15Likes
November 3rd, 2012, 12:53 PM
As a stopgap measure, until mankind can completely become fossil fuel use free, is it possible to create artificial ice caps? The evidence is strong that the polar ice caps reflect the sun's heat back into the atmosphere. If biodegradable artificial ice caps can help reflect the heat, I believe it would be possible for permanent ice caps would reform. The problem is, I don't know how to create these artificial ice caps, but there's plenty of scientists who could.
That idea is so good that they have actually been working on it for awhile now.
Solar radiation management - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A minor effect would be reflective materials on our roof tops--it would make our buildings in warmer places more efficient as all.
In fact the loss of snow cover on land is just as big an issue as the sea ice itself. Putting a reflective cover there would be much easier - it would also shield some of the permafrost from a bit of the melting. Anything we can do to delay setting off the methane release (now that we've got ourselves this far into the doo-doo) would only help.
Would be good for the inhabitants too... sure would be nice if I could take this tin foil hat off from time to time.Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox
The real question is...do we have artificial ice cap money?
Money to do what exactly?
Other than clear cutting the low aldedo forest marshing to high latitudes how could this even be done?
as/re GiantEvil's link:
What kind of total nut job would consider covering 67,000 square miles of desert with a toxic plastic covering?
.....
first mate, "Captain, we're going down by the bow."
captain, "Cut a big hole in the stern and we'll stabilize this boat."
The climate of the planet has changed many times based on the records of the rocks. Although human population has greatly increased and our activities may be contributing to the current pace of change, it seems unlikely that we are capable of cooperating sufficiently to coordinate any meaningful intervention.
I rather expect that our best approach will be a multi-tiered one of more responsible energy use, alternate energies and adaptive strategies.
Anyone have plans for an Ark? First challenge being to determine the what measure is meant by the term 'cubit'...
cubit (measurement) -- Britannica Online Encyclopediacubit, unit of linear measure used by many ancient and medieval peoples. It may have originated in Egypt about 3000 bc; it thereafter became ubiquitous in the ancient world. The cubit, generally taken as equal to 18 inches (457 mm), was based on the length of the arm from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger and was considered the equivalent of 6 palms or 2 spans. In some ancient cultures it was as long as 21 inches (531 mm).
It may be difficult to coordinate efforts; however, it is important that we do.
Then innovative solutions like the OP has suggested can emerge, and devastating flooding of coastal population centers can be avoided.
I believe that this "coordination of efforts / evidenced based practices is a key element for positive change in a complex system.
Usually this comes from governmental action.
However, a public private coordinated effort could be very effective when a large number of "uncoordinated" efforts would be next to useless.
Last edited by dedo; November 12th, 2012 at 06:19 PM. Reason: spelling
Considering the near disastrous efforts of some private initiatives in this area I'd be very reluctant to go this way. Much better for private bodies to tender for specific tasks after governments and scientists have decided on the priority, the nature and the scope of the work required. We got ourselves into this pickle by letting private businesses and individuals set the path and the pace. We shouldn't compound the error by letting the same processes set the pace and the path out of the mess we let them create.a public private coordinated effort
In reality,(at least in the way legislation is developed in the USA), when seeking information on specific legislation, the legislators invariably call in "industry experts"(read "industry insiders") to help craft the legislation. This has led to some really crazy legislation. A couple examples
would include setting polution limits as parts per million, billion, etc----so for water polution, just suck in more river water and use dilution to "control" polution--------- = the same gross amount of polutants, but within regulations.
and then, there is our high medical costs...
When the legislators sought to control the insurance industry, they "called in the experts" who helped craft legislation limiting the insurance companies to a percent of profits-------even a blind man could have seen this coming---the only way that the insurance providers could increase the bottom line was to increase the top line, so they encouraged the "health care providers" to charge more, so they could pay more and raise premiums, increasing their profits while staying within the legislated guidelines.
Without calling in the nutjobs, and industry "experts", I think we're already heading in the right direction. Seeking to free the country from the economic drain and tyrrany of addiction to "foreign" oil, we are building more "clean" technologies including solar and wind. We cannot just switch energy sources in any short time frame, It took us well over a century to reach the current levels of energy consumption, and will take awhile to wind that down, and/or switch to cleaner sources. As long as we are headed down the right path, we need to keep going that way.
