| (Click on a 'Start Time' to view the video) |
| 00:02 | foreign [Music] 's turning up all right um a bit of papers right off I've just had a an answer back from Stephen Salter so it's all getting very interesting with the cloud calculations sorry just a minute foreign |
| 01:18 | uh what did I what to say I was gonna do I I asked him I didn't say anything I I was suggesting it's about time we would appreciate an update from CCRC yeah he was um he was with us two of these ago not last one but the one before and he didn't give a report did he not have anything or did he not have time no the previous timing he gave a report right I think we had that um we had Aaron um yes and I think uh I think uh Sean had a little while to say things but um but I don't they don't think he had |
| 02:00 | anything to report then okay which is about a month ago yes yeah he's just taken on a new uh young Chinese uh engineering science postdoc who looks really good okay and in what role is that uh he's a mathematician I think I think he's dealing with the um uh Marine carbon pump stuff mainly Marine carbon okay okay wow that's complicated there's a lot of chemistry involved in that hi hi friends here we are again hi hi oh yeah yes are you there Stephen I just want to say so I I've started reading about Steven's clouds friends |
| 03:00 | uh it's his typhoon moderation it's all very interesting yeah yeah to calculate how many droplets this is what I've been kind of looking for how many droplets what's the cloud depth what's the amount of liquid water content uh because if you do you have big droplets or small droplets and um from that you can calculate reflectivity is Stephen there I think Stephen might be having trouble he's hi manager oh howdy how are you doing I'm doing well busy as always um and and making a little progress I |
| 03:42 | think I reported last week but to a different group um but yes I I I'm just trying to keep up with and and learn enough that I can be helpful to the community here in the Hudson Valley of New York that's wonderful manager I hope you can understand some of what we talk about here it's this just back from a major conference in Austria I think about that through later on yeah I'm happy to report on my keynote speech the International Center for Earth simulation fantastic all right should we start doing a a agenda then |
| 04:27 | let's crack that yeah okay so we got it uh agenda so uh yeah and uh so first thing then it's Brew feedback is that why you weren't here last time bro um when was last time it doesn't really matter so it's two weeks ago no no no I always miss people when they're not and and you you're you're very useful things to say so um uh right here we go uh for Austria keynote speech it was no Geneva Geneva I believe it's Switzerland yeah there you go you made a keynote speech all right okay |
| 05:32 | okay um it's Stephen I I had some questions for Stephen Salter and uh but he's already answered them so I better read those first I hadn't really had a chance to take it in properly and um and Stephen joined first but I haven't heard a peep from him yet so I don't want not sure if you're having can't see you Stephen and can't hear you um okay then uh hi Robert good to see you at Robert tulip uh as always your Communications written Communications are clear and bold and and to me correct the right thing to be |
| 06:16 | saying about Albedo and this is what um certainly friends and I are concentrating on a lot that's where my question for Stephen salza came from just now I'm not sure if you're speaking Stephen we can't hear you um right is there anything else from anyone else yeah I've just put um a thing in the chat the uh ocean restoration research and development Act of 2022 uh right um now um that seems like a big step in the right direction but you know um in the U. |
| 06:51 | S if you see what people think of that so we could so you're suggesting we sort of have a look at this and sort of chat about it a bit is that what you're saying well um so have you are you aware of this I'm aware of it I I couldn't see any way it's gonna gonna help my stuff particularly unless the the White House stuff gets through I don't know but I have a very excited Russ George sending me Communications about it okay well yeah he's one he wants to get on with things yeah um I just put a link in a chat to um |
| 07:30 | there's a workshop last week on Marine carbon dioxide monitoring reporting and verification there's a workshop in um the Eastern us at uh University of Rhode Island um I have I can briefly say stuff something about it but it the recordings of it should be available in due course anyway and there's one or two perhaps interesting bits that people might uh like to dip into there's quite quite a lot to it because it was a three and a half day workshop with loads of presentations and discussion okay I mean there's always it's time is |
| 08:04 | always an issue Chris so if you don't sure I'll just briefly mentioned you've got the program up you can whip down through that and see the basic issues that they've so I probably don't need to go through that at all what I'm saying is that everybody's I speak to myself I've got so much to do and so yeah if you're well if you're able to give a quick summary of what it was about okay then that's very helpful certainly fine yeah okay yeah um uh so so uh uh the Broods also so there's also that |
| 08:36 | um uh but what was that again um it was uh this oh yes this legislation on on Ocean restoration okay so but then again uh new legislation on Ocean restoration oh is that right ocean restoration yeah it's researching too I mean it's it's perfect news I think for the people who are trying to get involved in right is that funding announcements um I've got to dig deeper into it I really haven't had that okay but all right up to speed on it yeah Bruce it's your space right so next So Okay so we've got |
| 09:20 | CDR ocean CDR reporting and verification which is a big deal for getting paid uh yeah it's not just for getting paid either because remember because it's important also for getting things like if you're doing experiments proving the thing and then getting a permit for deployment so it's actually also for even getting a permit to get in the water ultimately for deployment yeah okay uh and um there was also a one of these uh open open-air CDR um talks which happened before the workshop which is only a one-hour thing |
| 09:58 | which I thought was an excellent talk um which I'll find a link for in a minute and add it into the chats where it's all related to the same thing which I just mentioned hey okay uh anything that's an excellent talk that's a little bit new because if I again if I speak to myself there's a lot of stuff is the same it's people are saying the same things yeah a lot this one I haven't seen before sorry I think and the thing is although it's a one hour slot yeah Talk itself is probably only about 30 30 |
| 10:27 | 35 minutes and then it's discussion afterwards so you about half an hour or so for the actual presentation so it's not too onerous to have a look at it and now it's not too bad it's if it's something different I I have to say I also often find the Q a at the end of these things is often very useful as well it can be yeah yeah yeah people often ask very good questions uh so good talk um okay chat chat link I just put it there okay um great great what is that anything else anyone else oh dear yeah after we do with Stephen question |
| 11:07 | mark Stephen what what I wanted to speak to Stephen about yeah do you think yeah okay uh yeah I've I've been reading the typhoon so uh anybody ah you can hear you okay you can't hear us so let's could would somebody send Stephen a quick chat or perhaps I'll do it now Stephen um I'll just say everyone Steve and I can hear you Stephen we can hear you yeah there we go you'll get that um yeah if Stephen gets his system working then um questions on uh well it's typed it's got It's |
| 11:59 | headed typhoon moderation uh uh but it's um really about calculating how many droplets and options for you know clouds starting early Steven's talked to us about this before and I've never really had well whatever reason read this thing properly and read it now read it again sort of learned more and I'm also getting a bit better at putting numbers into Excel Excel is an excellent I find an excellent tool for doing these scientific calculations um especially well if somebody gives you the the formula we've got to just plug |
| 12:38 | in the numbers and you can try different numbers and you know you don't sort of it's easier to see what's going on all right anyone anything else yes yes please yep John can I just ask a question yeah uh a general question to everybody yeah um who not what um people with any Authority or business cloud is in favor of srn because I think a Chris Gideon sent a message once saying there are there are people uh who are pro-srn who in this group people have said the fossil fuel industry would like SRM to get that to get them |
| 13:30 | off the hook but uh every identified anybody who's actually come into the open and say say they uh Sr is a bit broad you want to do you mean Sai yeah I'm not saying uh SRM generally well and that's that's AI in particular but SRM but generally yeah well I think I think everyone in this group's in favor of yeah I'm saying people with Business Club or in Authority uh it but so not this I don't think anyone in this group has got well maybe some have some Authority we have you know senior academics well we |
