| (Click on a 'Start Time' to view the video) |
| 00:28 | foreign how you doing hello getting dark darker now these days but very pleasant with otherwise still nice and warm yeah the um the consensus document is in the Euro which you sent out so you may want to bring that up for the end of the session okay hi Chris hi hope you had a good break uh yes busy but um come back to us blizzard of emails I bet good evening John hello hello uh Doug was hanging around waiting for you last week but I bet you've caught up with him by now no I haven't I've been away so oh you've |
| 01:25 | been away I haven't brought up with him I haven't answered a single email in the last three days okay sometimes it's a nice break yeah yeah just letting you uh suffer a bit when you get back to catch up yeah that is a problem right uh just see if I can go here we are so there it is okay yep good evening Brew good evening all good evening and uh yeah and we have Brian right let's uh well I could bring up the uh the usual screen oh just eight o'clock now yeah yep well it's yeah if it's eight o'clock |
| 02:15 | it's eight o'clock okay um I mean you know it goes through my mind people keep turning up to these meetings and all I do is send out invitations so and I think um people keep me on topic um if there's any comments about anything that could make them better I'm open to those if there are if there are otherwise I'll just keep going the same way all right so right so there we go agenda and I know France wants to France how can I hi all hi friends yes so you that you've told me you want to put something you want to talk about |
| 03:05 | something it's a little bit more information about you know concern so this is what we're here for we don't agree on everything yeah right so France um UV loss this wasn't what you wanted to hear I know John oh yeah we've had this before yeah okay so there's a little bit more to say about it yes sir good excellent uh um right so uh affecting uh chemistry or oxidation yeah oxidative chemistry I was going to say capacity yeah I think Yay Taylor had something to say on a similar subject yeah there's been a few emails low low |
| 04:05 | level work SRM being better that's that's what friends are saying as well uh I kind of I'm not not a proper scientist so I I kind of waft around with what other people are saying um I mean I do see it anyway so uh I see that the value of essay I became very clear to me last time with what Brian was saying good good evening well good morning Brian because you've got your note taker there um um but um but but you know we've got this particular drawback as well so the whole thing has to be weighed up |
| 04:45 | um okay uh and good evening oh well I suppose afternoon Grant and uh and hi John hi there and Roberts uh okay anything else anyone else what else do we want to talk about today Club I don't know whether they've got uh we haven't got uh Robert Chris on the phone on the call have we but uh there was an excellent letter he wrote a few weeks ago to his local member Greg Clark at the instant to discuss that again as a sort of a pro former of how to introduce the subject to politicians um I know John listen you've been |
| 05:24 | encouraging us all to write to our politicians but if uh if there was a sort of a methodology here that we could sort of adopt and we could all sort of spread the message I think we need to get the message of calling out there and uh if Robert if Robert Chris was happy I think that would be that was an excellent program on that right so we can so I'll put that down for you because I don't know if uh Robert Chris is going to be here no um template for reaching out should I say yes simple for outreach yeah foreign |
| 06:34 | classic Civil Service approach yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah exactly yes oh I'll make sure someone gets back to you means you're never going to hear from anybody ever again that's what I heard from Ed milliband on on carbon pricing some some time ago so yeah they just want to wear you out um anyway but uh I think that they we can say more about that when when the time comes and what what else do what hi um Dermot as well hi what anything else to talk about today um just a question since I haven't been |
| 07:15 | on the last couple of meetings um did you discuss the most recent one I don't know if it came out at the time those two different letters from scientists saying we needed to research SRM I didn't I mean there's so much going out uh two sort of calls from 60 and 70 scientists respectively sort of international climate scientists saying that we basically must research SRM at least that was something right I just wonder whether you'd already covered it no we haven't all right so let's talk about that then |
| 07:51 | scientists uh research yeah that's good to know then we've got the consensus stuff if you want to have another crack at a few of those yeah consensus actually there's something um something I would like to ask uh since it's not uh Chris now that you're here um I hope you don't mind um about um so people love the idea of whale poo we haven't heard much about it recently but um thinking about cruise ships uh there's a lot of people producing a lot a lot of waste um which I believe gets dumped or or incinerated or |
| 08:46 | something so I would just wonder about um so we have an idea so let's put that in there and climb question about it and I don't know you might know more about shipways you mean yeah ship generated West yeah about generated waste okay maybe that's enough anything else at all I'm interested in the relationship between iron sold aerosol and stratospheric sorry and uh solar radiation management um whether the agenda is too full to to include that I'm not sure uh yes yes I will tell I'll try to find out |
| 09:36 | something about that well you we know that uh Einstein aerosol was would make clouds friends what's one thing that's been talked of a lot in fact you know that that time I heard from stratospheric okay is that what you mean uh Robert Trump's record just the broad relationship between uh iron sold aerosol and uh solar radiation management right yeah so or Albedo effects of iron sold aerosol yeah ah so are you just talk you're just talking as stratospheric then when I said stratospheric I meant Albedo |
| 10:18 | effects of iron sold aerosol ah okay so you're talking of tropospheric as well yes aerosol hi Rocio welcome hi hi Rocio and you can put up something for the agenda if you want um covered it um let's see um let's see yeah what I I thought Robert Chris was going to be talking about geoengineering and the um but I don't see that on the agenda so I'm interested in listening to what France put up about the UV laws for us for uh how it affects uh Isa what we're doing yeah um yeah uh that's right so maybe we'll |
| 11:17 | put this template for us because these little things go together don't they um let's put that sorry Joe I'm not demoting you just bunching things together and um uh now if I scroll along to the next page um welcome to other familiar faces but also Luke Eisman has joined us this evening I invited Luke uh welcome to this noaca meeting Luke good to see you there thanks Clive I'm excited to be here great yeah you're welcome um so you don't need much of an introduction would you like to very very |
| 11:51 | briefly just we we ask people to very briefly make a very brief introduction for anybody that doesn't know you sure uh I have what I strongly believe is the first uh stratospheric aerosol injection commercial effort uh PLM plus sulfur dioxide I believe that just as we don't use ambiguity about the exact scope of warming per unit of CO2 released we can't use the uncertainty about exact amount of warming as an excuse to delay action on carbon dioxide emissions and we cannot use uncertainty about the exact amount of cooling from |
| 12:34 | sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere as an excuse to delay injecting now to save lives and species okay okay thank you very much you're the man behind the uh the make sunsets uh furore that's correct which we discussed a fortnight ago um and uh so uh there you are thanks for joining us and uh Sean Fitzgerald hi Sean I wasn't sure if we were going to see you again but it's great to see you see you too Sean is from the center for climate climate repair at Cambridge okay anything else for anyone else to go |
| 13:12 | on the agenda I think we've got quite a lot here okay France would you start off then please okay I found this paper from medronit and others about the UV refractive index reduction by this um s i s a i a method by by esophage injection into the the stratosphere and this paper says that the UV index it goes down about 22 percent and |
| 14:16 | the Shockwave DNA damaging UV goes down to about 29 percent that is the same effect as we see when sun sunset it Dawns and sunsets some we see a red always Red Sun that means a short wave as everyone can see is has a stronger refractive index than visibility of the UV has this right so UV has a shorter uh it's got a smaller sort of bigger refractive index it's more affected by yeah much bigger refractive index therefore |