Demanding immediate change will surely invite the nutjobs and profiteers to get involved, to the detriment of the majority of the population.
Hell, we don't even know yet why some previous interglacials were much warmer, with higher sea levels. And some "scientists" didn't even believe that we have had warmer periods in the past, both within this interglacial, nor in preceeding ones.
Action, should always follow knowledge. As a good start, better funding for the NSF, and studies into paleo climates will help us increase our understanding of our spaceship earth. When we know more, we will have the advantage of wisdom and foresight with which we may proceed wisely.
meanwhile,
We can all help by
reduce (ing our levels of consumption)
repair (ing all that comes under our control)
rebuild (ing all that comes under our control)
reuse (ing all that comes under our control)
recycle (ing all that comes under our control)
and-----Plant a tree and nurture it. Then plant another, and another, and another.....with each tree consuming 52 pounds of CO2, my little 3 acre wood makes my family carbon neutral.....
Accept that sea levels will rise. and develope strategies for continuation of our species within our biom.
Set an example for those who follow. Don't mimic Al Gore's movie, wherein, he was cruising along in his 6 gallons per mile helicopter, and then 6 miles per gallon limosine while cautioning the rest of us that we needed to consume less. (I had the image of a really fat man standing there with 2 overflowing bags of groceries, proclaiming "We're running out of food, so y'all are gonna have to eat less!")
Do not declare war on the biom or our developement within it. Study it, learn from it. Study us and learn more.
I think we got into this mess because there is no cooperation at the public or private level.
The most effective industries in terms of preventing mishaps have a public private cooperation. When that "cooperation" deteriorates to become private lobbying, then govt. action is often the next to be effected.
Nevertheless, how to achieve that cooperation is not known, at least to me. Maybe it starts with govt. + scientists. Or maybe it starts with popular demand followed by govt. action.
The two extremes of:
1. radical conservatism: "Almost all govt. action is bad." -- is clearly wrong and leads to undermining regulatory authorities. Accidents then follow.
2. radical liberalism: "Govt. is the enlightened rule maker" -- is clearly wrong and leads to piling on of regulations to the point where regulations cannot be followed or enforced. Then regulations are ignored and corruption comes into the "enlightened govt. controlled system".
The ideal situation is a public private cooperative effort where there is solid govt. action, and feedback mechanisms constantly revise, and improve regulation and eliminate outmoded regulation. Feedback never occurs without private "front line" cooperation and is vital for rule improvement.
My personal interest is more in how to spread a healthy practice when there is no "rule maker". That could also apply to this situation since you need cooperation at the level of the individual to cut down on carbon emissions. Govt. action may not be enough, even if govt. and industry worked together.
Unfortunately, right now there is minimal cooperation at any level: govt., industry, or individual.
It would be preferable to filling the oceans with comparable quantities of plastic shopping bags.
The same kinds that think doubling or tripling a green house in the atmosphere isn't going to screw things up on a planet?What kind of total nut job would consider covering 67,000 square miles of desert with a toxic plastic covering?
Kinda depends on the definition of "screw things up".........................maybe, just maybe, we differ in that definition?The same kinds that think doubling or tripling a green house in the atmosphere isn't going to screw things up on a planet?What kind of total nut job would consider covering 67,000 square miles of desert with a toxic plastic covering?
I do not consider melting the ice caps, raising the sea levels, nor reforesting the shores of the arctic ocean as screwing anything up. And, if we are doing that under the sway of a collective unconscious, so be it.
I see it much as adding organic fertilizers to one's gardens, just encouraging nature to do what she has done many times before, and, sooner or later, will do again. Kinda like "training a dog" if you try to get the dog to do what it would do naturally, with minor modifications and obedience to commands, your chances of success are greater. But that requires an understanding of a dog's nature.
I see much more harm in overuse of roundup(or any use for that matter), bulldozing out windbreaks and hedge rows, and intensive row cropping.
(eg: flood after flood, the little bay in front of our property never silted in, then came another flood after ethanol encouraged the expansion of corn row cropping ------and the runoff was a thick brown slurry, which silted in much of the near river bays, wetlands, and water meadows. One really nice thing about that silt, is that now our one time bay is a beautiful water meadow, rich in a diversity of plants and animals. The lush greens of a water meadow are a delight for the eye.