| 14:16 | try and write letters to people who are with influence like cop 36 or G20 or or um right so okay advisors we haven't had anybody uh there's nobody I've heard of who is in favor of SRM okay of of the sort of government advisors not even clouds not even Marine Cloud brightening then you're saying well yeah I mean no one's signed up to it sort of say yes I'm in favor of doing it full stop there's there are possibly people who might be favored doing the research after all they're doing some in |
| 14:58 | Australia with government money so presumably the government there at least is in principle willing to do the research even if it's not committed to anything beyond that um yeah right so but um so let's be more specific SRM deployment anyone will commit to it now until there's some more research done exactly um that's that's what that's what you say but is there anybody who who's willing to say that well perhaps we do need it now now soon well what do you say SRM I'm not quite sure exactly what |
| 15:38 | is but because yeah I mean regularly yeah direct calling or call the polls yeah I mean I think everyone in this group is in favor of that exactly but but not for for calling in in general yes but the methods people people differ on what's the best method in this group okay so I'm trying to decouple this from which method yes so so what you're saying is really SRM so in other words Albedo enhancement here's how easily you can build one and click someone's got their radio playing or something |
| 16:22 | yeah um yep uh but it's everybody John in this group no I haven't I haven't heard anyone in this group say no no no we can't no uh John's question was not about people in this group it was about uh it was about people outside uh this discussion it was about uh is there anybody uh in the broader Community uh who uh is uh in favor of enhancing Albedo and he said in Authority actually okay right so it's not this group then so no so um that's what okay who uh in authority so do we know who in Authority right |
| 17:08 | well the answer to that is nobody no at the moment I don't think anyone will commit now to deployment right so then we've got deployment and we've got um and we've got research in the near future well I think nobody wants to say they're in favor of search um well who is in favor of deployment in the in the in their future okay because you're saying if it's not deployed in the near future then we're screwed because of the that's my argument that's possible fuel industry might say we'd like SRM |
| 17:56 | in order that uh we can we don't have to have a complete a carbonization let's discuss it when we get to it yeah okay yes that's it for now thank you that's the idea okay anything else I think that's probably enough to keep us going okay then okay fine I'm very happy to be driven by this audience so Brew please well okay um I was very honored to be asked to go to um Geneva to the international center for Earth simulations uh biannual Workshop which I attended three years ago we we missed the year |
| 18:37 | because of covert um this is a organization that's run by Bob Bishop Bob Bishop is one of the founders of silicon graphics um so you know all the animation you see on the screens he's also one of the guys behind modeling of the human brain and um the analysis of the Apollo 13 debacle moments and pieces um he through his own wealth funds this thing and brings some particular 60 leaders in uh systems together for a workshop so there was a very senior group of people there and um I was asked to present my biosphere restoration plan |
| 19:23 | um which was some the first thing that happened on the Wednesday evening after we'd had dinner I had an hour to present and we had 45 minutes of questions and answers afterwards um and this is really senior people you know um uh Earth system modeling Community Computing Community um uh NASA people you name it I'll send you a share a list of the people that were there um it went down really well um we will have Thursday and Friday on the workshop with a series of presentations and I actually got cited in the following |
| 20:08 | presentations from five to seven times um we're including some very senior finances and people are working around that so I kind of pulled over that um you know nobody came up and said bro we liked it but you got this bit wrong with that bit wrong um which is a huge endorsement of where we're going um um I gave um seven big plug for uh motion fertilization by buoyant flakes um I twice called everybody to account when they started talking about Net Zero by 2050 and I challenge the Run and said is is there anybody here that |
| 20:51 | believes Net Zero by 2050 is okay and there was out of silence and then I was congratulated later by call into account um so anyway it was a fascinating experience um now International simulation is a proposal to bring to put a supercomputer possibly quantum computer system together to bring together all of the earth system modeling and add to that agricultural data add to its financial data it's an attempt to build literally a well I describes a dashboard for the planet and I've been describing the need to |
| 21:36 | manage our environment I put forward the argument that um the biosphere is a living thing that this is uh it's a biological function and there's a plenty of chemists and physicists in climate modeling but there's not enough biologists for what is a biological system um and that was very much accepted I challenged one or two of the climate modelers and said have you made allowance for the fact that 10 000 years ago there was double the amount of life on the planet and all these things were different and the planets |
| 22:20 | self-regulating system in the light of the fact that living things have in common that they colonize and stabilize and these patterns grew and they followed right through to the whole of the Bible script and the answer that was well um no we haven't really um that led us into the discussions on Quantum computing and as Professor what's his name Tim Palmer from Oxford who's sort of the leaders in this area who was describing the entanglement of quantum Computing and this gets related to multi-dimensional stuff and all the rest |
| 22:59 | of it but the interesting thing about entanglement to the interconnection um as and the numbers that they're throwing around in terms of just how many connections there that occur within a quantum computer led me to ask the question and say is the by itself sphere itself a Quantum operation and in that in in this quantum physics I understand it might not really good but you can have a reaction happening over here and Miles Away over there it'll respond without any obvious connection and um so in in that entanglement of the |
| 23:42 | whole earth system working is is this is this a Quantum operation that's going on and can you in the future potentially tap into that to enhance the modeling well that threw up a whole lot of exciting discussions but what what it brought up was that awareness of you know just how important all these things are um so there's a lovely chat called uh uh um Shukla um Jerry shuffler um and um he is a prostitute of Johnny um Johnny is you know Johnny Johnny but he was the first person to look at Earth system sensitivity and Johnny |
| 24:35 | curve and then there's the various other ones as the Earth System since it was increased and he was the man that would set off Butterfly Theory you know where butterfly flaps its wings in the Amazon everything interconnects and it creates the storms Chaos Theory yeah Chaos Theory um and tripler is the one that actually said no it doesn't quite work like that and he's done those observational stuff I mean he's looking up um anyway what what's come out of this is um retain some real influence and I've |
| 25:08 | got people reaching out to me um want to do more and I've been invited to go and speak a number of places um and that's really quite exciting and um absolutely beyond that I've um the work that I'm doing with the um uh interbrand an Enterprise being the world's largest brand new organization who handled all the big globals um have come back to me saying they want to do more and this gives wonderful verification for biosity restoration plan which if you're not familiar with that plan um that that goes into legal structures |
| 25:49 | it goes into Earth system accounting um and you know what's what's wrong with human societal structures and What needs to change and and fundamentally how do we deliver the UN sustainable development goals by 2050 and if we do what are the financial implications of having nine maybe 9. |
| 26:13 | 5 billion people living well across the planet instead of 2.5 people living well on the rest yeah Louis badly which of course the answer to that is huge economic growth uh and these are developing arguments to bring large-scale Finance into large-scale ocean and land restoration so anyway that's that's what I've been up to trying to do with where I've been gaining influence and you know fantastic I've got one question bro how did you get invited to that um I got in introduced to Bob Bishop by David wasdil uh nine years ago 10 years ago and I met |