| 15:22 | if you have only a slightly large visibilized you'll get a lot larger a minus for UV right right yeah and so and what's the effects of this so yeah 29 loss of UV in the troposphere yeah the uh oxidation chemistry in the atmosphere is driven by these oxidants or age radicals and chlorine radicals or chlorine atoms and these are produced mainly by UV effective activation right what are about terrestrial hydroxyls too right hydroxyl generation and UV and ozone and and tropospheric |
| 16:27 | ozone yes and the H2 H2O2 for the foot age depletion yeah which is done by UB that means that if these oxidants are in a similar way reduce we get a enormous lifetime increase for methane depression because methane is depleted by oh or CL uh atoms yeah and uh because we want to use this myth and depletion method by uh aerosol like like it it's done by Nature yeah |
| 17:29 | we can also uh will also see and efficiently efficiency reduction of say 25 percent that's uh a big problem and uh okay what what we make in in the stratosphere in in cooling the climate we we do the opposite in the troposphere a buyer increasing the lifetime of methane SII will be to increase the methane concentration in the air yes surely yeah yeah and not just me saying it's all the oxidable I know you've got your hand up David I'll come to you the the oxidable super pollute um so black carbon aerosol is also a |
| 18:32 | strong warming agent and and others so David you've got your hand up David yeah well I was going to make that point that nox destruction of nox and such I mean the biggest uh Triumph of the queen air movement was the destruct Was the removal of nox and such uh reduction in the emissions but The Fugitive emissions and the natural emissions are also mediated by the their destruction the same kind of Destruction that France was talking about now we do have an interesting I don't know if we can on unpick the ball of the ball of Beyond |
| 19:09 | but um the reduction of particulate emissions caused an increase in UV I think unfortunately that might have been coincident with the reduction of nox otherwise it'd be very interesting they would basically give us a natural experiment to look at the phenomenon that Franz is talking about um there's a second point that was raised by yitau which I think is very important which is the genetic effect on plants of doing this for long periods of time um so if you haven't read that note it's it's worth reading I think |
| 19:43 | um before we talk about it and sorry I have to get my dog yeah okay thank you very much David thanks for pointing that out um Chris yeah um I just wonder don't we need to distinguish stratospheric and tropospheric here because Sai as I understand it is almost all going to happen in the stratosphere which is what friends has been talking about but it also hasn't been suggested doing um answer aerosol in the troposphere which is where you're not going to do Sai and so presumably there must be some different issues there |
| 20:17 | um and the other point I would make as opposed to what Seb said up uh this will not increase UV of itself what it does do is reduce the rate of Destruction which means the increasing amount of methane coming in will be less destructed so the actual process doesn't increase methane by itself it's just it decreases the destruction rate which is not the same thing yeah the net result is what I was getting at it yeah okay yeah that's right I think that's what people meant um but yeah no problem to clarify that |
| 20:50 | okay David did you have something else you wanted to add it's gone it's gone he's back I just I just forgotten to lower the hand yeah okay okay so anything else for anyone to say uh um about that then yeah um yes the the methane lifetime is mostly just decided by hydroxyl level in the tropics uh so if you're injecting uh SO2 into the stratosphere 50 degrees north or 60 degrees north or or even further north um the the Brew of Dobson circulation takes your SO2 towards the pole uh and so the it's it'll have negligible |
| 21:48 | effect on the uh uh on on the methane lifetime right so you're saying that most oh radicals are formed in the in the tropics the majority of me saying uh destruction is done by the methyl aharic oxide in the tropics where the uh where the the sunlight is very strong okay and uh John I have to say that your word will is very is doing a lot of work in your sentence okay I think you should say may uh is this if it drifts to the poles it may have uh less effect on methane destruction um but we actually okay quantities of |
| 22:39 | the I'm I I'm pretty confident on my statement uh of course there will be uh some reduction on the way the question is how significant uh is it that you've sort of reduce the amount of oh radical mid-latitude for example uh on the missing instruction you see the the level is in in the summertime the the polar regions get more insulation than the tropics because it goes 24 hours 24 hours a day uh yeah but it's it's quite there is relatively low in the sky and that may be a crucial thing although the the insulation is longer |
| 23:33 | and therefore and and it's over a longer it's over the total 24 hours um so the average gets quite High in fact Stephen says it can get higher than that the the the average for a day at the greater um it's going through quite a lot of atmosphere yeah and as as Brian was saying at the recent meeting we are the atmosphere is quite a thick a thick layer um so the for example the the amount of sunlight that's absorbed by the air the dispersed by the air uh between the Stratosphere getting to the lower |
| 24:24 | troposphere is quite a lot and so SRM and the troposphere tends to be quite a lot less effective than the equivalent amount of protection going on in the stratosphere um but bro I'm not sure Brian is present in person to kind of okay defend that but she pointed out us to a paper on the subject which I haven't read but I need to read about um is because I'd imagine the atmosphere was quite a thin a similar and the Sunshine went through pretty pretty much um the mouse is depleted in the troposphere because it's much denser |
| 25:17 | yeah if you if you have a reduction of UV and the troposphere you will have a the most effect in the JavaScript it's logic yeah John are you still advocating uh Sai just above 60 degrees north oh yeah well the first the most important priority as far as saving the planet is is to uh is to save the Arctic from meltdowns uh cooling it so at least the temperature stops rising in the Arctic yeah um the the quickest and most uh obvious way is is is uh injection of stratospheric uh into the stratosphere with SO2 |
| 26:21 | uh at highlight High latitude and a paper by various authors including Doug Mac Martin who with whom I've been corresponding about this I've been trying to check for these thought of everything and everything and I've asked him he's come back with a with a pretty positive answer so I'm I'm I I mean I'll I'll put these questions about um methane lifetime to him and say have you thought about this and have you got any quantitative estimates how much how much you could uh yeah I'll do that |
| 27:09 | as an action great it's it's uh it's methane black carbon aerosol uh tropospheric ozone and the chloromethanes these are the things can I just make a note of this yeah so it's me saying uh methane black carbon aerosol um and the tropospheric ozone a lot of that where there's pollution yes no ex pollution um and uh then and um the chloromethanes which are all over they come they come from plants anyway in phytoplankton so halogen methane since it's mainly chloramine things yes I must have missed |
| 27:56 | awesome out good evening Peter yes we're well into it all this I think my what my watch has gone or that my watch has stopped I was a I'm a bit late not to worry we've got we've got an agenda and so you'll get the recording Peter so um so I might just put you on mute Peter because I think we've got some music some knit radio in the background or something but come back when you need to um yep uh Chris and just a couple of things I think um the fact that the Arctic might have very high insulation in summer is not of |
| 28:37 | itself the issue it's the annual overall effect uh in the in the polar regions compared to the tropics and I imagine because the tropics are getting it 100 at the time then I presume the tropics are more significant uh despite the what the uh polar regions get in their Summers um the other point I I'd like to make is the fact that uh einstall aerosol might be negative affected by Sai is not an necessarily uh a uh decisive argument to rule out use of Sai it all depends on the relative effectiveness of these |
