical volcanic eruptions on the stratospheric aerosol layer during the last decade, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L12807, doi:10.1029/2011GL047563.
This is exceptionally relevant for SPICE, particularly the modellers, as it is an observation of the aerosols being transported by Brewer-Dobson circulation. The bottom line of the article is that the recent increase in stratospheric aerosol loadings, otherwise postulated to be sourced from industry in SE Asia, is in at least part in due to the eruptions of Soufriere Hills, Manan and Reventador.
Global events too play on my mind. Events in Norway strongly underscore the fact that extremism, in any form, is abhorrent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