| 26:54 | with Bob a couple of times and I've been quietly developing my ideas and putting these things forward and you know a couple of people have come forward as mentors of that idea but I was blown away to be invited to do that and then to find myself in the keynote speech um you know because everybody else said 15 minutes to present and uh uh it was some yeah great quite an experience literally I'm not just back and I'm just sort of going through all the things that were said and who everybody was and |
| 27:25 | fitting it all together at the moment okay fantastic thank you um it's uh and yes the understanding that we are in real trouble and that we're almost certainly going to have to carry out some sort of solar radiation management to control templates if we have run away um was pretty much accepted by everybody there at least whereas nobody came up and said no no no um and there was a lot of talk about the importance of funding research I'd go nowhere without some research but the reason I'm Detra for the |
| 28:02 | International Center of Earth simulations um whole earth System model is you cannot carry out these experiments without excellent feedback and monitoring and that's what this will provide so it's a really important initiative and it's an initiative we've got to get across to the funders because we're talking a billion dollars to put this together we're talking massive amounts of energy to run these computers but you're creating what is potentially the best crystal ball there ever was |
| 28:37 | and therefore it has huge commercial values so I I mean I I work at a very high level without the detail throwing these ideas together to try and make things happen so uh yeah I mean I'm I'm skipping around all the positivity of it so far so I'm gonna shoot you down very soon I could say a few things but well one thing in particular but uh I've done a bit of speaking has anyone else got you know got comment or congratulations or anything for brew I do no congratulations uh one of the theories that's been uh doing |
| 29:24 | the rounds is from Kyle Kimball yeah I think have you seen his paper uh it doesn't happen though anyhow his theory is that the ipcc has been hijacked oh yes I have no Bridge I've read that yeah and uh they have cost models in which completely underplay it practically everything that really matters yeah I I raised the uh problems of consensus-based Science and the lack of precautionary principle and actually um as in the questions and answers the um we debated how this should be handled bearing in mind some of these people |
| 30:08 | have been lead ipcc authors um I suggested that there should be an additional level beyond the the fifth and worst case which was based purely on precautionary principle which said and this is what some of us think could happen so not everybody has to sign up to it but the policy makers should be made aware and should in their documentation make people aware of the outside risks um because quite honestly if you don't do that and you present this to an insurance company um the the they're not going to understand it and |
| 30:51 | this is one of the reasons you fail to get traction and fail to get financing you know if you start talking about a 60 risk of blowing your temperature targets you're not serious you know you want to get insurance for your house burning down you know one in five thousand and you'd still pay a massive premium the sorry Chris can't hear you give me a Juice um the point is that the ipcc reports are systematically underplaying the danger and um great this is in their cost modeling and they use their cost models uh to say |
| 31:35 | that uh you know emissions reduction uh to zip Net Zero by 30 2050 is is quite adequate uh to protect um uh it's a major economies uh economic growth can continue um and some of them some individuals have been quite outrageous saying for example of the U.S economy 95 will be okay under seven degrees warming now I mean that's outrageous um but who's who's actually challenging it um we do need somebody to produce some cross models which are much more realistic yeah all the modeling challenges though what |
| 32:29 | is the cost uh of one meter of sea level rise which seems almost inevitable of this Century if not by 2050. but by 2015 according to the latest answer but people know about this rosstrom's just done a very good um video which um David Attenborough narrates short one which speaks to this so yeah I mean there's a lot of voices out there that are calling on it so so these these people who who realize that missions reduction uh up to Net Zero is is not going to prevent catastrophe why aren't they demanding SRM |
| 33:18 | because the SRM is terrible framing yeah you always demand research first show responsibility this is why you know having having really good Earth system modeling is so important you've got to be able to trace the feedback and you've got to be able to provide real-time information on what's Happening to justify yeah what's the terrible framing on SRM uh Brian apart from SAR what what what's how do you see the terrible framing well good morning from Australia and I have a very nice conversation with sir David |
| 33:54 | King recently and uh you know he actually embraced and extended some framing that we've been developing recently and that is uh let's re-brighten the planet and literally if we talk about re-brightening the planet physically and mentally we can get back to a healthy climate so it's a double entender it's meant to be uh you know it's meant to be diverse but effectively if we can get back to let's say a pre-industrial brightness levels for the planet it's all about getting back to a healthy |
| 34:26 | climate and I'll tell you right now you know for a lot of people anything with the word radiation and it isn't going to get funded but uh re-brightening the planet to something that's pretty industrial I mean that's getting back to maybe a safe harbor it's really brightening the planet of accurate description because the change in resulting from global warming is that outgoing long wave radiation has been curtailed by greenhouse gases I'm not aware that the Albedo of the planet has changed markedly |
| 34:57 | certainly not as a result of global warming but it may have changed for other reasons but I'm just not aware of that well what about the ice loss uh hi Andrew the first time we've seen you thanks for joining us you've got a slightly tinny uh sound but never mind uh yeah what what about the ice loss of the Arctic and you know these loss of glaciers in the Arctic there's another loss of Albedo um well glasses are quite geographically small so they wouldn't make much difference to an Albedo point of view |
| 35:28 | well there's the North Pole ice is yeah yes polarized loss does make a difference to our bead over its effects predominantly Regional as opposed to Global um it's not an area of high insulation and therefore any Albedo changes are attenuated in terms of their effects in the air system but I think if you're gonna use the magnets you're like re-brightening and you want to be very careful because it may be that you're I'll be the modification is actually taking you beyond what the brightness of |
| 36:04 | the um planet was originally and therefore you're not re-brightening you are just brightening right so I'm just urging caution in terms of the um the mixture you use it because I think you can get yourself in hot water by telling people that you're doing something which is not strictly what you are doing okay Andrew I take your point I'll take your point uh Chris you've had your hand up for a little while black carbon which is affecting the Albedo there's also a lot of solar energy going |
| 36:36 | into the high latitudes at at the mid-summer there's actually more going into the South Pole than into the equator in December so so that affects it the the I so that's a it's a it's a big difference in energy and there's lots of ice shelves in uh Antarctica as well so so so I take your point Andrew it's a good point and um but uh I think but it's getting answered by uh the the change the loss of ice so but but it's still you're urging caution um and fair enough uh so what's emerging |
| 37:13 | is to not use the word re-brightening if what you're doing is taking it beyond the total Albedo that would have been in place in the pre-industrial era yeah just so if you want to call it brightening fine that's what you're doing but if you're talking about free brightening it's got to be meticulous and how you use it that's my point that Stephen's correct about the summer installation but obviously the year-round the installation is not as high of the poles as it is um in um more um tropical latitudes but |
| 37:42 | anyway I'll let others speak okay thank you uh Chris uh Chris you're muted yeah I was just going to come back on Bruce Point about the IPC and how it frames things and I was it occurred to me that what you could do with is something that sort of approached the military sometimes takes where they'll have a sort of a wrecked in Blue Team type of different approaches well usually actually they come up or the intelligence ages particularly come up with a some extreme things and a central argument so you can then see what the |
| 38:15 | spread of the whole the issues are if you take that type of approach to assessment then you can see what the spread of understanding your opinions are across the say the ipcc and just one other thing besides the point that uh John made um it's also quite notable that the uh summaries for policy makers are distinctly different to the actual report from the scientists the actual full ar5 part whichever because the countries or the politicians pull that back and so for example the recent most recent one on mitigating ristons on is |
