>> okay. hello, everybody. welcome to the seachange session at the 2017 texas book festival, the 22nd annual texas book festival. it's great to have you all here. i am dr. spencer wells. i'm a a geneticist and anthropologist, and sometimes author. for many years i was the explorer in residence for the national geographic society, study how are species of pipe with the world and since 2015 i have lived here in austin. i'm the founder and ceo of the consumer genomics firm in town, and co-owner of a nightclub which is -- [applause] >> i would like to introduce our authors. we have juli berwald was an austin-based side letter, and

editors contribute to publications such as the "new york times," naked, national geographic and slate. she is a phd in ocean science and university of southern california and she lives here in austin she's the author of "spineless" which we will be talking about today. [applause] >> then we have peter wadhams who is the purpose of ocean physics and head of the polar ocean physics group at cambridge university in the uk. he's held visiting professorships at the national institutes of polar research, the university of washington, currently at the scripps institution of oceanography and he is the author of "a farewell to ice" which we will be discussing as well. [applause] >> next, a couple quick reminder that after the session to office will be signing books in the book can't over here. the books are for sale courtesy

of bookpeople in austin institution. remember when you buy a book at the festival you support the author, the festival and local independent book stores. that's good. texas book festival is nonprofit. nonprofit. its mission is to thwart low income students in texas with all the visits and book donations by its reading rock stars program and also to fund grants for libraries throughout the state of texas. your book purchase really does make a difference. okay, i think were going to kick it off there. well, let's get into this. juli, "spineless" is about jellyfish. >> it is. >> which is an interesting topic. yesterday in fact, was world jellyfish day. >> i was just as surprised to find out as probably everyone. >> jellyfish are fascinating. everybody has experienced a jellyfish sting out in the wild so to speak, swimming in the ocean and that's how most of us

know about jellyfish. where i was turned onto a fascinating jolliffe ishtar are was when i visited the monterey bay aquarium back in the '90s when at that jellyfish exhibit with oblique lighting. you can see what the creatures were like and what they were doing. what was your journey to writing a book about jellyfish? >> i didn't start with the beauty of the jellyfish, which is as it went around to talk to scientists about why this study jellyfish, most of them said it was the beautiful demand. for me i was actually -- beauty that hold them in. i was a textbook writer in austin and i started to do some mainstream right at is working on a story for national geographic about ocean acidification, and they had that classic graphic that national geographic has this as winners and losers in the future acidified c. on the winners side were things like algae, microalgae, tell and

jellyfish. and i thought do we really know that? i can be done experienced in that jellyfish can do well in the future in acidified oceans? i dove into the scientific literature and i found that we had not really done any experiments to know that. but it also found this like really interesting scientific argument going on, which was what's happening to jellyfish in today's oceans. and a lot of the things were doing to the seas are making life better for jellyfish. so things like warming, acidification maybe but coastal development probably plays a role with the runoff of fertilizers which causes dead zones, overfishing, illegal fishing. all of these things, jellyfish seem to tolerate them very well so there was a big discussion in the scientific literature like our jellyfish taking over

ecosystems? there was another, pushback say we just don't know. it turned out resorted systematically not study jellyfish for most of the 20th century because once we started studying the ocean by pulling big nets through it using winches and motors, our view of the ocean became biased about things that are durable, things are hard enough to handle the treatment before we look at them. it was just to meet this incredible scientific question that really led me into the world of jellyfish. >> very cool. jellyfish a really interesting. they are animals and they have relatively complex behaviors, including sleeping. >> yes. >> this is a new city that came out a couple of weeks ago. yet they have no centralized nervous system. they don't have a brain so how does that work? tell us about the life history of jellyfish and some of the biology which is a fascinating.

>> and i might just take this moment to say there's a secret in my book that some people are not really picking up on so much but the book is based on like what i structured the book is based on the lifecycle of the jellyfish. the jellyfish starts off as a little, there's medusa and there are males and females and their eggs and sperm the form of the larva, and on the larva is to become like a tick tack with her on it. the first section of the book is kind of the ideas of the book. that thing settles and it becomes a polyp, and a polyp as i can see anemone with tentacles it lives for many, it likes to live upside down. it can live for many, many years like that. and the second section of the book i supplanted here in texas learning about jellyfish science, and then what happens