Some of the other stuff, like acidification should be looked at in a broader study, so far, it seems that the most pronounced effects are near shore near urban centers' rivers. Not too many years ago, shellfish were contaminated by mercury, and each meal held the potential for long term problems.
(Tell me that you ain't ready to cut a hole on the stern!)
Last edited by sculptor; November 10th, 2012 at 12:10 PM.
I find this oft used argument pretty shallow on your end. Any pronounced change over a short period is what I define as screwed up because it will lead to great difficulties for plant, animals including us. I really could care less if it's been hoter, colder in the past, because we in often know the reasons--none of which are happening now. What you should learn from the past events is how well they often synch use with the disappearance of groups of plants and animals.
I don't know what you have in mind here. Two weeks ago, while attending an Oyster festival, I had extended conversations Washington oyster fisherman. Natural production, due to acidity of Wallipa Bay, WA has completely stopped already--it has no cities at all, nor populated rivers flowing into the bay. Hood Canal, which also have no cities is starting to be effected, and the aquafarming is already starting to switch to artificial spawning. All of them worry that even that won't be an option in ten years. Meanwhile, geologist find ancient oyster beds going back millions of years over the same region. And our proxy evidence suggest it's been even longer since ocean acidities have been as high as they are now--perhaps as far back as 50 million years when it was associated with a die off. Ocean acidification rate may be unprecedented, study says You'd be right to suggest it needs a lot more research, and I'm somewhat dismayed it's not getting much coverage in the press as of yet. But what we can't dispute is acidity is 30% more than pre-industrial levels, is due to man-made rise of CO2, and is already effecting shell-fish that man consumes and other marine ecosystems.Some of the other stuff, like acidification should be looked at in a broader study, so far, it seems that the most pronounced effects are near shore near urban centers' rivers.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; November 11th, 2012 at 10:07 AM.
The Thread OP seeks to mitigate the loss of refflective ice and snow cover. More reflection of heat energy on a daily basis to slow down the effects of Global Warming.
Some time back it was mooted we should fly Kites. Well, not hand held Kites. But something in the most critical areas that would prevent the suns rays from reaching the danger Zones.
Great Hang Gliders, with some stabilising height control, made with reflective material, sent up into the Stratosphere. They would need to be anchored.
Cost wise and practicality would be the problem. I don't believe we have the expertise to implement such a programme.
Other Posters to this Thread have suggested more practical approaches. Cut down our energy needs. Plant the right kind of vegetation. Prepare for higher sea levels. Implement Flood Mitagating measures. Try and control which is controllable. Every positive infrastructure at the now human level should be encouraged.
I'm a great believer in Solar Panels on roof tops. Every effort should be made to improve the efficiency of this source of energy. Do nothing at our peril. westwind.
the curious thing is, that the lower stratosphere is cooling as the lower troposphere is warming
........and, it seems that the lower stratospheric cooling is most pronounced at the southern pole which also seems to be having the least(polar) tropospheric warming
all is a guess, and some are guessing that the depleted ozone is the causal factor for the stratospheric cooling, while noaa is showing more stratospheric cooling after we stopped depleting ozone, and the ozone concentrastions have been increasing. After banning CFCs there was an initial stratospheric temperature increase in the early '90s, then a sharp drop which has held relatively steady at - .4 to -.6 C.
There seems to be little change in the upper troposphere, and upper stratosphere.
........
curious
...............
as/re rate of change. long ago, when I was at the academy, we were taught that exiting or entering a period of glaciation took thousands of years. I suspect that this was because much early studies were done with deep ocean cores. Think of the deep ocean as a really giant flywheel that is slow to change, more energy in spins it faster, but in very small steps compared to the energy in, then, remove the energy input, and it winds down very slowly. (one of the reasons that I went to Florida Atlantic U. in the early 70s was that some of their professorial staff were involved in the deep ocean coring...) So we came away seeing change as a very slow process. Now, more shallow water studies seem to be indicating, that surface change was indeed, very rapid with meters of sea level change in centuries, and in some studies, decades. 30 years ago, most of what we understood about climate change was just wrong. If we (and this is a strong tendency of our species) cling to our previous "knowledge" as though the questions were already answered, then we blind ourselves to the advances in the sciences.