| 38:51 | much more positive about CDR for example than the scientist's assessment but of course the SPM is the one that tends to get the most publicity and tends to be quoted more widely so that tends to distort the impression of what the scientists say because the people assume that that is what the scientists think actually is the scientists moderated by the politicians um on the front of it exactly defeat the object then wouldn't it yeah thank you Brian yes um thank you Clive um to in response to some of the previous comments first of all uh the |
| 39:30 | installation argument is uh incorrect In The Summer uh the North Pole receives more insulation than the equator uh near the summer solstice and so that insulation level is absolutely critical critical as is your point Clive that the Albedo of the sea ice in the Arctic has been utterly transformed and we're talking about Regional Albedo we're talking about restoring the reflectivity of the Arctic the Antarctic and the Himalayan poles where we're seeing lots of carbon black we're seeing you know |
| 40:00 | the soot from Rice straw burning and the sit from even cook stoves affecting the Albedo of the glaciers so re-brightening the third pole the Himalayan pole is absolutely critical to the water supply of two billion people I'll also mention the research of tapio Schneider from uh Switzerland and also at Caltech who has really done a great job of verifying that in a warming World we're seeing less and less cloud cover and Marine Cloud brightening is going to be an essential part of rebritening the planet |
| 40:33 | so yes we're serious about re-brightening getting back to pre-industrial Albedo levels regionally and ultimately getting back to a balance and that balance of radiation whether it's a short wave or long wave radiation we still have an energy balance to deal with here and unless we can address it and we're talking about two Watts a square meter getting back to normal uh you know we're in a runaway situation so the Triad is basically decarbonization um and reducing emissions drawing down greenhouse gases and probably direct |
| 41:07 | climate Cooling in order to address the challenges in this decade and Beyond and that starts in regions like the three poles and extends to Marine Cloud rewriting I would say simply because we have lost a lot of cloud cover and there's good peer-reviewed evidence that in fact in a warmer World we're seeing less and less clouds which is a horrific um runaway feedback loop when it comes to the radiation management of the planet yeah thanks Tom thank you sure uh thanks Brian I'm going to just play um uh put Andrew's point a little bit |
| 41:44 | more so two things so um given the the greenhouse gases uh to uh you know if if the the greenhouse gases can't be reduced uh very much in the next whatever 100 years or whatever it is um we we're talking about re-brightening planet which we can truthfully we can say that with Integrity because it has got uh has lost its brightness but then if we if we do a sort of go go back to where it was let's say it's they're still not enough is it it's it's still we certainly need to make it even |
| 42:20 | brighter than it was before to counteract the relative forcing of greenhouse gases yeah well when it comes I think a lot of this has to do with getting a broader public to accept the notion and by moving from SRM towards re-brightening we can simplify it and I would I would suggest that we don't practice wavelength bigotry and whether it's shortwave radiation or long wave radiation it's still a matter of energy balance and so whether we're you know effectively getting to a state where we're able to shed enough energy to get |
| 42:55 | back to a healthy climate I think that's really an opportunity for us to address the problem in the coming in our lifetimes because quite frankly I don't see any evidence yet that we're going to uh solve the the uh the drawdown of 1500 gigatons of greenhouse gas equivalents uh you know in the next decade a couple of points have been misquoted on so firstly I didn't disagree with the idea that um uh the polls get more insulation in some of the the quite and I um Stephen sort of said that and I |
| 43:28 | picked up on it but also I don't think it's at all appropriate to refer to this as wavelength bigotry because you're not talking about you know the color of reflected light when you're talking about the Albedo balance you're talking about um thermal radiation from the earth versus um incident radiation which is reflected from the Sun I mean it's a fundamental physics difference and if you're going to suggest that you're going to use nomenclature which that runs directly counter to that which has been agreed on |
| 43:57 | and normalized by the ipcc it's important to have a very good argument for doing so and if you're what you're doing is you're doing something which is basically kind of like a marketing exercise then I I think that's in cautious particularly when the the what your the wording that you're using is both different from the ipcc and also technically wrong and I'm not I can't stand for the language of bigotry because it isn't about bigotry it's you know describing a fundamental and very |
| 44:28 | real difference in the process of global warming and if if you misrepresent that by claiming its bigotry or okay Andrew okay I got that um Brian I'd like to respond to that briefly hi thanks um so are you trying to tell me that infrared radiation is not radiation is that reflected sunlight is fundamentally different from the long wave infrared radiation which is directly emitted by the Earth it's it is a different wavelength but it's still electromagnetic radiation is it not but it's not reflectivity you're not |
| 45:09 | you're not rebrokening the planet it's radiative energy I mean I don't think it's a laughing matter right it's a difference physics I'm explaining I'm not offering opinion on this I'm simply informing you of how the physics works now you may be aware of this and choose to ignore it I'm not insulting your intelligence which muddies or disguises in physics he's not in my okay Andrew uh do you accept what I'm suggesting there is simply that we go for an energy balance and it's a balance |
| 45:42 | of shortwave and long wave radiation if you prefer shortwave or long wave you know you can choose your favorite my point is it's still a matter of electromagnetic energy balance and so I would encourage us to frame these topics in a way that we can actually engage with the public and at a non a less technical level and quite frankly I don't find the ipcc verbal framing to be particularly helpful so I think we do need to evolve you know we can't use old thinking to um you know to solve problems that this |
| 46:13 | this old thinking actually got us into the problem to begin with we have to generate new ways of thinking about this in order to solve these problems in a transformative way misquoting Einstein but uh anyway back to you Clyde thank you thank you everyone uh Chris please yeah just very quickly I just did a quick Google search and it does suggest that there is a global decrease you know veto just a very quick look I haven't gone into in any detail but I did just do a quick search over the last 100 years or a couple hundred years |
| 46:45 | perhaps okay yeah thank you very much there's a paper there's a paper about that uh which uh analyzes it against the reflectivity of the earth uh scene uh the the brightness of the old Moon yeah the other thing also it's not just the question of insulation after all because Albedo depends on on the surface area so the tropics may get a lot more sunlight a lot of the year but of course it's not all reflected it comes different uh wavelengths presumably because it's a much darker canopy for example than you |
| 47:16 | get in the Arctic which is all ice which is very reflective so there's differences as well you need to take into account Albedo too sorry what was that Robert the growing level of soot black carbon yeah on the ice yes lowered the Albedo level and the reduced area of the uh of the snow and ice cover yeah also worth pointing out that multi-year ice I think has greater reflectivity in some way of lengths than single year eyes and there's no multi-uras anymore in the north yeah they lost it okay yeah so um Andrew what what do you do you think |
| 47:56 | uh public framing is important or do you see any importance in the way the way that because the public doesn't have many people you know they don't have much that much interest or they don't have the expertise and they're just frightened and I think the way that you describe stuff is important and I think that the you know the ipcc for quite obvious reasons will use often quite um non-intuitive language to describe um what it's doing but I think that any deviation from the ipcc has to be meticulously technically correct so if |
| 48:37 | you could if you say something for example um you know something like shiny Earth cooling or something like that and you know there's a degree of technical accuracy there but as I you know I'm not I'm not getting involved in the dispute about how historic Albedo has changed because it's certainly not a field of expertise for mine but the issue I've got is not about the word brightening which I think is reasonable it's the the description of re-bright's name to the point at which it was as bright |
