I watched this a few month ago. Took up the offer of sending in questions. No answer yet.
Q1: What is a reasonable remaining carbon budget (in CO2e) to keep within 1.5°C (or 2°C)?
On a per capita basis, how does it compare with average world yearly emissions?
How much more than this are average European emissions?
Q2: What’s the current thinking on the radiative forcing index for aircraft emissions?
Is there a Hansen’s Faustian bargain with aircraft emissions because in the first few decades air flights cool the Earth?
CF: Unger et.al. Attribution of climate forcing to economic sectors
Q3: Can the global carbon intensity of production be reduced fast enough to save the climate and avoid de-growth?
If GDP needs to be constrained there is full employment, labour productivity must be constrained. This means wages are constrained. How can the incomes of the low poor be supported?
Q4: In reference to BECCS (and more generally), has anyndetailed work been done on the albedo effect of biomass planting?
CF. Bala et al. Combined climate and carbon-cycle effects of large-scale deforestation
e.g. Has there been work to find crops with “good” albedo?
Q5: What do the panel think of solving fuel poverty by taking from the rich to give to the poor?
Has anybody considered that to heat houses requires heating hundreds of cubic metres of space to warm people that occupy a few metres each?
Q6: Would the panel demand high profile governmental campaigns to tell the public the effects of their everyday actions?
Would a more detailed version of How bad are bananas? by Mike Berners-Lee help?
Q7: Is mass car ownership compatible with saving the climate?
Q8: In assessing green house gas emissions what is the appropriate weighting for methane compared to CO2?
Occasionally I have a comment on another blog rejected. This will be a list of those I want to follow up.
London Economic 11th January 2019
Working people shouldn’t pay price for political failures of Conservative politicians
To save the climate degrowth is needed.
(Kaya identity & etc.)
Subsidise the wages of the low paid.
Take from the rich to give to the poor.
(It’s the right thing to do.)
The rich most responsible for greenhouse gas emissions.
(So fine them and give to the poor.)
Question: does London Economic reject
2. Labour subsidies
3. Robbing the rich
4. Tax rich polluters
Or did I overdo the links to one of my own blogs?
I’m keen to find out – I rather like London Economic.
An idea for capturing CO2 & storing
heat under your new house
Question: “Is it a good idea or barmy?”
A heat store to capture CO2
P1. Store 50+ tonnes of rock that absorbs CO2 under (or near) a new house.
The mineral olivine is taken as the example for this note. It absorbs CO2 slowly at ambient temperature (25°C) but much faster at a temperature of 186°C. Continue reading Capture CO2 under your new house
‘An idea for storing renewable energy’
was first posted on ccq.org.uk, 25th March 2012
Question “Is it a good idea or barmy?”
1. There are times when renewable energy cannot be used. Sources tell me that 20% or more of wind energy is grounded (i.e. thrown away) because sometimes the generated energy cannot be used. Other renewable sources (solar, wave power) are also intermittent. Biomass is an exception. Continue reading An idea for storing renewable energy (2012)