is at some point given some environmental cues that polyp was schism itself into a stack of plates, and this is what i sort of realized i had to get out of texas and find out more about jellyfish around the world. each one of those hops off and becomes what initially known as baby jellyfish, and then later become medusa which are the mature jellyfish and then the whole thing starts over again. so have this really complex lifecycle, two parts, the medusa is definitely not the only part of the jellyfish denotes what most people think of as a jellyfish. i i probably going on too long, but the question of how bout you like initial thing get around in the ocean, if you look carefully at the medusa, like in an aquarium you'll see right around the edge of the bell like the umbrella part this little intensification of once in a while and those are its sensory organs begin each one of those

the art couple eyes usually, a thing called a touch plate which is like something that they cah up into the water and spell chemicals. there's a balance center like in our ear. there is a thing called a pacemaker which how fast it pulses. each one of these different from around the edge of the bell, the nerves run through these and they integrate all the information from all the different directions at the jellyfish is experiencing as it moves through the water. although they are not, they don't have a brain at the top,, then this very interesting integrated, interconnected intelligence or ability to get around in the world that has given them enough capability and

evolutionary success that they are the oldest animal still swimming in our seas. so they're quite adept at what they do. >> very cool. i love natural history. peter, switch to you now. your book is about ice among other things but ice is where you'll start off with the book. you talk about going to the arctic in 1970 on the research ship hudson. how did that happen and why did you become interested in ice in the first place in the arctic in particular? >> i i was always interested in the ocean, and the first oceanographic point either opportunity to take part in was when i was young and it was a canadian ship going around north and south america. the hudson, the first and only time the americas have been circumnavigated and it took a year to do it. that meant we started off going down the at arctic and then on the way back we came through the

northwest passage. so i had plenty of time to study ice. i got very interested in that. as opposed to some of the warm waters in between. and made that my field of research. in those days very few people were working on ice, so there were a lot of unsolved problems and it was a very interesting field. now ice has become much more important mainly because it is disappearing. a large fraction of the world environmental scientists are not interested in ice. >> ice and the shrinking ice sheets in greenland and the arctic and at arctic that we hear about a lot in the news, but this whole habit of observing ice patterns goes back quite a ways to whalers of all people. someone named william imaging in the book in 18th and 19th century. tell us about that and why were whalers so important?

>> well, the at arctic is where the white whales out because they could catch the fast swing whales. it was important to the arctic. affect wailing in the arctic produced the oil that was used to light tents in new england. think about -- [inaudible] and that was all whales caught in greenland. the waiters in doing that made very valuable observations about the ice, how much there was for instance, a big protrusion of ice on the east coast of greenland that waiters for the first ones to notice and a recently disappeared which had the epic climactic effect. they were very fallible in telling us where the ice limits were in the 19th century. this helped to show us a much ice has retreated over the last

few years relative to those days. >> excellent. juli, three words for you. jelly and passive margin. explain. >> i can pass that test. one of the coolest stories i found when i was kind of following, as i was writing the book i would start to plan our family vacations so that i could go and talk to jellyfish and scientists. we were on tape card -- cape cod and us are talking to these two jellyfish site is who work on the biomechanics of jellyfish, which is how they move. they had been just given a grant by the navy to try to build a robotic jelly. the navy was thinking about the thickness would be like surveillance. they use very little energy so they can kind of hang out in base and surveillance and spike and i don't know, but let me just i don't think there are any

jelly ops out there. anyway, in the course of making the robotic jellyfish, they created the silicone cell and put samosas in it, -- some sales. they turn it on and it squeezes and it moves forward. and then they turn it off and it opens and it goes back to what started. they were like what? they turn it on again and it goes forward, they open it and it goes back. it's like a yo-yo. they were like we got something wrong and this one graduates it was like well, they're supposed to be amplified round edge of the edge of the bell. i didn't have time to glue it on, and we should glue that on. they said okay. they pull it out of the tank and dried off in the glue this -- you've you seen the little edge of the jellyfish, and they glued on the people back in the tank and they turn on the power and it goes --

it's just like, swims at a site just like the jellyfish. the discovery is, it has no muscles and get it moves as a consequence of the bell moving. is everything to pushing something forward through the water. it creates these turbulent eddies at the jellyfish can push against to move forward. that wasn't even the whole story. they continued to work on the project and am able to create almost like a map of the pressure field around a jellyfish. what they discovered is, well liked, when we walked we push back on the ground behind us. we create like a high-pressure zone behind us and we push about to go forward. we are terrestrial creatures. we don't have fixed things around us. but in the water much more viscous. so that many of the jellyfish sailed is only push back against