| 49:08 | as it already was yeah so it's like Alice Alice yeah Mad Hatter's tea party when she's offered more cake and she says well I haven't had any cake so how can I have more it's the same principle basically yeah so um it's all right sir Andrew yeah um I I like to kind of cause the fracker and you know to get we don't there's no good being in our own little Echo chamber here we need to allow anybody to speak yep I think I mean Andrew's got a point I think about language in general |
| 49:44 | but you do need to carefully frame it because it's quite easy or not easy you can accidentally frame it in such a way that it can be then either misused abused or become a sort of meme that attracts the wrong attention so it is worth thinking about the language you use I think whatever the language is so I think it's something to bear in mind yes absolutely sir David King had some very positive feedback for us over this new reframing of uh re-brightening the planet and I think Chris's apt comments about global |
| 50:21 | Albedo decreasing is particularly timely and look forward to being able to reference that literature okay and someone else we're in favor of a brighter future [Laughter] the thing I love also is the idea that we could re-brighten the minds on the planets you may recall that um in discussions about the loss of biomass and particularly the loss of phytoplankton that um way back in the the presentation Aid in service work um I suggested that actually we should be returning to the turquoise Planet as opposed to the Blue Marble or the |
| 51:02 | turquoise marble I with double the life on it that was 10 000 years ago the planet would have been a different color um and that that's again that's something that's fairly understandable um so uh there is plenty of communication to the general populace and not just general populace but to Bankers insurers and you know everybody outside the science community um you know the the the wording of ipcc documents to advice to policy makers is un understandable un understandable yeah yeah I've heard the comment that the |
| 51:48 | summer of your policymakers is not suitable for policy makers [Laughter] Thomas it's all so complex isn't it and it's certain parts are still uncertain well I mean we'll always be uncertain that that's what I was going to say to you about modeling this this idea that you can model everything um is uh it depends on the model but as it comes down to how good your models are doesn't it and well it does and and any of these things data in data relative and if you've got large subjects which are completely missing |
| 52:24 | from the model you've gained to have errors all you can do is bring as much together as you can but if you find something that's not there you can't ignore it you've got a another area of uncertainty to it um multiversity thing you you have all of these effects going on but you glump them together and you have a node that controls all the things you try and get that as good as you possibly can yeah I I fear that when there are too many uncertainties that it the whole thing falls apart quite quickly well |
| 52:55 | not necessarily it's a bit like it's a bit like democracy when you get enough people voting on something you tend to come to a pretty good answer and um you know the more you can bring to their the better it tends to be yeah absolutely I think the the comment about models is that someone made or many people have made is that all models are wrong but they're useful yeah only some are useful some useful yeah no all useful necessarily yeah some are useful well leads to be interrogated and it's very helpful to look at the |
| 53:27 | performance model I mean look the one advantage we have over the last 30 years of ignoring all this is we have the observational science um which you can compare to the the model performance um yeah station tells us that they're running short everywhere running short but uh but weren't totally I mean they've had the right roughly the right idea definitely yeah right yeah yeah the ipcc models have been totally inadequate uh in uh in following observations they've been totally inadequate obvious but when you say totally inadequate I |
| 54:07 | mean they've been in the right direction at least haven't they they've just been totally inadequate so the question is that this is uh uh deliberate this is probably Kyle gimbal thesis is the this is because of Direction uh from the uh leaders of the eyepiece this is the they don't want to disturb the status quo so everything is underplayed uh scientists are supported who write papers uh saying that things aren't as bad as one might think they were um and all yeah they have scientific residents as well |
| 54:54 | I've I've heard from a modeler uh the the teams of modelers producing uh models on the out the outputs of the models are vetted by some panel or other uh and then the teams that have got answers nearest to what the panel yeah I think they should be uh I'll I'll give them a you know more money or it reminds me of a joke how many statisticians does it take to change a light bulb this is corruption on the stupendous level because it's it's putting the planet and of the future of our grandchildren children and grandchildren |
| 55:38 | in payroll yes it's an absolute Scandal and and so what do we do about it we've got to kind of expose this or we start a movement uh of um younger people who who works uh tolerate uh this ignorance uh deliberate on the play of the dangers that they are going to have to face yeah so it's corruption that's basically ending the only known life in the universe well the only known intelligent life in the universe sorry Andrew let me let me just let Amanda Joe's had a handout for quite a long time completely overstating it |
| 56:24 | Cloud yeah overstating well I'm what I'm saying is so that there are huge risks and those um risks I mean that the the sea level rise hasn't really uh started in in comparison to what it's going to be it's you know 20 centimeters or something uh over the last century but we're allowable to have a meter uh by certainly the center of perhaps even by 2050. |
| 57:01 | and that is just not uh being taken into account uh by the by the ipcc so but all all the people who should be acting on this yeah so what's this about the so scientists for you to say that um you've you know believe and favor certain modelers are you saying that these are not people that work with the ipcc or they are but they but they're those are the ones are being that are being ignored by the you know summary for policy makers and they're choosing other models is that what you're saying no no what I'm saying is that the ipcc |
| 57:38 | uh arranged for funding uh they get funding through governments for the scientists who do the modeling and the the modeling teams uh or all from many countries but so how can you say that it's not going to be that it's going to be a meter by possibly 2050. you've got a dozen modeling teams all trying to produce models which support what the panel want the results to be therefore you get models which reduce different results according to the uh amount of mission according to the emissions scenario because that's |
| 58:26 | that's what the panel wants to see in the results so we've got systematic errors which are not just systematic errors that are systematic lies so it's very serious yeah of course I understand that John I just want to make sure I understand what you're about just questions this comes from the leadership of of the ipcc which is funded by the fossil fuel industry so fuel industry behind this and they want the status quo they they realized that aiming for Net Zero uh is very good for them because nothing |
| 59:11 | of active is going to happen to the status quo for decades yeah we know this yeah I'm asking you that how do you what makes you so I mean it's not that I disagree with you I rather agree with you um but what how do you know how can you say that uh that you know they're wrong and uh other people are right um that it's going to be probably a me a meter probably by 20 you know could be by 2050. |
| 59:41 | well you need to follow the thread that's um but can you just say can't you just summarize and say other models are more credible and the IPC models are less credible well I've I've put this argument I'll I'll I'll circulated uh is it that complicated that you can't just answer it in a couple of sentences uh well the the uh the bottom line is that the ipcc has only allowed for ocean expansion when they've ignored uh the acceleration rise due to Iceman right very simple answer yeah that's that's great that's |
| 1:00:20 | very good thank you thank you very much for that um John manager has you've had your hand up a long time manager please I I have uh just a couple points and and a question um first of all I want to say when it comes to politicians some of us have a lot of integrity and curiosity um and uh for example the woman who is now running for County Executive in Ulster County um when she was a New York state senator was the brains behind the climate act um again it still focuses primarily on an emissions reduction and climate restoration is is not yet |