| 29:10 | methods what is the target is if you want to refreezing the Arctic for example it's your target um and so there's a whole load of factors that still might persuade people that Sao is actually better even allowing for the effect on destruction and methane it might be the other way around as well I don't know I'm just saying you can't rule one out on a simple basis at all it requires a lot more work to decide on what would be the optimum approach to take and also it might vary latitudinally as John has |
| 29:38 | said yeah uh yeah I I was very taken by surprise by these figures of of 22 reduction and damage 29 because I thought that the reduction in the uh uh UV was only going to be uh one or two percent um because Stephen salsa says you only need to reflect one or two percent of the insulation and and you've done you've produced a lot of cooling this is uh well this is from madrenic who's actually Pro stratospheric Coastal injection yes and saying that it's very good that there's a loss of UV imaginished m-a-d |
| 30:28 | -r-o-n -i-ch I I send it no yeah I haven't seen my emails for four days so he's saying it's the refractive index the big refractive index that of UV that affects UV more than other wavelengths that's what he's saying so you get dispersion because of the refractive index yeah you tend to get rare yeah this version of the thing and uh that's right I I wanted to uh just say quickly um I don't know if Brian's there Brian said last time or the time before um maybe it's not a problem because |
| 31:08 | um the photo catalytic cycle um so some of this is might not be relevant because it just happens with oh radicals anyway but if if it is a photo photo catalog cycle one of the things that we that we are um promoting uh iron sold aerosol and other and Things We Should we've got more five sensors sensitive now if it's if it's that Brian was saying don't worry about it because the uh maybe that's the short part of the cycle you know the the the the hitting of the photon and this kicking off of an atom |
| 31:42 | or a radical is a short part of the cycle and and the other parts of the cycle take much longer um but um we thought well I I thought about it I realized um a chemist would say that this is which would think of it if you can think of it from the law of mass action that you have reservoirs so uh so when you have a lot of light you have a lot of these radicals or atoms moving into a different you know they're coming off the particle or in a different state they're being they're sitting there as as oxidants and if they're not going |
| 32:19 | anywhere and you get more of them um so you have to think of it like that so actually it's uh that's that's not it's not that something else is the limiting fact the limiting factor is humidity and just getting rained out these are limiting factors of iron soil aerosol it's very humid it loses acidity has stopped working and if we get around obviously it can't work anymore but the the whole thing is driven by by Sunshine so clearly there's a whole lot more to uh to be researched which is our next |
| 32:53 | item or one of the next items Luke I'd like to pick up on uh Chris's point about the importance of um field tests uh just but um uh from what Luke was saying we really don't know what the balance of effects will be between stratospheric aerosol injection and uh and iron salt aerosol and the overall system complexity is such that uh we really need to uh to test and measure the effects of uh of various uh Technologies uh uh hopefully like starting at as smaller scale as possible and and gradually scaling up now uh that seems |
| 33:47 | to me to be the the only way to answer um Francis uh challenge that that SII would have uh negative ozone effects but all of these effects need they all go into the mix and and this raises the point that I wanted to raise about the relationship between iron sold aerosol and um Albedo enhancement which is that I've seen just uh quite a lot of um commentary recently so notably the uh the MIT technology review article on iron salt aerosol and Peter pikovsky's book on climate restoration and I think and also the uh the work of |
| 34:38 | methane action which which essentially downplay the Albedo effect of of iron salt aerosol and uh so it it's something that that I uh think is is contrary to this sort of experimental principle which is that we really need to do the field tests and use the field tests in a very open way decide well what are the climate effects and you know it could be for example but the um dimethyl sulfide effect of of iron salt aerosol to Brighton Marine clouds has just I don't know it has just as big a cooling effect as uh as its methane |
| 35:25 | removal effect now uh you know we can sort of speculate light about what these effects will be but the planetary system is so complex but that we can't really know and it's I I just think you know let's start off with uh testing on a small scale and and be open-minded about what the benefits will be and also I'd just like to to just challenge people who are saying like the Amit article was was just a really bad example of it saying that many people regard the Marine Cloud brightening effect of iron |
| 36:02 | sold aerosol as a negative uh simply because they hate geoengineering so much and you know that's a really illogical point of view because you know if we can if something has a cooling effect then that's great and it should be welcomed so yeah that just those comments yeah thank you yeah absolutely thank you Robert uh Luke please huh Luke yeah um question on the science I if I understand correctly and I probably don't but my understanding of why the ozone depletion effect of Sai specifically with sulfur dioxide was |
| 36:42 | such a problem is the increasing UV and if this is if SII is also going to decrease UV wouldn't that when that offset one of the best arguments against it and then secondly just to uh expand on the last point if there are experiments that can be done for high five to low six figures please propose them to me and I will either fly them or try to figure out how to help others fly them yep there is that to think of because that's another thing you say isn't it France that uh any solid uh in the stratosphere acts as a catalyst to |
| 37:26 | deplete ozone to actually remove ozone yes and uh I'm sure the many um planes which transports the so to to the stratosphere will make a lot of a lot of suit and particles up there black carbon aerosol yeah yeah well one of the effects of climate change is the stratosphere is Cooling uh so that would I guess warm up part of the stratosphere anyway so it's all so complicated um that yeah I think Robert's right that these experiments need to be done um as I would also say that we had a lot of problem just explaining iron salt aerosol to |
| 38:14 | anybody um because as soon as you start talking about more than one effect people's eyes glaze over you know and so we came up with a policy you might remember I don't know if you were there at the time Robert Renault said just talk about one thing methane you know removal from the atmosphere and and that's when methane action people because that's when they were formed they became interested Peter farkowski's group uh they they started listening and saying hey this really is something and |
| 38:46 | every time I mentioned oh it makes clouds as well it removes black soot around as a climb shut up stop talking about that other stuff because people can't cope with all these different things they want to have a policy if this is what we're going to do but I think they're coming round to it now I mean obviously they are they realize they have to have to look at this yeah my mom my I take completely the opposite view uh the main thing we have to do is to repress the Arctic uh and and if we replace the Arctic we |
| 39:19 | can suppress the methane coming out of the permapross which is one of the main threats to the future or future on the planet if if there was a sudden burst or meeting from the permafrost which could happen if there was a big earthquake or a tsunami or something unaffected all that undersea uh part of a frost stability you've got these methane High Gates or clathrates uh which Under Pressure if you if you accidentally release that pressure for a moment you get an explosive situation and this has been observed on sea floors |
| 40:02 | so off offset of New Zealand they're a huge huge pot pot marks on the seabed where they've been explosions and we get them on land as well in Siberia perhaps triggered by meteors or some something like that and then you get up yeah we have an explosion and so on so so the meat so uh cooling the Arctic is the best way of dealing with the yeah I don't think there's any argument in this group about that um John yes um so so trying to take the methane out of the atmosphere after you've put it in |
