I've already looked at this. The meteor missile (modern) and blood hound (cold war) use ram rockets. Nammo make ram artillery, and there's Chinese manufacturers, too. It's not inexpensive to start these ramjets, considering rockets or barrel wear. Coil guns might be viable. There's manufacturers eg velontra.com making small hypersonic jets, which don't require a hard start.
Ballistic flight makes recovery difficult. On Sun, 5 Nov 2023, 18:15 Gilles de Brouwer, <gdebrou...@gmail.com> wrote: > A low cost SAI option? > > Regarding the trillions or billions to do SAI geoengineering, consider > this option: > > Watch "How ramjets may change the role of artillery on the battlefield" on > YouTube > https://youtu.be/0vIPNElDkns?si=9Z_mUQUXBm-4dBxF > At 4:21 you can see the 150km range parabolic trajectory goes as high as > 105km altitude! > > Maybe Iowa battleship 16 inch guns with this ramjet tech could send stuff > to orbit. > Or could this be a low cost SAI geoengineering option? > 1. How much would it cost to refurbish and send these old battleships to > the Arctic and Antarctic waters and deliver to much higher altitudes? The > armor plating would make the battleships iceberg damage resistant. > 2. How much longer would the particles stay at useful altitudes? > 3. Would they stay in place much longer with little wind at these very > high altitudes? > 4. Would it be more effective than aircraft delivered SAI? > > Note from the Iowa Class Wikipedia page: "...all four are museum ships > part of non-profit maritime museums across the US." > > Gilles > > On Sat, Nov 4, 2023, 5:16 PM Jim Baird <jim.ba...@gwmitigation.com> wrote: > >> From the Physics and Economics of Thermodynamics Geoengineering, >> reference 77 of the Healthy Climate Action Coalition Petition to World >> Leaders: The Case for Urgent Direct Climate Cooling, The cost of removing >> 1139 Gt of CO2 with this technology (Negative Emissions CO2 OTEC) would >> therefore be $175 trillion. CDR technology for creating synthetic fuel from >> atmospheric CO2 or for other purposes currently costs about $600 per ton, >> with a goal of reducing this to below $100. [48] So, a goal of returning >> atmospheric CO2 levels to preindustrial from a 2054 level of 1577 Gt is >> likely to cost at a minimum $114 trillion. >> >> >> >> *From:* healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com *On Behalf Of >> *Gilles >> de Brouwer >> *Sent:* November 4, 2023 4:21 PM >> *To:* H simmens <hsimm...@gmail.com> >> *Cc:* healthy-planet-action-coalition < >> healthy-planet-action-coalit...@googlegroups.com>; via NOAC Meetings < >> noac-meeti...@googlegroups.com>; Planetary Restoration < >> planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com>; geoengineering < >> geoengineering@googlegroups.com> >> *Subject:* Re: Hansen Vs. Mann - Is Global Warming Linear Or >> Exponential? - CleanTechnica >> >> >> >> My comment left on the article: >> >> Steve I like your writing, but "Trillions" is obviously wrong. Billions >> is more realistic even with expensive new high altitude aircraft, but maybe >> much less expensive with a small fleet of specialty airships. >> >> All the SAI geoengineering risks are scare mongering without data to back >> it up and such dogma unscientific opinions from "scientists" are damaging >> to science as an institution. AI, for example genetic algorithms or better >> could design an SAI strategy that minimizes the negatives, as it's an >> optimization problem with infinite variables which is why progress is so >> slow. Coupling computational models with small scale real atmosphere >> experiments with full public data access for review is critical to make a >> smart decision to potentially avoid billions starving, cooking, and/or >> dying of thirst, or migrating. >> >> Thanks, >> Gilles de Brouwer >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 4, 2023 at 3:10 PM H simmens <hsimm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> This article provides the author an opportunity to declare war on Geo >> engineering by for example claiming that scientists estimate that >> Geoengineering will cost “on the order of tens of trillions of dollars”. >> >> >> >> Nice to know that we can count on the media to be fair and balanced. >> >> >> >> Herb >> >> >> >> https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/03/hansen-vs-mann-is-global-warming-linear-or-exponential/ >> >> >> >> Herb Simmens >> Author of *A Climate Vocabulary of the Future* >> >> “A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson >> @herbsimmens >> HerbSimmens.com >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/3D131483-011F-4A9A-9B2D-3BA99C9A9F05%40gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/3D131483-011F-4A9A-9B2D-3BA99C9A9F05%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to healthy-planet-action-coalition+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAGQ2tEqsU%3Drm7ZJpo4p67O9p-HHL0f_%3Dq9Xd2Q5nj6bLUFvkqw%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAGQ2tEqsU%3Drm7ZJpo4p67O9p-HHL0f_%3Dq9Xd2Q5nj6bLUFvkqw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAGQ2tEq6GP68_404MZonwgf4NZFypGLHeTzcvK0V%3DNPoZEMEWQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAGQ2tEq6GP68_404MZonwgf4NZFypGLHeTzcvK0V%3DNPoZEMEWQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-05sBDn1Bf5JgCiKxHeXLfaWjVQRP7T-VZK_zKTGDgnf8Q%40mail.gmail.com.