the water, it actually creates a section in front of the jellyfish bell, and low-pressure system like when we sucked in air. that low-pressure is a great, contributes more to the movement of the jellyfish than high-pressure in the back. then they started looking around the world, or the ocean, and lots of things that's when, and you notice everything bends. it's all flips and flops in the ocean. the whole reason is because it creates this low-pressure in front of the animal that sucks it through the water. as we've been building ships and submarines and all the things to explore the oceans, we've always just use are terrestrial . if you like let's push back against the water. but, in fact, should probably be bending, creating bending vehicles to the underwater because they are much, much more efficient. the jellyfish by the most efficient swimmer that they look at, compared to something like a salmon what you think of as a

very powerful swimmer. the jellyfish used one-fifth as much energy to move the same distance as a salmon does. really cool. it's a very cool story. >> biomimicry at its best. we should be paying attention to make sugar tell us about day-glo jellies. >> this is another great story from the jellyfish that is maybe not so well known and that is that many jellyfish bioluminescence and jellyfish lived all over. they don't just live in the service or and coastlines but in the threat the ocean and in the deep waters bioluminescence is one of the major problem with the major way of communication. the animals make little screens holler coming me, check me out and let go away. bioluminescence, or i'm getting eaten come help me, they make

these bioluminescence calls that have the server meanings. jellyfish are very good at this. in 70s there trying to understand what makes bioluminescence happens and this one scientist was working on that question in jellyfish in puget sound, and yeah, interestingly he actually, he was about a few miles away from nagasaki when it was, bombed with the atomic bomb so he hera very interesting life story. anyway, he was able to purify the chemicals which are probably -- out of his jellyfish from puget sound, then what he notice was that purified the glow was blue, but the jellyfish in the ocean below green. so what was going on, and he

went on to discover that there was a small protein called green fluorescent protein, which takes the blue light and ships it to the green wavelength. it's a very self-contained unit. it doesn't need an enzyme to work or anything. it just needs light. and it's a very sturdy. some biochemists and geneticists picked up on this and they would like we can take the dna for that green fluorescent protein and asserted in front of the genes that were interesting study in the animal and it will light up. it's almost like adding a sentence to an e-mail before you forward it. every time that gene is expressed in the green horse approaching will be as well. you're probably seen pictures that are going and that's all started with the green fluorescent protein from the jellyfish. then servant of the people, i guy named martin kelsey if they could with the green fluorescent protein and outcomes in every color of the rainbow really.

these scientists won the nobel prize for their work on day-glo jellies. >> survey shows the importance of funding for basic research which is being debated these days. speaking of basic science, peter, we're going to get into a discussion about present-day climate change, human induced climate change. give us some context, tell us about the length of which cycles in his longer. diplomatic shift happen naturally over hundreds of thousands or millions of years. >> to say something about what's happening to see ice now in the last few decades, because went ice first started working the arctic, the ice that we could see was very much heavy ice mostly. you can see the picture, multiply multi-your ice which is really thick like mounds of ice.

occupying the whole of the arctic ocean between north american and the asia. and so the feeling, the psychological feeling you felt was that the world from the northern hemisphere was joined together at the top because the ice extends across the arctic to join canada to russia, and we all one. in recent years the ice has been retreating faster in the summer but also in the winter as well. so that instead of i continues cover across the arctic, you have open seas in summer months which is change everything. they have changed the nature of the ocean itself and has produced lots of feedback effect the first part of a book is actually concerned with this because when you see the sea ice retreating and thinner ice over

the year the temptation is to say this is a curiosity, obviously global warming that has caused this, but it's just a curiosity like the disappearance of isom kilimanjaro. what we're finding is the loss of ice and arctic is having much bigger efax elsewhere in the climate systems. so we can't just think of arctic sea ice retreat by itself. it's affecting the whole climate system to or a greater extent n just the loss of ice. the open water in the summer is now giving an accelerated warming of the world, and it's causing warmer air to spread over the greenland ice sheet and that's making greenland melt faster which is giving us an increase in the rate of sea level rise globally. so that's no typical here in the gulf of mexico, or everywhere. in fact, in the world. sea level is rising at an