| 1:01:08 | part of the vocabulary here but I my um hope is that we could um form a working group that would create an educational piece that was accessible I have fairly High credibility in the region and but and I have already created my own PowerPoint which I think Grant reviewed um and I am uh doing presentations on what I call uh climate science and solutions and I do include um uh brightening I include phytoplankton farming um I talk about uh the different regions of the earth and um Etc I won't go into the details |
| 1:02:12 | but I'm a novice at this and I I would like it to be that the various groups that are working on climate restoration um could produce something that was accessible to the public and you know maybe I can kind of stand in um for the public so it's just a suggestion to think about um are you requesting that a little bit of collaboration with one or two people here maybe yeah because I think if you you know how to present things that to the to public and politicians is that that's what you're doing you're |
| 1:02:53 | requesting that is there anyone here that's that's got a that would like to work on it so what are we talking a couple of hours a week or a meeting here and there or what are you however root evolves as a matter of fact however it evolves yeah I have given um Clearwater back in May I gave them a year notice so that I could work on climate full-time uh and they deserve somebody who will be more River focused yeah um so I I'm just kind of at the moment planting the seed because I'm juggling a lot but it's so needed and it |
| 1:03:38 | it could so easily get picked up by the New York Times or whoever uh if it's clear and coherent and language in a way that is Success accessible and also you know visually supported which my PowerPoints are uh and I suspect that many people here will respond and quite a lot of people here send things out uh I've had Stephen salsa sends things out and Bruce sent out a wonderful PowerPoint you did a wonderful PowerPoint um I can't remember it's to us or hpac or one of them but and then you sent the |
| 1:04:14 | PowerPoint out Brew um you're so you're muted Brew you're sort of I can't hear you're speaking no my the my presentation is now out there and it's available and putting it out with people of course it's always work in progress being upgraded and I tend to cut it about depending on the audience that it's going to um restoration plan is is increasingly out there now right have you seen that uh manager the thing is I've seen so much um and I did buy uh Peter's book for um that I will be presenting to |
| 1:04:51 | uh Chuck Schumer and and other people that what is it you need then well um let's see maybe let's start with um if if just resend or put into the chat um the specific uh PowerPoint and I I think what I need is um help organizing information because there is so much information um you know to distill what it is that um the people that I am Inc in communication with including climate reality Etc um and uh one other quick question I asked it before but I remember within the last month someone posted an amazingly clear list and I wanted to |
| 1:05:58 | compare that with uh John nissen's white paper and I've gone through dozens of emails and I can't find it what sort of list is this of potential Solutions the system potential um interventions climate restoration Solutions right the hpac if that's Ron byman has done that recently yeah yeah so if you contact him yeah and also you think it was run Byron yeah he's been putting it out and uh he's been managing it he's been asking us and chasing us up and telling us to you know make sure it's correct what I |
| 1:06:41 | don't mean what I don't mean is a spreadsheet this is not a spreadsheet it's a document it's about 20 or 30 pages yeah with a paragraph on each one all right I will look for that and um I don't want to take up any more time but okay it is my to uh to put something together that we can share and I'll look up um uh what Brew already has a look up Ron Bayman and we'll take inch by inch yeah and feel free to email people I mean many people are busy they don't reply not because they don't want to but |
| 1:07:22 | because they're just too busy to forget them you know somebody was you know so and you're welcome just as welcome to ask a question uh at the beginning and have it on the agenda and say I'd like to ask this person or that person about should I say this or should I say that and here's my you know this can be a sort of like a workshop uh you know in part you know for sort of 15 minutes that you please do that next time and just say have a quick have something ready you know if you can't get hold of |
| 1:07:52 | people they won't reply hopefully they'll turn up to this and you know we're just trying to do the best we can and with the time we've got given that we're all busy so that's fine thank you uh manager um who's next I haven't uh probably Brian yeah yeah for the response to manager and that is uh the Healthy Planet Action Coalition is coming out with a um a Triad vision statement and that vision statement is designed for uh politicians and others and it's very much focused on the Triad of |
| 1:08:23 | decarbonization uh greenhouse gas removal and uh re-brightening the planet if you will uh and and regions in particular the polls and I think that would be a pretty accessible document and I think it's going to be under 10 pages and it should be out later this month and I think they're going to look for a lot of signatories on it so I think we should all have a good look at it um so I think that's something that's up and coming and worth talking with Ron Bayman and Suzanne and others about um I'll also touch briefly on something |
| 1:08:55 | John Nissen pointed out and that is with oil and gas funding for ipcc and others we have firmly in our minds the notion that methane is a greenhouse gas with a multiplier of 28 on a Century time scale but if you look at recent methane curves they're increasing super linearly so when we're looking at it from a planetary standpoint the relevant figure is the instantaneous figure of 120 times or greater and I'm really in awe over the fact that at nearly two parts per million methane and a instantaneous multiplier of 120. we're |
| 1:09:33 | looking at 240 parts per million of methane equivalent and 420 parts per million of carbon dioxide which adds up to 660 just for those two greenhouse gases alone and that's more than twice pre-industrial forcing so we already hit our 2x greenhouse gas you know model and I I never thought we'd be there in our lifetimes and we're there already so I think it's a very ominous picture in terms of acceleration of warming Trends and the Tipping points that we see in the Arctic and the Himalayas and in the |
| 1:10:04 | oceans uh thanks Clive back to you sure thank you very much Brian uh I could just put a link in first one if it was the wrong one I've just put a link in which should take you to a pdf version of my PowerPoint which could come to the speaking notes I think that's the whole thing I did a slightly cut down version in Geneva but to have a look and see what you think so sorry lots of pictures don't come don't be alarmed by 90 slides all right wonderful thank you thank you uh Chris uh yeah I just wanted to come back to |
| 1:10:40 | John about his comment about how basically modelers are all in the hands of the economists in the rpcc um because they're not all funded by them anyway there's loads of modelers around the world running models they're not all in the in the sort of pocket of the ipcc by any means there's plenty of independent ones around so um they they may well come up with whatever answers they wish and and that will May well contrast with other modelers and so I just I don't think that to assume that all models are basically under the thumb |
| 1:11:09 | of ipcc is really anything like the case some may well be I'll Grant you but I don't think it's a generic case in all cases by any means and there's quite a lot of Earth system modelers around uh I can add to that my understanding is the desire for consensus once it gets through to advice to policy makers means that the models of many countries go into the pot some of those models are very much better than others some of those models don't include Half the feedback loops but in order to make it fair |
| 1:11:44 | you end up with a lot of junk bottles with some very good models and the net result is you end up with something that's badly watered down um to keep everybody happy because it's a big political element to this yeah politics okay thank you just to come back on the modeling to defend the modelers it's very difficult to deal uh with a positive feedback or negative feedback about particularly the positive feedback uh and um so the modelers who try and take into account produce very diverted results whereas the people who |
| 1:12:23 | ignore it tend to get the similar results uh so so when the IPC does its uh analysis uh it finds that there's a high consensus or on the uh or on on the make it high competent for example on on this uh retreat with the sea ice because they've ignored the outliers which are the ones they'd actually take into account uh positive feedback so it's not just that they are um just by a biased panel but the the whole process is is biased against dealing with uh the accelerating trends just because they're outliers oh |
