cc: "V McGregor" date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:26:29 -0000 from: "shimon awerbuch" subject: RE: Tyndall/CMI Symposium Summary to: "John Shepherd" , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , John -- Very good summary. I would underscore that a portfolio approach makes a lot of sense given the magnitude of the problem and the uncertainties. I also think that 'bifurcating' the issues -- i.e. into CO2 mitigation plus global temperature control (increased albedo to lower solar radiation) makes a lot of sense. This creates extra degrees of freedom: in financial terms this mean it creates potentially valuable options that can be exercised later. However, I am uncertain now about a bifurcated approach because I am unclear about the implications of continued CO2 emissions. I liked the bifurcated strategy because I was under the impression CO2 was helpful-- enhanced crop growth, etc. But in your summary, I see that it also causes acidification of ocean waters. Assuming albedo control system are in place, how does continued CO2 emissions affect things? Can it be categorized in simple "positive" or "negative" terms? Kudos on a great meeting! Best - Shimon -------------------------------------------------- Dr. Shimon Awerbuch Energy-Regulatory Economics & Finance Tyndall Centre Visiting Fellow, SPRU - University of Sussex Brighton, BN1 9QE, UK Phone: +44 1273 227 077 Mobile: +44 7796 835 279 -----Original Message----- From: John Shepherd [mailto:j.g.shepherd@soc.soton.ac.uk] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 10:40 AM To: eeadams@mit.edu; Kevin.anderson@umist.ac.uk; s.awerbuch@sussex.ac.uk; eaboyle@mit.edu; victor@pik-potsdam.de; basil.butler@lineone.net; kenc@llnl.gov; mgrc@ceh.ac.uk; silvana_cardoso@cheng.cam.ac.uk; he101@esc.cam.ac.uk; juliof@geol.umd.edu; rogerh@foe.co.uk; held@pik-potsdam.de; m.hulme@uea.ac.uk; p.johnston@exeter.ac.uk; keith@cmu.edu; lkump@psu.edu; ksl@ldeo.columbia.edu; brian.launder@umist.ac.uk; latham@ucar.edu; tlent@ceh.ac.uk; p.liss@uea.ac.uk; jesjl@aol.com; mcmahom@bp.com; pearcefred@compuserve.com; sirasool@compuserve.com; njr@bgs.ac.uk; dork.sahagian@unh.edu; h.j.schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk; j.g.shepherd@soc.soton.ac.uk; vsmetacek@awi-bremerhaven.de; m.h.smith@leeds.ac.uk; phstone@mit.edu; rivw@nhm.ac.uk; a.watkinson@uea.ac.uk; lowellwood@comcast.net Cc: V McGregor Subject: Tyndall/CMI Symposium Summary Dear colleague Many thanks for coming to the Symposium. I feel that it was much more successful than I had anticipated, and we are very grateful to you for your contribution. Herewith a first and very tentative attempt to summarise (very briefly) the "emerging consensus" from the meeting. I ran out of time at the point where it breaks off, and I am sure I have forgotten to include some things, but NB I am not (at this stage) aiming for a complete list of comments on all the options, just to highlight any "surprises" (i.e. things which are not common knowledge). Sorry its a bit rough, but I am up to my ears preparing a lot of lectures for the week after next.... All comments & suggestions (preferably as Change Tracked amendments) will be welcome... John PS I have left a few people who were unable to attend on this circulation list, so they get a modicum of feedback anyway (and will only delete them for future messages if they so request)