| 40:43 | is it much that wasn't their policy it's just that people when they're beginning to learn what's possible John that our problem wasn't that they didn't you know didn't agree with the policy so they didn't have a policy and they didn't know what was possible things that yeah well okay that's the one we chose um but the good news is uh there's a lot more people talking about uh cooling now Albedo enhancements yeah um and that's because what we need to be talking about and calling The Artsy I |
| 41:15 | don't think uh you know refreezing the Arctic I don't think anyone in this group here disagrees with that um uh David did you David yes you've still you got your hand up yes David please yeah uh well I got three things uh two things uh on the uh Marine Cloud brightening from uh Isa release we have some experiments designed that we hope to do uh in in the smog chamber in the next few months and uh actually in the atmosphere possibly into nine to ten months very tiny tropospheric experiments not okay |
| 41:58 | yeah but grams of grams of release right but very the the point the point is we're very concerned about actual um brightening from water droplets both because it will uh reflect a UV that we need to drive the reaction in the first place but also to your point Clive um in my experience when you say well this product is both a dessert topping and a floor wax um that that actually doesn't cause people to shut down but frightens them okay and my time as a pharmaceutical developer we were very at Great pains to |
| 42:34 | find ways to circumscribe the behavior of the drug because uh people were terrified uh the FDA wasn't terrified but you just had them yeah analyze it right but uh the general public is often terrified uh when a drug has more than one effect you know um so it's not that they shut down but they actually think what the you know is this a Sorcerer's Apprentice problem right uh you know it's very exciting when you're developing something as an engineer a scientist and it does three or four things but that can work against you on |
| 43:10 | the terms of social license finally as an MIT person myself uh please do not call that article in MIT article okay my only connection between that magazine and MIT is that they pay the Alumni Association for the name okay and there if you if you get if you get the media kit their competition is large magazine that's how they see their that's that's how they see themselves all right so when you call it an MIT article every time I cringe um because it has nothing at all to do with MIT except it's paid for it okay thank you David I |
| 43:50 | would not have known that I'm sure probably most of us here would not have known that thank you for that we'll try and remember that um okay uh next and anything else uh good evening Stephen good evening you've missed the best part what's the recording yes okay okay well we've still got uh let's see so UV loss from stratospheric aerosol injection affecting Tropics so we've done that so anything and and so we've kind of started to talk about this was there anything else you wanted to say about |
| 44:23 | that Robert no there's not uh right okay so and Luke has just said if there are some experiments that we'd like carried out I think there's a whole bunch of experiments we want we would like to have carried out we can see a whole load of things that need to be done and Luke has said uh he's he'll make it happen uh you know he'll be part of making that happen and reaching out and with his contacts and so just a question can I just weigh in on that sorry sorry Chris sorry I was just going |
| 45:02 | to say um the Assumption of your sort of conclusion on that they all they're all field experiments I don't think they necessarily have to be in all cases it is possible as uh David was saying earlier to do things in the lab as well depending on what the issue is and how you're going to tackle it uh okay if I gave that impression I didn't mean to Chris I quite agree there's a lot you can do in the lab before we we um go into this well actually the best thing is when you have a lab set up and then |
| 45:28 | you can find core um I would think it was individual but atmospheric correlation then you can you can iterate much faster than in the lab um yeah you can go way out of bounds in the lab um because you're you know it's a controlled environment and that will actually guide your your actual atmospheric work if you think that starting in the atmosphere is good then well you don't have a grasp of science if you ask me yeah yeah I think it's also important for um Luke to uh to recognize some of the criticism of making sunsets like I think |
| 46:09 | especially the the Time magazine article was was quite critical and uh it's somebody like Chris Vivian uh whose work on uh the gazam project uh you know setting out uh what are the uh what are the guidelines for for field research I just think is extremely important for uh for credibility and uh for for achieving sound results so yeah I think you know it's nice to have uh Luke here with us but um yeah there's there's a lot that making sunsets needs to do in terms of uh research uh methodologies |
| 46:50 | um and uh yeah so do you want to come back on that Luke yeah I mean I'm not going to solve all problems before I start working towards some solutions and I'm certainly not claiming to be a climate scientist or furthering the state of the art on science my contention is that we know enough about sulfur dioxide to be putting it up to 0. |
| 47:16 | 5 C of cooling into the stratosphere many will disagree with me they should run their own experiments and or start their own companies um yeah my job's not to make everybody happy and I certainly won't I do hope that you all and anyone else interested in helping one will consider being technical advisors if if it's a fit and two will you know make sure that we are telling the truth and that what we present is the state of the art and the science is accurate and if we make a mistake there I'll be I'll be very quick |
| 47:43 | to correct it thank you okay anyone like to come back on on anything at all this is a place where you can have a civilized proper conversation and not just you know um having a go at somebody um just by writing so yeah yeah I could just um reinforce uh Luke's optimism if you call it optimism yeah the paper by which I mentioned by Doug McMartin and and others uh about some subpolar injection and stratospheric injection into this Stratosphere um he's suggested he could produce two degrees uh Cooling and that and she also reckon |
| 48:39 | that that's enough to repreeze the Arctic and the man you put to cost in as well I think it was 11. billion dollars per year and if that you'd have to do it for uh several probably several decades keep it up right this is Doug McMartin subpolar so um I could put a link in if anybody's interested right so that's kind of not really what you're advocating you're saying do it above 60 degrees sort of in the polar region um well I'm confirming that you can produce some cooling yeah Luke is is very confident that he can |
| 49:24 | produce including and I'm just confirming that uh in in particular for the uh cooling uh High latitude you can produce that effect yeah okay I I don't think this uh okay uh don't think anybody disagrees that there'd be some cooling it's the it's the effect isn't it it's possible side effects and as I said I've been uh thinking of all the possible side effects and as people come up with objections I pass them on to Doug and say you know have you thought of this subject that falls out and how much |
| 50:00 | effect would that happen right that'd be helpful John to hear back from Doug Martin about the Tropic oxidative capacity I've been emailing uh David Keith and getting nothing back so that'd be very helpful we want to know where we are with this uh okay thank you thank you just to say um Sean Fitzgerald has commented in the chat that um field experiments uh should be done in light of the contents of the recent open letters so we can uh probably come on to that when we get to that point on the agenda well you know uh I'm not sure |
| 50:36 | there isn't that this is it this is what we're on now yes this open letter so links to those letters are in the chat as Sean's put them there and uh the letter two one is the one that's been signed by James Hansen amongst many others so uh letter two and that's so is Sean uh is Sean's still there uh let's so letter two is uh the one that says call for balance call for balance right thank you um so Sean I don't want to pick on you is there anything else you'd like you'd like to anything you'd like to put in |
| 51:11 | here at this point oh I mean other than I think they've been you know the authors of these have obviously reflected long and hard and I would I would guess that actually they've thought long and hard since that letter open letter by Biermann at our town who was basically calling for a ban on any experiments outdoors and also a ban on frankly government-funded research uh in this broad area um and uh I mean I I myself thought well how best to respond um and took the view that perhaps in the near term when it was published to |