accelerated and that's the extra contributions mainly from the melting of the greenland ice sheet. that's due to the sea ice retreating in the arctic. another fact is that we are getting the possibility of higher amounts of methane being released from arctic oceans surface because there's a lot of methane held in sediments under the continental shelves of the arctic. and actually the sediments fall out. they are still frozen after the last ice age. that allows the methane below to get out and we now seem big plans of methane commit into the atmosphere. and again causing an acceleration of global warming. i guess the final, not final, but two more affects which affect people here, the fax that

as the ice retreats where getting warmer, the arctic is warming faster than the rest of the world so the temperature difference between arctic and the lower latitude is going down. that's reducing the strength of the jet stream. that's the rapid air, the wind, and mass that separates the arctic air from the tropical air, and you experience it when you fly from u.s. to europe. it helps you on your way. that jetstream has slowed down because these winds have decreased in strength because the temperature goes down in the jetstream now is producing a big low instead of being straight. it's a vertical low. each low brings polar air down into some lower latitude region, like the midwest. warmer air, it takes a towards

higher latitudes where it shouldn't be, like the northeast. so you finding alternating regions right around the world in mid-latitude where it's either exceptionally hot or exceptionally cold. these extremes of weather have been seen for about the past eight years coinciding with the retreat of sea ice. they span the latitudes where we are getting most crop production, so they're having a very disruptive effect on crops and causing global food crisis to rise, which is really serious for third world countries. we are finding another effect on global food production, and that's the life of people. the final set which is really important around here with the hurricanes is the fact that at north greenland this place which was first spotted by waiters is a location where ice used to go

in the winter and cause the surface water to sink. that produced, helped to produce a slow circulation of water in the atlantic. not the same as a gulfstream but in the same direction, and that circulation has slowed down because that ice is not being produced anymore, and the result is the less warm water from the goal in the caribbean being carried to the northwest europe, and that means because it's just as much heat going into the world, that means the hot water stays down here and the surface water temperature in the gulf and in the caribbean is warming up faster because the water is not being transported as efficiently up to your. so europe is cooling down. not going down but it is warming slowly. the goal is warming faster, and

this hot water is what intensifies hurricanes. that's the warmer the water versus the more intense the hurricane. we're getting hurricane intensification because of the slowing down of this current which takes water away from northwest europe. i guess the point is sea ice retreat in arctic doesn't just affect the arctic. it affects the whole planet and some parts of the plant are affected much worse than the arctic itself. one of the places affected badly is around here because of hurricanes getting more intense and sea level rise affecting low altitude regions, , which is lot of the gulf coast, florida and louisiana. >> great. so, , peter, in your book you tk about this notion of tipping points. do you feel we've reached a tipping point with respect to

climate change? >> yes, i think we have. a tipping point is where if you stop poking something with a stick it goes back to sleep. if you don't have a tipping point and you folk in line with the stick, and you stop poking it goes back to slip and everything is okay. you can reach the point yet poked the light and it comes in each you so it's an irreversible process in science. the question is, have we stressed the climate for the planet so much with the carbon dioxide we've added that it we managed to find a way to take it away been we will go back to where we were before. i think we still can. i think we haven't reached that tipping point that say mars or venus reached where they the ll their water and became completely lifeless. we can go back, but we have to,

first of all, stop producing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and then we have to more than poorly i think is where to find a way to take a lot of it out of the atmosphere. we've got a lot too much in atmosphere now. what we put in already is enough to give us an acceptable global warming. it's not a question of reducing our emissions. we've got to not only reduce our emissions but we've got to get rid of the stuff that's there already. so we need a big research effort on methods of taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere directly, and it's just technology but it needs a lot of money to develop it. once we develop it we have solved global warming. i think we can see we need not feel totally gloomy about global warming because we can find way to get back up. if we spend enough on research to do it. >> juli, you've done some research about efforts going on in texas on the coast in some of

these geo- engineering projects. >> well, i work at ut part-time with the group that does carbon sequestration. it's really, you know, the idea that you take carbon dioxide from a power plant and you injected back into the reservoirs where the original fossil fuels were extracted, and it's been done in west texas as part of a process called enhanced oil recovery for 50 years i think. there's a lot of technology in texas and there's a lot of expertise in texas about carbon sequestration. in fact, there's a project down near houston, net carbon which is one of the big problems with carbon sequestration is the added cost to the electricity, but there's an innovative project happening, there's innovation ever. i do think we also have the capacity to solve these problems, this is one of what

