|
Post by ffpycm on Jul 28, 2014 10:04:49 GMT
Dear Summer School Participants
I'm always confused with the concept of "termination effect"? After "smoothing" the SRM scenario into a "quasi-equilibrium" scenario then the termination effect is gone?? There must be a boundary, or a transition between a system which has a termination effect and a system without it, likely depending on the scale, intensity and rate of extra signal loaded into the system. Is this "critical point" existing in SRM for the earth system? If yes, what earth component controlling this critical point? THis is question is abstract one, looking forward for some reply! Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by anonymous on Jul 28, 2014 13:16:03 GMT
You need an underlying evolution of another state variable (here: stock of atmospheric CO2).
|
|
|
Post by matthiashonegger on Jul 29, 2014 10:54:56 GMT
Dear ffpycm,
termination risk is determined by scientific and political factors, namely:
- the gap in radiative forcing between the forcing due to A) current greenhouse gas levels (W/m2 resulting from concentrations of CO2equivalents in parts per million) and B) the resulting radiative forcing due to artificial intervention via SRM.
- the stability of the political regime that supports that level of (ongoing) SRM deployment.
The latter is arguably a way more complex aspect of the termination risk, but arguably several factors to it can be identified (e.g. level of support by a sufficiently powerful coalition of the deploying and existence of appropriate measures – e.g. compensation and adaptation payments for those countries not fully supporting the chosen (form/level) of deployment.
For more information come and discuss with me during the poster session. Cheers, Matthias (honegger@perspectives.cc)
|
|