| 51:56 | actually just see where let the dove settle and see where things developed well I think I think things have developed I think there's a lot more discussion and openness of inquiry of thought about this particular topic um and I think these left I personally think these letters are well crafted I mean I I have therefore put my name to them as an individual uh to be a co-signatory and I would just urge everyone to uh to look at it um for you know for for this in terms of just how this work might be done um so I mean I think really it's a case |
| 52:34 | of my nervousness is in this whole area we don't want to go one step forward and five steps back uh as a result of then losing the uh the broad support which I actually think is possible but it's navigating that path as to how quickly we can move it um there are many areas in science where you know we have actually not progressed as quickly as we would have liked because people have gone too aggressively at one particular point I mean clearly you can never know the counterfactuals you don't really know uh |
| 53:06 | therefore that's a there's a hypothesis uh but anyway I just think those letters are worth reading if you haven't seen them um and I actually think it helps uh whether you want to reject them or not but I think it helps them form one's thinking regarding what an approach for for good researches thank you very much I haven't read them I will uh okay anyone else on this uh yeah look uh the the first letter um uh makes a bit of a swipe that makes sunsets by uh uh it it says uh the state of scientific knowledge about SRM is |
| 53:45 | currently insufficient for it to be included as part of a climate credit system or other commercial offering as some have started to propose so uh that's that's something that's uh well I mean I I basically agree with Luke on on this point that it's it's good to learn by doing and you know to start off with um developing uh systems that uh that seem to make sense rather than uh saying it can't be done so that was the only complaint I had about that letter on the Sean sorry that yeah the you that was your |
| 54:30 | complaint was that it's uh the the letter uh criticized Luke that by saying Yeah well yeah it was saying that the the state of knowledge is too early for uh for a uh calling credit uh system and uh I I I just didn't like that form form of words I thought that it it should have been more positive about um the uh the value of uh radiative forcing credits as uh as a better way of managing measuring the climate impacts of of any intervention yeah okay I have to say rather agree with that thank you Robert uh uh who says Sean |
| 55:16 | yeah so I'm going to respond to what Luke's put in the chat um you know he'd be super excited excited to see an open letter calling for deployment already csai um and I think you know a I think that's very unlikely that you're going to get a group of scientists uh that would agree to that and I fundamentally disagree with it I absolutely think that's the wrong the wrong thing to be doing right now the bigger question that I have is that if you're going to do outdoor experiments then actually how what's the what's the |
| 55:52 | growth stage of those how big do they need to be to be able to actually establish um you know what the what the effect might be and you might then get to well gosh unless you do something at scale to 0.5 degrees Centigrade as a trial as an experiment to establish your knowledge I actually just think there's a different way of framing this Luke and I am absolutely opposed to uh saying this is going to be wide scale deployment right now but I do think we need to further uh knowledge I don't know what the right |
| 56:20 | scale is and but it isn't going to be just pouring little teacups um of of things you know forever and a day we've got to be able to go and build a scientific program where we're going to be able to effectively try and measure some some sort of impact to assess something at some scale and I do think these are Big questions that should be posed but I don't agree with the framing uh that you're suggesting at the moment sorry thank you Sean uh Luke um yeah I guess it's not it's not only up to us right like give |
| 56:57 | it a couple wet bulb events you know like depicted at the start of Ministry of the future and then you know we'll see really quickly deployment at scale without anybody on this call having any say into it to me this isn't a matter of whether we do this it's a matter of when and I think by starting now we can learn one and two you know yeah my balloons are small now but a kilogram of sulfur dioxide is it ain't nothing that's a that's a thousand ton years of carbon equivalent offset okay so you're saying it's going |
| 57:32 | to happen sometime anyway okay uh so there's no question if it's a question of when okay thank you Luke thank you sorry but that's the reason why I think urgent research is needed because I do think it's it's likely that somebody will intervene but I'd rather have I'd rather equip them with the knowledge so they know which levers to pull and which leave us not to pull if they're going to pull any lever at all so I actually I'm you know I am just the strongest proponent of research in this |
| 57:59 | area uh you know I massively but we need to get the framing and we need to get the the the the conduct of this uh correct yeah so I have to say I agree that I think we all want expert researchers to do the research properly funded to do this work uh I think everyone agrees with that I think Luke is nodding his head agreeing with that um uh and Luke has shaken it up and uh made it a political thing focused politics sorry sorry Luke is proposing we get on the deployment right now deployment right now and that is my Freight Clive is okay |
| 58:38 | beyond what I am suggesting okay okay all right thank you for clarifying that I think John Nissen isn't isn't so sorry Chris you're next yeah Chris yeah um yeah I'd very much agree with everything that Sean said I think he's absolutely right and also I'm fundamentally opposed to getting any credits for research stage work I think it's uh completely inappropriate and it may uh bias the actual work that's done uh which is why in the London protocol Amendment um for ocean fertilization uh getting |
| 59:10 | actually anything like that is actually banned um that doesn't prevent people providing services in order to allow some experiment to happen but you don't you can't get calm credits or anything like that from the experiment stage and that's something I would strongly uh support at the early research stages when you get up to Pilot or even sort of demonstration it may be slightly different but certainly at early research stages I think it's fundamentally wrong to get carbon credits because I think it's very |
| 59:40 | dangerous and potentially biases of the work thank you thank you thank you and John listen uh yes um I'm supporting Luke I think um I think I think well what we what we need to do is to decide what is the priority for the for the future of our planet and the people on it what is the priority where is the greatest risk and the greatest risk I see is in the Tipping points in the Arctic are there some tipping points elsewhere of concern but the most immediate ones are in the Arctic and they pose a huge risk not because |
| 1:00:26 | they're going to happen immediately right but they just might yeah so we're that close risk risk equals you know probability times impact well okay the impact so John you're saying go ahead without doing any further research no no what I'm saying is that you can start preparing for large-scale deployment now you can get all the planes lined up and the SO2 uh ready and in the meantime you can do say two two years intensive research on uh what the impacts might be how you optimize your okay employment and so on |
| 1:01:09 | so that when you do start doing something at scale you've got all the modeling to make sure to check do it right that should be and you've got the monitoring from satellites and and ground stations to take that it is doing exactly yeah it's everything set up yeah yeah so okay now if you treat now as a Manhattan Project which is I mean it's a it's equivalent to to avoiding a World War uh in in in terms of of impact so that's where our priorities everything should be driven by the priority for a |
| 1:01:49 | decent future for our children and grandchildren everything yeah driven by that okay thank you John uh Sean please I think you put your hand again I did yeah I'm going to respond to John by saying look you know all of us care about the planet okay and you know but if we care about the planet okay it's a case of I think judgment about what we think the best and the fastest way of creating positive impact and you know I I'll just reiterate what I said one step forward now of a big step of deployment could take us three |