you preach it it's interesting. there's a problem called daschle a project called net carbon in houston with using this, they're burning fossil fuels in taking the carbon dioxide and directly using that to turn a turban as opposed to what regular fossil fuel power plants do, which is extracted, burn a fossil fuel, get carbon dioxide and other things and those go off as pollution. and then use the heat to boiling water to make steam to turn a turban so sort of dynamically of loss at every level if this is a much more efficient way. the ideas you can scale this. there's really creative ways for us to attack in some of these problems that affect the ocean that the jellyfish are telling us about and what the ice is telling us as well. >> juli, do you see evidence of the effects of climate change in jellyfish populations? >> so this is one thing the scientists are finding about. i think in certain places

certainly, there is a jellyfish that lives, that invaded the eastern mediterranean. it is originally from the indian ocean which is quite warm, and in the past it probably would not even able to survive in the eastern mediterranean which was significantly cooler but that part of the ocean has warm disproportionally. it's much, much warmer now. these jellyfish came through, i thought to have come through the suez canal or ships that cascade through the suez canal and they been deposited in the eastern mediterranean. now they form these balloons that are tens of miles big every summer. these jellyfish i really, really bad stingers. they're called the nomadic jellyfish, and so you can't go to the beach when they are blooming. then they wash into power plants which use which you see water to cool the

machinery and they are like million sink stoppers coming into the machinery. they have to shut down operations and then you can google it. there's these container ships full of jellyfish that they have to scoop out of their machinery and wait until the blimp dissipates. a similar thing happened and australia, a swarm of jellyfish got swooped into the uss ronald reagan which is like a big aircraft carrier, and it incapacitated it. the jellyfish are responding to these changes in the ocean. they are living probably, they are able to take advantage of these new habitats that are forming as we won the ocean. >> peter, there's all of this evidence, scientifically, for climate change caused by human activity, but a lot of people are obviously reluctant to accept that this is an issue.

researchers like texas tech university have pointed out when you done the service people believe that in general climate change may affect a region or country but it won't affect them personally. do you feel you have to be an advocate rather than simply a scientist when it comes to climate change? >> well, to be a scientist is to be an advocate i think because the evidence is so powerful, scientific evidence, which, it's evidence which can't really be,, there's evidence they can be refuted or if you see some of fax like the sea ice disappearing. you can think of other ways, of the things that might be causing that besides warming of the atmosphere. so there's always room for doubt insight and there's always another explanation if somebody can drink it up. some things in science are irrefutable like gravity, that

water flows down hill and two plus two equals four so they should be respect for tax we think about clinical discussions. one fact is carbon dioxide once the atmosphere, because it is sort of high school physics that if you have a ball floating in space, the temperature is a balance between the radiation it gets from the sun, which is pretty much constant, and the radiation that the earth itself emits because of its temperature, which is longwave radiation. a given atmosphere covering the earth, then the radiation from the sun gets in and worms the earth but the radiation from the earth can't all get out because carbon dioxide absorbed some of it and holds it back, like in a greenhouse. the more carbon dioxide there is, the more it so back. the warmer the earth gets to

produce the balance, so you can't add carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and get anything other than the warming of the planet. so to say carbon dioxide does affect the climate, it's absolutely wrong. it's not just an opinion. it's like saying that water flows uphill. so you have to accept certain basic things about climate change that really all scientists accept, and beyond that the magnitude of the effect is something where there is the scope for disagreement and disagreement about how it will show itself, what will happen first. will we start starving because of lack of food or will we start drowning? or will neither of those things happen? >> on that note -- [laughing] i would like to open up to the audience. if you have any questions there's a microphone set up over

here. i'm sure you have lots of questions for our panelists, for juli and for peter. >> hey, , spencer. >> how are you? >> you know, we read about the reserves, the oil reserves, and natural gas reserves and so on, and that there are folks who own these reserves and a working diligently to get the fuel outlet of these reserves so we can burn them and bring carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. i'm wondering, i don't know how to interpret the numbers that are involved. with these reserves that people are actively either pumping out or have purchased and have plans to pump out, in terms of the carbon dioxide that will end up in of a certain i know it depends on how fast and everything but if we know what rate we are burning these fuels is there a ballpark figure that