| 1:13:18 | systematically The Most Dangerous Ones so there's a systematic uh error in the whole process of the ipcc modeling results right I just want to make sure I understand so you're saying that the systematic error is that the outliers are sort of not there sort of average and so they ignore them is that what you're saying yeah I mean it operates by consensus so it's got to be never going to take these streams into account that's the whole issue with the IPC but that's how it was set up originally |
| 1:13:51 | um that's not it's not a new feature it's it's the way it's always worked um and it certainly isn't and very satisfactory granted but that's the way it was set up sounds like they don't take their own history they don't look at their own historical uh modeling you know they look at their own you know what their um you know their history they're not they're not taking that they're not adjusting their own policy but according to the fact that they've been getting it |
| 1:14:18 | wrong yeah the the ozone hole was only discovered because somebody looked rather seriously it's an outlier hmm I've discovered the outlier wasn't an outlier it was actual actually true so John would you like to if Amanda Joe wants to put in a message to the public and to politicians uh do you would you support manager and say look you know they're getting it wrong on a systematic basis yeah I actually put up my hand to offer and see if we can say see if we uh there you go manager please connect if |
| 1:15:02 | we can put some things together yeah and that makes sense thank you yeah yeah John keeps coming back again and again John never gives up I mean we all don't give up but uh John is particularly impressive in that regard and I think he'll yeah there's um you might just there's a nice little quote I've just come across as a paper published in um the conversation the online uh thing a year or two ago by among others uh Bob Watson who used to be the head of ipcc and basically it's critical of um a Whole Net Zero thing |
| 1:15:37 | but this quote I thought was quite interesting he says talking about um modeling and so on Unfortunately they also remove the need for deep critical thinking such models represent society as a web of idealized emotionless buyers and sellers unless ignore complex social and political realities or even the impact of climate change itself so their implicit promises market-based approaches were always work this means discussion about policies were limited to those most convenient politicians incremental changes to legislation and |
| 1:16:05 | taxes I think that's pretty much what John's saying more or less does not yeah yeah pretty much very nice if you could uh yeah I'll put the I'll put the link into the chat yeah brilliant okay great yeah uh it's okay all right um this strikes me that's difficult for the members of the public they're just trying to Grapple with the basics and then they keep hearing they see the scientists all fighting each other well what can they do all right um we've just got 15 minutes uh everyone |
| 1:16:38 | uh so what else I don't think I think I can take this stuff with Stephen thank you for your answer Stephen um I think I should take that offline with you uh you can you could park mine till next week if you want Clive I don't know what Bruce thing on legislation and research illustrations about maybe you could tell us about that okay are you ready to do that Brew should we do that uh yeah sorry I don't know much about it I posted to make it interesting this is this is an American move which appears to open |
| 1:17:10 | up the doors for um funding Research into ocean fertilization and other ocean-based research and makes it um possible for people to fund that and get tax breaks for funding it um in parallel seems to be releasing the some of the restraints on that research but I do need to dig in deeper and I thought you know just putting it out there for people to take a look and see what's going on there's a second leak which you will be able to see which I've posted in relation to this 30 million carbon removal uh dark Zone ocean and |
| 1:17:46 | air captured article which is interesting alongside that I am sorry I'm having trouble making SharePoint thing work so you can the share screen thing I might not have accessing the file on my uh I'll have to dig a Little Deeper I think there's a setting that needs changing so uh what I'll do is have a dig around tomorrow morning and try and send it out to everybody in the group and that's sorry what's that again that's the well I was trying to post my biosphere restoration plan presentation |
| 1:18:21 | I hope there's a share in it that would work for everybody in this group but Brian tells me it's not accessible so a a share in the presentation just in the links I thought I just oh I've been giving you a link which we're taking a wonderful I would say that I could send to you on the screen here to access it individually but um it's it's oh it's not okay you're saying it's not sort of online or something okay the the security profiles on on Microsoft are too high and I've got to |
| 1:19:02 | change something to enable it to be okay right but you didn't you say you're going to email it or yeah I'll find a way of emailing but sort of tomorrow okay or another time thank you very much yeah okay okay well um so we cut that very wonderful conversation well very uh important conversation uh short um so we've that means we're pretty much done unless you want to speak Crystal unless anyone has any anything else how about you friends do you have any comments on what did you I know that it's difficult for you to follow your |
| 1:19:40 | muted friends you're muted you're muted you have to click unmute a comment to uh to a stratospheric aerosol injection and I had a email to send to a grant Gower to his uh to uh uh the papers he sent around and he wanted to put cocoa leaves in the stratosphere as I understand it right the stratosphere into the stratosphere apocalypse I have a haven't I uh understood it no is he happy in the ocean where it has an Albedo effect not in the outside yes but but something he wrote about uh sort of radiation is then I said to him |
| 1:20:46 | the UV depletion by but stratospheric injection to it uh change the atmospheric Chemistry by uh reducing the the oh and the Korean radical reactions and oxidations with methane hence producing a mommy see me saying and lenson the uh uh a lifetime of this but uh additional it could be a negative to Cloud uh production because the Forex Zone produces Surfer yeah DMS Organics |
| 1:21:50 | in the atmosphere and if if they will not become oxidized by UV by radicals they cannot produce uh sulfuric acid carbon Cloud colonization nuclei so uh also the cloud production over the oceans would be disturbed by this so I can only say don't use solar radiation it makes it makes us agreed and what the class but not the stratosphere yeah because it produces the UV which reduces the oxidative capacity to yes yes to change DMS into sulfuric acid |
| 1:22:55 | which is the main source of clouds over the ocean it's actually sulfuric acid droplets um yes yeah um okay um I actually so is it where I saw a sort of a few messages okay I don't see Hands Up Stephen you know I've got a sort of a basic question so you're that I've been trying is you know reading your um uh trying to get better at understanding the thing about clouds and reflectivity that you in the so in your um typhoon moderation PDF which is monthly you know it's argued I mean there's it talks about the Slingo and |
| 1:23:38 | someone else's um the calculation of Rage uh reflectivity are and as one of that so that's the reflectivity of clouds and saying that if it was a change of like 0.05 or something in the reflectivity then that changes the amount of energy that comes in from the Sun but clouds are also trap heat so I was wondering is is that is that part of it or how how does that come into it uh Julius lingo who used to be the chief person at the Hadley Center uh told a friend of mine Alan Guardian that the problem was uh |
| 1:24:18 | 1.7 watts per square meter now that was a while ago maybe a bit higher and the mean 24-hour server input is 340 watts per square meter yeah so this means that you actually need to change the reflectivity of the Earth by just uh a half a percent in order to saw the 340 that's coming in now this is a way to do very very easy calculations uh it may be that you can change different parts of the Earth by a more than you need and move things around and then change other parts for example migration from the South Atlantic to the |
| 1:25:06 | North Atlantic so you know be much better to have a proper climate model that did everything in different parts of the world at different seasons but we haven't got that or at least I can't get at it and so if you want to do an engineering calculation just to get a rough estimate you need to say we've got to increase reflectivity by this half percent now I want to do it with clouds and there aren't clouds everywhere and we couldn't do all the clouds so we might say that we if we could only do 10 percent of the |
| 1:25:41 | reflectivity increase only 10 whether we need to increase reflectivity by five percent ten times a half maybe a bit but that perhaps that's a bit more than wheat but okay let's let's go for that and uh the way to do that is is to double the uh concentration of cloud condensation new Cloud this is what to me predicted now his stuff is physical observations done from airplanes with photometers and droplet collection and all that stuff so it isn't a model it's a real observation and the models are |