| 1:02:25 | steps back in terms of therefore their being actually you know wider scale support that's going to be necessary for real for you know for the scale of um intervention that we think might net might be necessary so you know it's a judgment call and others are clearly entitled to a different opinion and it'll be very difficult because you can never do the experiment in terms of and figure out what the counterfactual is but uh my experience is that uh if you if you run as hard as that by just doing deployment right now John uh it's |
| 1:02:55 | actually not going to create the result that you really care about but that's my idea don't interrupt don't interrupt but others are clearly allowed to have a different viewpoint so I I think there's a stepping point a social Tipping Point taking place now people are beginning to realize uh that the the the the uh strategy that adopted by the ipcc and adopted by governments around the world of emissions only uh strategy now it's it's not going to work yeah we know and it's not working and and the weather extremes |
| 1:03:35 | are getting worse and if if you look at the uh how the weather extremes performance it's it's due to a warming of uh rapidly warming Arctic now once people accept it's a rapidly warming Arctic and and you can do something about it and it's pretty harmless as far as we can tell a statistic aerosol people can swing round and that's what we need to do and then and then it'll all happen John you're saying you should do res research don't actually do a full-scale deployment now you're saying |
| 1:04:16 | do research for whatever two years or as long as it takes uh and with the view to having made decision you're pretty much probably you're going to do that you're going to do a deployment in two years take the decision but do the research now and if there's a backlash if there's a huge public backlash against it that cuts the funding then so be it that's what you're saying John is that right oh I'm I'm hoping that we can take take people with us we're hoping but this but I know I've made a risk that's |
| 1:04:50 | too much of a risk to risk that much of a public backlash yeah so so we've we've we've got very little time you know to persuade to get that kind of public Tipping Point and ideally we get that public Tipping Point at at least a Tipping Point among the uh the key people who can decide on these things okay thank you other people have been waiting um Brew Pierce please uh you raise the point about um groups uh I've been dragged into this Market a bit uh which is linked to the financing side um did you say bricks no carbon credits |
| 1:05:45 | of the the various um the issue really is is raising the necessary funding so that some of this experimentation and planning can take place and be done properly um with the accompanying narratives that need to go with it so the public gets educated as to what these things are about and one of the discussions was opened up the other day was whether we could get a structure in place so that you could actually get credits for funding experimentation so that they were properly funded to carry it out in a limited controlled managed way |
| 1:06:31 | with an overseeing structure in place and I just wonder how other people felt about that concept any any responses about that credits for research and development well I'm already in the queue yeah David then yeah you next then um they're already two good mechanisms for doing that um one is your traditional research grants it's a slow process but there are a private you know private granting entities as well that move more quickly than governments do um the tried true technique uh the second one is you can get people to uh |
| 1:07:19 | pay you free product before you deliver it essentially uh it's not Revenue but you can spend it um so that's not what I raised my hand to talk about but I am answering uh Bruce sure we'll give you a question you can discount the forward credits that might be produced which people are trying to do now um it's high risk strategy effectively it's it's junk carbon bonds if you like but um you know there is always a shortage and a difficulty with getting financing for experimentation you think |
| 1:07:50 | about Seth Clark's work um you know a really good concept needs desk research needs limited Open Water research because the desk will never give you the the real answers um they think of the early ocean fertilization stuff that was done by um Victor celtek those were very underfunded Too Short you know you need a long duration experiments to get proper results all the work that people are doing on you know potentially syncing seaweed to take carbon to the deep ocean bottom you know you need time these things need to be funded well and |
| 1:08:29 | you need to to sink tons of compressed seaweed to the deep ocean um that's a really expensive process you've got to put monitoring equipment down there and you've got to watch it and see what happens so um you know I think there's a desperate need for a lot more of that and a need to get the narrative out there as to why we should be carrying out these experiments um and I have a lot of sympathy for people who may get frustrated and move forward and want to take some action was it you who said the U.S or somebody |
| 1:09:05 | said the U.S a few minutes ago um over the last six months uh doe and NSF uh among others have had a complete change of of heart or what happens is that the people within the Doan and I said who wanted to do this work were suddenly given Authority and they are splashing out money uh very aggressively most of it of course the R1 institutions um but not all of it they're also very aggressively going on the slightly slower path um you know sbis and such so um we're filed a couple yeah but mainly for monitoring and they and they I'm |
| 1:09:46 | just gonna say and they have the patience as well they're urgent to get the money out but they have the patient for long experiments yeah all right good things are getting better thanks Clive if I can go back to what I really stand for yes please I want to go back to uh John uh nissen's point um because I share his frustration with the precautionary principle which is the overriding principle of the EU and particular EU regulatory regime in particular um but when we look at risks what what I thought of was Yes Minister remember |
| 1:10:23 | something must be done this is something thus we must do it that was what I heard John from you I don't think that's what you meant to say but that's what I heard um and I think again going back some of you have heard me say this in other meetings but again going back to how Pharmaceuticals are evaluated it's commensurate risk all right and the commensure at risk is how serious is the disease I think we all know how serious the disease is but what do we know about the risks of the therapy and is the risk |
| 1:10:54 | of the therapy appropriate to the disease itself okay and that varies by what you're trying to fix and that's the work that needs to be done before you switch something on because in fact the risk of the therapy can be worse right it may be that we decide that uh you know reducing the amount of UV means we have to put up with more methane or we have to put up with more iron salt in the ocean to get the methane or something and we decide that is an adequate commensurate risk but you have to know what it is because to methane |
| 1:11:29 | problem is bad and it's getting worse right and it's not it's not the only problem um and if if doing and say I wipes out a lot of Alternatives and I am really worried about the uh about you know nox more ambient nox that's going to kill a lot of people too if you haven't done that analysis then your work is inherently irresponsible and I know you cannot answer every question to you know to uh to five nines but um you have to have an appreciation of what risks are in fact commensurate thanks and the good news you're saying |
| 1:12:09 | is that there is money coming forth from so from U.S departments right now in the last six months four year four of course for U.S attitudes only makes sense well there's all Geo engineering task force that has been funded and you know I mean that's a pretty big change right there yeah well at least somebody's doing something yeah yeah Chris yeah yeah I very much support what David just said I think it's absolutely right um I think um two things um one John's idea to actually do the research while at the same time |
| 1:12:45 | preparing to actually deploy will actually look to people like it's a done deal and you're going to go ahead irrespective it's in fact it's not a slippery slope it's just a vertical slope it's gonna happen so that will actually create more many more problems than it solves as I think Sean has alluded to I think that is a very dangerous approach and will actually create a backlash so I think it's ill-advised to do that I think though John you're not that far away from some of the other comments such as Sean and I |