we can have as to what the effect of putting all the stuff out there will likely have so that when we talk to our representatives we can say this is not good? >> recommendations from the intergovernmental panel on climate change is about two-thirds of the remaining known reserves of coal and oil should stay in the ground. we can't ration what we can burn and still keep warming below tws regarded as acceptable means that two-thirds of the reserves can't be, shouldn't be got at. it's psychologically, it's highly unlikely the world will allow two-thirds of the remaining oil and coal to stay in the ground. so that's where i feel that these gene engineering methods have to be used, or co2 removal has to be used because there's

an irresistible urge to dig for coal and to dig for oil. all the nation's of the world have that, despite what they say about reducing carbon emissions. we won't get that amount of restraint. i think we will see two-thirds of our reserves left in the ground. if we're going to dig them and burn them, then you have to find another way to get rid of co2, technically. >> next question. >> this is for peter. i left miami four years ago if i lived there my whole life, and one of the reasons i left was because of sea level rise. since i left the city has put millions into a pump system on miami beach to try to keep the high tides out of the streets. it doesn't look like it's done much good. i think this weekend is a bad

team tied as will. and my question is, either to much about how much more quickly the ice is melting, and now the wins lying on the antarctic from the west cause warm waters to melt under the ice as well as the warm air melting about that. it seems like it's happening so much quicker than we thought. we can see it happening in our lifetime, which is amazing to me. should everyone be moving away from the coast now? >> well, the answer perhaps people should be careful about living right on the water. because the sea level rise rate was previously thought to maybe be half a meter or so by the end of this century. that's two and half, one and a half feet in u.s. units, but it's now, the figure keeps going

up because with the accelerated amount, melt of greenland and antarctica, the level seems to be now at least three feet, at some of the predictions are four, five, six feet this century, which means we will see changes in a place like miami very fast within their lifetimes. coastal real estate will stop being high-priced because it will be sort of underwater. >> i just had sort of the question you could both deal with. i just read an article like yesterday and this morning that the melting of the ice in the northwest passage is also change the gulfstream going up around the island and changed the pods and other animals that live in the fjords. is this a reversible type of

thing or the pods growing there now are less nutritious which affects the birds, the birds and the patient not going to live as well, et cetera, et cetera. wondering how reversible do you both feel these things are? >> well, i think in terms of biology, i think it's a really difficult question to answer. one thing we've seen with some of the coral reef that of an affected by climate change already is that they can be resilient. there is a coral reef that was not destroyed by climate change but by pollution and oil spills in the red sea, and once they put in place, made it a marine protected area, put in place restrictions about the kinds of fishing a pollution i could go on around there, it came back within a decade. in terms of the biology, it's an

incredible, there is a lot to be hopeful for, whether it will come back to what it was is, who knows, but it could become a very rich ecosystem given enough time. the thing is the amount, the speed at which we are changing our planet outpaces evolution, and the resilience of many ecosystems. so i don't know. i don't know if anyone can answer that question, but yeah, we need to start paying attention to it. how about that? >> the first time i went to in 1970 we had to battle away with an icebreaker we still got stuck this year a cruise ship went through and the on ice that was seen was in the gin and tonics of the guests. [laughing] >> a big change happening there.

>> i think with time for one more quick question and then we will have to wrap it up. >> thank you for being here. i have concern about the geo- engineering aspect. one, i think politicians tend to think we can fix this by sticking the engineers on them, on the problem. that will fix everything. and our history of unintended consequences is not good pics if you could speak to that. >> well, yes, in that sense the most natural form of geoengineering is massive for station. you just build, g plant trees everywhere. the trouble is there's not enough land. but unintended consequences of putting aerosols into the service area is one method of

geoengineering. and there the fear is that it spreads out over the whole planet and it affects places we don't want it to affect like maybe the indian monsoon. you've got to wait until the all falls out of the atmosphere before the effects start. the method i like because it's developed by a scholar is called marine cloud lightning. here you put seawater in very tiny, put into tiny nozzles into the bottoms of gray clouds like to get in britain and it makes them white and to reflect more radiation. that works, and also you are putting something harmless into the atmosphere. as soon as you stop pumping through these nozzles the effects stops so you can minimize the harm possible, unintended harmful consequences.

as soon as you get in if you stop doing it and that would have an immediate stop what happened. that is i think the release -- the least harm for jew engineering. >> i i think we have to wrap itp there. think think you very much, bothf you. [applause] so juli and peter will be available next door at the b bok signing here thank you very much for coming out. [inaudible conversations]