All-
I'd like to hear other's opinions on this, but it seems to me that
it's too premature to consider down-selecting all of mankind's
geoengineering options to 1) Stratospheric Aerosols and 2) Marine
Cloud Brightening.
In just the last few weeks, SA's effectiveness and pollution have come
into qu
Thank you Ken for your response.
My main concern is that a formal solicitation and ranking of
geoengineering schemes has not yet been done, but that I believe the
scope and complexity of the problem absolutely warrants (and
necessitates) doing this.
It wouldn't be a list that would stand the test
John and All-
Andrew makes a great point. If methane release tends to be limited to
vents or so-called "hotspots", and the number of vents is a reasonable
amount, the use of Lair or LN2 to freeze and seal these vents becomes
MUCH more feasible than trying to cool/refreeze large permafrost
regions.
John and All-
Mr. Lockley makes a great point. If methane release tends to be
limited to vents or so-called "hotspots", and the number of vents is a
reasonable amount, the use of Lair or LN2 to freeze and seal these
vents becomes MUCH more feasible than trying to cool/refreeze large
permafrost reg
As I’ve advocated a number of times in the past, I strongly believe
that a formal global solicitation needs to be performed to help
identify as many additional/new geoengineering options as possible.
This could hopefully engage a wide participation from those outside of
this group who otherwise wou
The first post somehow got derailed into unrelated topics, so I'm
reposting to hopefully receive more direct responses. I believe these
concerns are of utmost importance, so please take the time to read and
respond! Thanks
As I’ve advocated a number of times in the past, I strongly believe
that
All-
The last thing I would want to do is prematurely rule out any SRM
ideas that have even a small chance of success, if they could help
save lives and protect our planet. So the point of my post is NOT to
imply that we should "give up" on MCB or sulfate aerosols or any other
ideas for that matte
f planing condition, and if so, how would it be reached
(turbines provide temporary forward thrust until planing can be
maintained)?
Thanks for the additional information-
Mark
On May 22, 10:05 am, Stephen Salter wrote:
> Hi All
>
> Mark Massmann has suggested that drag of turbines w
+44 131 650
> 5704 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
> Mobile 07795 203 195www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs
>
> On 25/05/2011 12:36, Mark Massmann wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dr. Salter-
> > I would think that in order to obtain a credible review of the MCB
> > v
John and Mike-
Thank you for taking the time to consider how Lair might be applied to
increase global albedo or to possibly mitigate storm severity, as well
as other potential applications such as "frosting" permafrost to make
it more reflective or fighting wildfires by releasing liquid nitrogen
(L
John-
In terms of Lair calculations- I had hoped my colleague Kevin would
have time to do this since his background is more suited, hence the
delay after requests from Andrew and Mike. I'm going to work on this
over the next few days, so should post my results Friday or Monday.
I totally agree wi
With all of the talk and focus on direct air capture, it seems like
core issue of capturing CO2 at its pollution sources (esp coal and
natural gas power plants) is getting less and less attention.
This comment by Ron Socolow sums it up very well-
"We should be suspicious of distractions, and, to
All-
I totally agree that wildfires are a potentially large feedback, and
that this group should consider how to mitigate them. The feedback is
clear- the fact that wildfires are more prevalent with higher
temperatures and more severe drought, and that the pollution from them
adds significant CO2
rise higher in the TOA
region, making it significantly more effective.
_
From: John Nissen [mailto:j...@cloudworld.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 1:00 AM
To: David Mitchell
Cc: Mark Massmann; 'Kevin Layton'; Geoengineering; Ken Caldeira; Sam Carana;
John Gorman; Emily;
on.
This very hot and dry air has a key benefit of bouyancy, so that Lair
released at 50,000 ft, for example, would continue to rise higher in the TOA
region, making it significantly more effective.
_
From: John Nissen [mailto:j...@cloudworld.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14,
Does the SPICE testing include some kind of measurement for how well
particles will disperse?
It seems that an aerosol approach which discharges from a stationary
nozzle, as would be the case with a tethered balloon, would cause
unwanted coalescing of smaller particles onto larger particles,
limit
Albert-
I wonder if liquefied air (Lair) or liquid nitrogen could help in this
situation.
For example, imagine if large payloads of Lair (-320 F/ -195 C) were
sprayed over these regions using aircraft, as it falls it would expand
into extremely cold air, which would evenly spread out over the ice
John-
Couldn't you quickly create the desired effect of MCB by injecting
salt particles using aircraft??
If the formation of salt particles could be done on a large enough
scale on land, it seems that aircraft could release them very
strategically to create maximum benefit. This might be more eff
ha...@manchester.ac.uk
> Tel: (US-Work) 303-497-8182 or (US-Home) 303-444-2429
> or (US-Cell) 303-882-0724 or (UK)
> 01928-730-002http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/people/latham
> ____
> From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [geoengineering@googlegro
Hello All-
Has anyone read this and if so, what comments do you have about its
conclusions?
It seems like very important feedback (i.e. the brutally honest type that
might be very useful).
Best Regards-
Mark
PS- is there a link to view this where I don't have to join Wiley and pay
$35?
--
ate costs in as much detail as possible for
both production and operational costs, then we would multiply that by 1.5
times. This was surprisingly accurate when projects were all said and
done.. Maybe a factor like this could be used for geoengineering estimates
to make them more realistic.
Best R
Dr. Keith-
I was very surprised by one of your comments in the above interview with
Tony Jones. Concerning the feasibility of sulphate aerosols you state:
"So, you might in principle be able to put up enough reflective aerosols -
probably not sulphates, actually; I think it won't work with sulp
ll as the damaging effect on the ozone
layer and the resulting acid rain.
I have been calling for a global solicitation of SRM concepts with this
group for over 3 years now. I'm afraid that we are now running out of time-
so it's more urgent than ever that this gets done. Please
Dr. Keith and Dr. Caldiera-
I think Dr. Robock is right here. From an engineering standpoint, claiming
the technology already exists for sulfate aerosols is not a true statement
at this stage and could be easily misinterpreted.
In my experience with the aerospace field, which uses standardized
24 matches
Mail list logo