| 1:13:15 | have said about needing to do the research in order to be able to see what um we can do for deployment and that includes field trials as well as lab and other trials so I think that's uh something that is not too far distant but I'm certainly don't think immediate deployment and I certainly don't think is at all widely accepted or even by a significant fraction perhaps of the scientific climate scientist population that the effects are not going to be significant or minor or however you like to phrase |
| 1:13:46 | it I can't remember the words you use now but I think that is not something that's accepted and that's something the key thing that needs to be got over if you were to get wider acceptance you're going to have to get a reasonably wide acceptance that the effects are going to be acceptable and as uh David was just saying this essentially is a risk risk type management system you've got to weigh up the different risks of all the different factors in order to come to a judgment and that moment we are nowhere |
| 1:14:13 | near being able to do that in my view several years away I absolutely agree that you have to do the risk risk assessment but I don't think anybody's done that and anybody who has done it that sees that the the risk from uh Arctic Armageddon is absolutely ginormous compared to the uh perceived risks often just perceived or possible risks of SIA SSA by deployment at 50 or 60 degrees north but you haven't got that widely accepted yet so we've got so so we've gone together so people like myself who who |
| 1:15:01 | believe passionately the risk an s i i Sai is very small I I need to to spread the word I mean I love you all to be spreading the word that the risk is extremely small compared to the risk that we're addressing uh yeah do you do geo engineer or or what is more risky geoengineering or not during engineering for me it's it's a No-No it's a no-brainer it's much safer to geoengineer than not and and if you're going to do your if you if you face if you kind of uh recognize or realize that we're going |
| 1:15:46 | to have to do some geoengineering eventually then the sooner we do it the better uh and and the the the current strategy of the ipcc is just not working oh well yeah that's another that's another issue that's another issue yeah it doesn't because well we well this is an alternative strategy uh for dealing with climate change and and it would as far as I can tell it would it would work it would reverse climate change uh it would uh be good for almost everybody yeah the thing is for John you haven't convinced certain people in this |
| 1:16:25 | group you haven't convinced Stephen I know I haven't convinced ranzost I know I haven't I I think there's a and so there's a a lot of uh so we look forward to hearing what Doug mcmart Martin says uh I think I think some some people would find it very difficult to change their mind and of course um I I can say that but of course you if you're not the one I'm talking to yeah disregard what I say yeah but I think we'd like to say but everybody would like to see that um mentioned you know listed as a |
| 1:17:07 | possible problem that's been looked at and some big authorities you know some over you know bearing Authority um has decided we're gonna you know take that risk are we going to take that into account and we expect this much extra you know methane lifetime to increase and there's much extra whatever and the way we'll deal with it is is we'll I don't know do something in something different in the tropics than in the you know that it's all been taken into account either by the ipcc or whoever whoever it |
| 1:17:39 | is and maybe it's a U.S due engineering who knows I don't know but that that's what I'd like to see rather than scientists say uh letters which I do need to read saying we're calling for more research instead of calling for performers so those same scientists should be say be saying look just like you are do it now it's ready that you know but they're not are they they're calling for research so I think if there's a is there anything else uh did I get something wrong there is there anything else that |
| 1:18:06 | you're shaking ahead David uh is there anything else for anyone else before we move on because we've been on this subject for an hour and a quarter uh Sean I would just say please just read what I've popped in the chat thanks uh for everybody I'm not gonna have a chance to read that I don't think uh all right there's a couple of sentences but I uh I just disagree with the idea that the research might teach us that the idea of SRM is not acceptable uh my my view is just from my understanding of of |
| 1:18:48 | planetary history that uh it's either uh SRM or collapse and uh so uh that's when you say SRM do you mean stratific aerosol injection no I mean uh Albedo enhancement I I just think that uh Albedo enhancement is a fundamental of planetary Security today and uh that's not recognized it should be recognized I think that the uh scientific Community are too cautious on this uh I think that uh John Nissen is is absolutely right I so I think that what we should do is learn by doing through small scale uh field experiments |
| 1:19:26 | uh confident that the rationale for that will be Vindicated and that this course that the idea of SRM is not acceptable will prove to be something that's uh that's not correct in general is SRM in general okay yeah okay thank you okay uh okay all right bro sorry I think sorry bro I think Sean wants to just come back on that and then you please yeah sure look you know look the learn by doing you know if you really mean learn by doing right learning by doing needs to encapsulate sort of the the degree of |
| 1:20:08 | humility that if you learn that the if you learn something that is not acceptable then it would be better to learn to discontinue it otherwise you're not learning by doing you're just continuing to do so I completely agree with you Robert that there is there is there is Merit in learning by doing but we have to therefore embrace the degree of humility that we will then be able to be objective and dispassionate in the way that we allow those results to be reviewed I think it's very likely otherwise I wouldn't be suggesting the |
| 1:20:39 | research because I've got better things to do with my time but I think you know we're going to be able that we will find ways that this is going to be able to work but we have to have that degree of humility when we're approaching this if we're going to carry wider society and indeed ourselves along with this okay thank you Sean uh Brew yeah I'm just going to say we're very wary of SRM and silver bullets because you know there are other massive was coming forward which have to be tackled at the same |
| 1:21:05 | time an ocean acidification is not going to be helped by changing the Albedo of the planet particularly one has to show a holistic approach in everything you put forward otherwise you're going to be open to a big torpedoed yep okay whatever that is gonna have to have to not um right um okay so that's family actually um okay well John you're next we've just got 10 minutes no just quickly yeah I think part of the missing link here is that many of the decision makers and and the public have haven't got our message I mean the |
| 1:21:52 | urgency of for planetary cooling that the the urgency for research in the planetary Cooling and you know like I appreciate that you know we don't have great expectations about writing to politicians but I I really think we need to wrap our efforts here and that letter it's pretty uh Robert Chris is not on the call but the letter he wrote to his local member Greg Clarke I think was a very good Pro former I mean I know there was a person that need to be modified but as a as a way of going about it framing the the problem and then citing |
| 1:22:22 | reference to people in the scientists like Hanson and and Stefan and so forth uh religious acting as the messenger to uh to communicate the issue it opened up a discussion that hopefully they might read or get their advisors to read and maybe break through in some way I just think we should study that uh later he wrote it and used a similar format I know a lot of us are writing to various people and and but it's the way we go about it we've got to break through in some way Robert Chris is on the next call we get |
| 1:23:00 | to have that discussion with him again um Robert Chris and I will be presenting to the Healthy Planet Action Coalition uh uh this uh Thursday Friday um so uh there'll be an opportunity for uh for discussion with uh with Robert about that the the email notice for that meeting has just gone out from from herb very good that's a great problem right sorry everybody uh I'm a very persistent family member um yeah so um I missed I I got the the general gist of that John so what's uh that's that was a great letter I thought from uh |