(wild guess du jour) if/when we reach "the tipping point" (for which, I'd watch the ross and wilkins ice shelves-----if/when they desintigrate--then the west antarctic ice sheet will be much more exposed to the warmer waters of the southern pacific, and be much more likely to free itself from it's submerged continantal anchors) then we are likely to see sea level rises that would make Hansen's prognostications seem uncommonly (unexpectedly?)conservative.
Rate of change,? With higher sea levels, and warm pacific waters gushing into the arctic the arctic, sea ice will likely be a memory, and the added warmth will bathe greenland in rainstorms which will hasten the decline of it's ice. This, I suspect may explain the past changes seen in the shallow water studies.
.........
once, it was thought that the hadley cells(including the ferrel and polar cells) were rather stable, as just 3 cells from the equator to the poles, and that warming would just widen the tropical hadley cells at the expense of the ferrel cells, which might then narrow the polar cells. This no longer seems to be the case. Current studies are indicating that a sub-cell will develope(is developing?) between the tropical hadley cell and the ferrel cell---the resultant atmospheric turmoil may push the northern(poleward) edge of the ferrel cells poleward, creating much more precipitation at 60 degrees------snow? or rain?
If rain, then watch for very rapid change. if snow, then change should slow down (and maybe reverse) as more reflective snow cools those latitudes.
........
bottom line
We are witnessing a grand climate experiment, the outcome and mechanisms of which remain in doubt. And. our awareness of the changes both in our biom and knowledge base is just about all we got going for us.
...............
edit: epimetheus: solar cells:
During this recession: A friend who is an electrician, experienced a slowdown in new building and thereby employment, so he decided to get over his fear of heights, and start a solar cell installations company-------from modest beginnings, his business has grown to where the backlog of jobs is growing faster than his completions----------a veritable feast of solar cell proliferation here in Iowa. ...
Last edited by sculptor; November 11th, 2012 at 11:34 AM.
This is the real sculptor at work. He not only builds with what I believe to be capable hands, he constructs words as building blocks to real understanding. We need you sculptor, both your hands and your mind. westwind.
It's not curious at all. It's exactly what's expected when gases in the troposphere block the energy that formerly got through to warm it.the curious thing is, that the lower stratosphere is cooling as the lower troposphere is warming
It was predicted by physicists. The measurements by satellite confirm the physicists' predictions.
June 2nd, 2013, 01:25 PM
Space Tourism's Black Carbon Problem | Popular Science
This popular Science article might be of interest in this topic. We seem to be on the verge of developing an industry based on space tourism, which will deposit great quantities of black carbon particles in the upper atmosphere where they will remain for decades. Nobody has any idea how heating up the upper atmosphere will affect our weather. I think we might need a better way to achieve low Earth orbit.
Sure. But it needs a time to think. Anyway, it would be another world in Earth, though it actually affect our world by deep depth.
Overthelight, if you are working through an online translator, than you might want to have someone look over your post. The last one, like too many doesn't make a lick of sense.
I know I have to proceed studying English more, but Google Translator won't help it. Just I'll have a burden.
Most browsers have very good translator add on's. Which browser are you using?
Translation between English and languages of European would be work well. But languages of Asian wouldn't be work as.Most browsers have very good translator add on's. Which browser are you using?
Probably since the origin of words of the languages of Asian is too far from English.
They have a very good Japanese translator, but I haven't used any translators for quite a while, so I can't say for sure about any others. Although your last translation was better it still needs work. I was able to understand your meaning.Translation between English and languages of European would be work well. But languages of Asian wouldn't be work as.Most browsers have very good translator add on's. Which browser are you using?
Without a very good, very close to seamless translator, I'm not sure I would bother with a forum who's primary language wasn't my own.
My experience with Asians on English forums is they all know English as a second language. I know for a fact that in Japan learning English is required regardless of any other languages they might want to learn.
LOL.My experience with Asians on English forums is they all know English as a second language. I know for a fact that in Japan learning English is required regardless of any other languages they might want to learn.
I'm just doing my best.
That was very good. Keep it up.LOL.My experience with Asians on English forums is they all know English as a second language. I know for a fact that in Japan learning English is required regardless of any other languages they might want to learn.
I'm just doing my best.
| « Who has ever thought about that? Panama Canal. | Obliquity of the ecliptic » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