| 1:26:20 | then used is his data to try and uh produce their calculations so that that tells us what we've got to do and we want to be able to try and do it in the best place in the first time it varies a lot when there's no sun coming in at all you've never wasting your time so the mobility of uh the the spray vessels that we're doing is is a big attraction also the short life is a big attraction because you uh if you get it wrong you can stop very quickly and you're always forgiven and the next time |
| 1:26:54 | it rains yeah so that's that's what that paper's about now I don't know that that number is half uh you know um 1.7 watts is right all they can do is to use a number and say does anyone else want to change it and very few people have said no no it's not that much or the reflectivities is wrong whatever but the paper that I sent you is just a way of doing a calculation from the particular set of assumptions and I'm asking the climate Community to suggest other input assumptions I'm not saying |
| 1:27:29 | that my ones I know are right I've got them from the literature but if someone says oh they want a different one I will change it so far I've only had one uh person coming back and saying that I I'm I need to alter also number which I have done in the present thing so this is invitation to people to suggest other uh calculations and the the cost benefit ratio of this so enormous that it wouldn't matter if things were two or three times different it would still be a very attractive way to do it |
| 1:28:02 | yeah that's all it is that's great yeah does that make it does that make sense 1.7 is is is pretty widely accepted as a yeah that's the current imbalance is that the imbalance since is that the current sort of imbalance between uh the is that the sort of baked in warming that we've got given the current uh it's it's the difference between pre-industrial and what we've got now ah right it would probably be a bit higher than that because I think this is some years ago but uh um it ignores the Arctic |
| 1:28:44 | ignores the Arctic ah okay right I'm not I don't know where you got that from I didn't think she said that she was just talking the whole the whole the total Albedo loss uh because I don't know why but they do yeah they ignore everything about what's going on in the Arctic yeah so well they they have a pseudoscientific uh way of uh dealing with feedbacks they say they don't actually have any forcing value they only have a forcing which is in relation to some parameter like temperature so |
| 1:29:31 | so the optical Beto loss is defined in terms of so much per degree Centigrade okay I think it's more accurate to measure how much the ice has been lost and if you know that volume the last time I looked it was 25 000 kilograms a second if you know that and you know the latent heat is a fusion of ice number for the for for that part of it now there may be other uh Heats in and out which would be additional to that but that's that's a bit a big enough one to be going on with yeah well Peter Williams calculates uh has |
| 1:30:12 | estimated the uh Albedo loss if you include the snow and ice together their retreat has caused what was the average globally it would be about uh 1.0 watts per square meter it could be as much as that I I think that's 1.0 Squad what's per square meter just for the eyes in the Arctic yeah and that's average globally right you want to be very careful whether it's per square meter of the whole world or per square meter of the Arctic yes a square meter of the whole world yeah right so just add that to the 1.7 so I have 2.7 |
| 1:30:57 | okay yeah right so where my questions are coming from as um looking at Solutions so that's very useful Stephen that that uh those you know formulas because I can plug them into Excel and then just try different numbers and see how that looks um because we what what we have is a way to make uh you know mineral tiny mineral particles we don't have to get make droplets from seaward and wait for them to evaporate we they just start off by being mineral particles and we can make them reflective we can make them |
| 1:31:31 | hygroscopic and um what they come from is so light it's not very much stuff uh it can be carried around in an aircraft so um not everybody likes the look of that but then it just does it doesn't make it Cloud then doesn't look like a chemtrail you know um so is but if if a if a particle is very hygroscopic does that mean it's just going to grab lots of water and warm up and just go up and immediately become a nice particle and make everything rain or just disappear we don't I don't that's what I don't |
| 1:32:05 | know well if it gets up to 28 microns diameter it's now going to be uh falling fast enough to gobble up other ones that are smaller and that's what you need to get some drain 28 microns yeah yeah is what you need to for it to begin to rain on drizzle yeah it's been it's when one drop gobbles up another drop and then the bigger one gobbles up another one that you may yeah right but I'm asking about before that if you've got a tiny particle that's 100 nanometers and it begins as a particle |
| 1:32:41 | just a as a mineral particle it's got aluminum chloride on it it gathers water gathers its own water because it's quite hygroscopic um then then what happens does it get hot does it then shoot up and then become an ice particle I mean what happens well it moves according to the what the local area around it is that size the viscosity is about a hundred times yeah yeah okay but what I'm saying with the marble yeah so it's not gonna this but that would it make an updraft if you have a lot of them if |
| 1:33:15 | you've got you know dense particles a thousand particles per cubic centimeters that have been published that are worth mentioning in this discussion right so there's one that was done um I can't remember or the name of the guy was he might come back to me but he was talking about um using um carbon as a lasting agent so that you release a black carbon in a cloud behind the aircraft alongside your um uh active gas and then that will raise the temperature of that act of gas and then cause it to rise into the stratosphere |
| 1:33:56 | um but don't forget and the other the other one is uh David Keith that's a photophoretic particles ones which um have got Optical and aerodynamic performance such that they will lift themselves up and and seek the light basically the the airflow around them wow um works so that they will self-levitate right but the idea that particles will go up and when it rise because they give you up it's not uh accurate um in as much as the particles themselves women rise due to heating is that air passes around them yeah yeah |
| 1:34:38 | but don't forget in the stratosphere you you've got the Assumption in what you said that the as you rise then the parcels will get colder and freeze this that doesn't actually to happen because the stratosphere has got the temperature inversion so as they rise they get hotter no I'm not talking about the stratosphere I'm talking about the troposphere we're not interested in putting particles in the stratosphere we want to put them really low down um about Marine Cloud brightening yeah so |
| 1:35:10 | I'm discussing both related to stratospheric software yeah I just I misunderstood yeah no problem Andrew no problem I appreciate you trying to help there no problem yeah so and uh if it's humid then it they and it's time to stop in a minute very soon um they gather water from water vapor from the atmosphere and that as I understand so that you get the latent heat of sort of condensation then don't you um and so if you have a lot of them they might warm up and and so but does this mean anything to you Stephen does it |
| 1:35:44 | just sound speculative or um well I'd like to explore everything like this but you did mention waiting around for the drops to evaporate the evaporation is all right not waiting around but sorry no yeah but yeah you don't have to wait direction of a second to evaporate yes so I shouldn't have said that yeah sorry yeah so you but so um but uh it's it's I think it's waiting around for the funding to make the nozzles that you've got designed and ready to be made um that would help a lot yes yeah at the |
| 1:36:20 | moment you can say that the progress to cost ratio is infinite laughs yes yeah I've actually nearly finished the design for the vessels and I'm now trying to think of things that I've overlooked like the tooling and the ways of loading up the the canister do you hear anything from from uh Sean because they're supposed to be making these or researching and thinking about how to make model and better novels for Daniel Harris I've heard very little from them yeah um can I can I uh yeah indeed and the second uh a paper of uh |
| 1:37:04 | where Goa is a co-author they they want to make uh ehawks cocolis a dry aerosol and put it in this Stratosphere really wow okay yes so this is uh from uh Grant I think Grant's not here this this time no he is not here but I discussed it with him yes this stratospheric nonsense yes okay nonsense right I read the first half of that email from your friends I still have to read the other okay folks thank you everybody um been great again see you again in a couple of weeks bye for now stick around anyone that wants to talk after this hit the button |