| 1:23:43 | um Robert Chris um this is the trouble though you that you get a positive response and they say oh yes yes but nothing happens um this is partly why we are where we are uh is there any did was did anybody suggest anything this is why we have uh you know we try and get these articles and we have people like Mana Joe and you know people who are people this is why people like Luke have to do outlandish things just to get anything noticed because the politicians well they've got a million other things to think about as well is there anything |
| 1:24:16 | any other comment um about that other than what I've just said and what what John's just said about nice templates just reach out to MPS maybe they'd be a bit more responsive now that it's all in the news maybe they would respond a bit more now now it's in the news I mean well I was brought up I was sort of trained with political lobbying that it's not just the odd letter you have to go and see them as well and how to take people with you don't just criticize them uh look for some way that you can |
| 1:24:48 | help them with what they're they're you know trying to do in their job form a relationship with your elective representative they are supposed to be there for that so they do have to you know that that's what uh that's how what how I was trained and it it but it's a lot of work anyone else anything uh hands raised uh Grant please thank you the uh from my experience in marketing the adage that you have to kiss a lot of frogs to find a prince is purely true and one rejection from one politician is |
| 1:25:30 | not a demonstration that the need is useless or or fruitless uh we have a huge task ahead of us to increase the awareness not just in the political sphere but amongst their electors their constituents that there is a possible solution for the ravages of what we're seeing today in the real impacts of climate change and so one rejection is just a from my base my background as well I better find another frog that's yep find somebody else to kiss so uh I am also uh taking uh Chris uh Robert Chris's uh guide and |
| 1:26:26 | framing a uh set of letters that I intend to send to uh firstly the set a local senator who her state senator who is involved in the management of the California air resources board and then we'll spread it out to other members of his committees and I'm just going to keep hammering them until I see whether I get a response face to face follow through for them to see who you are and what you stand for but what we have created in the evidence field through hpac and through no act and Prague is a powerful piece of work |
| 1:27:17 | that deserves wider recognition acceptance and agreement amongst ourselves is not the goal we have to create its Effectiveness in the outside world thank you very much thank you uh Grant uh who was next is it uh otherwise I believe yeah yeah just the following up on the issue of reaching out to legislators um Mike McCracken and I both happen to live in the district of Congressman Jamie Raskin that at least most of the Yanks will are familiar with he's a very high profile a very Progressive Congressman but he and he |
| 1:27:59 | also actually introduced four years ago the first and I think the only resolution calling for uh climate restoration as a result of Peter filkowski and others reaching out to to Congressman Raskin and so we met last week with one of his key aides and she was very eager for us in fact we were talking about big picture and she was saying well tell me you know where the money should go go to which agency and what budget language you know we should push for and I said we'll be happy to um you know the president's budget will |
| 1:28:35 | be out shortly and then they'll go through a budget you know the budget process over the next few months so I simply extend an invitation to anyone on either side of the Atlantic who would like to work with Mike and me to come up with a specific set of recommendations for both budget language in terms of the kinds of activities they do and the actual dollar amount for the United States federal government uh if you're interested please you know email me up thank you all know put my email in the chat um you know the fact that she said that |
| 1:29:11 | doesn't mean um you know that it's going to happen but it certainly means we have great receptivity with one of the more influential Congress people in the United States okay thank you uh manager yeah I just want to let folks know that um we started a series here in the Hudson Valley um on uh climate science and solutions and our first speaker was last night uh Kirsten menging who is Professor sir at Vassar and she's a paleoclimatologist and I thought that was a good place to start because it's an area I'm most weak in |
| 1:29:57 | and and part of why I do the education I do is uh because of my own curiosity she did a magnificent presentation but then I asked her about what she saw Beyond emission reductions as potential climate Solutions and she was you know quite frankly suspicious of climate engineering and was concerned about unintended consequences and I did let her know that and and the others on the call that um my observation is that so are the people that are working on geoengineering very concerned and trying to uh plan accordingly and also very transparent |
| 1:30:53 | and I think that that is a real strength um you know I've been observing mostly and learning uh but I just want to commend everyone for that those two aspects and I think that's gonna uh carry us well through um the future challenges uh but I accept we we have um two other speakers planned every every two weeks the next one is on Earth flows which will include um the oceans uh the wind currents the vortices Etc for uh to help people begin to understand uh you know more about climate science than simply uh that greenhouse gases trap |
| 1:31:49 | heat and sunlight um and then the third speaker is from Lamont Daugherty um and she is has just come back from uh Margie Taryn has just come back from another ex research expedition in Greenland um so I wanted folks to know that that's our approach is to bring forward Uh current information so people start to have a context but also um you know it it was a confirmation of a concern that I had uh and that is that those people who are teaching or science Etc um are skeptical at best uh about geoengineering and so I think that is |
| 1:32:47 | a real challenge uh besides elected officials some of whom were on on the call and are in the network that I have access to um but besides elected officials I think um other scientists have to be we have to figure out how to um help them I I almost felt like um Professor menking's uh response was like a knee-jerk reaction uh and I'm not sure how much she had really um how big is this group uh manager we're gonna need to end soon um because we're on a 90 minute Mark but let's just finish this conversation |
| 1:33:33 | manager how many how many people in it's Hudson River did you say it's it's still very small it's just getting started yeah probably 100 people on the list medium-sized and are only probably 30 were on on the presentation but it was videotaped yeah okay that's that's pretty good and yeah uh does anyone know Oliver Morton anyone could anyone in contact with Oliver Morton who's the one of science writers for The Economist and he wrote he wrote a book on geoengineering uh Chris if you're speak |
| 1:34:14 | if you're trying to speak you're on mute um yeah I know I've been but I'm not actually in contact with him as such I haven't actually engaged with him yeah I've met him and had a meeting with him and uh exchanged emails from time to time okay do you think he would you have a minute to see if he would respond about this whole thing about The Economist should say something about you know stratospheric Arizona sorry I think I think the economist isn't very friendly towards geo-enging at the |
| 1:34:47 | moment but I will if you like I'll send an email to him and ask him if he's like to join the presentation here to tell us what the Press thinks about it and maybe that will change him a bit yeah I have a copy of it yeah the planet remade it's called or something like that exactly yeah it's quite quite a good book a bit it's a little bit dated now okay thank you Stephen that's fantastic um anyone any last uh comment Before We Say Goodbye for two weeks again okay thank you everyone uh great |
| 1:35:26 | decision actually I will just say yeah actually Clive I'll say that I very much enjoyed this call and I often don't then drop off calls because instead usually what happens is that people wait for someone else's mouth to stop moving so that they can open hours but this was actually a a conversation discussion and I think that was worthwhile so thank you sure welcome I'll keep interrupting okay thanks everyone see you again in two weeks yeah cheers did anyone want to have a last chat before we before I could click the |
| 1:36:13 | button I think what I'll do I'll I'll stop it from recording |