This interesting and contemporaneous topic (in its wider context) has been discussed nearly eight months ago with some great inputs-including looking at it in a lighter vein. But perhaps seeing it through the lens of climatic interventions (positive and negative)-is helpful in the clarities of understanding to diagnose the problem, and in thinking of solutions. Let me attempt to add some more in response to Alexander's interest.
The beginning of fossil fuel use in the 19th century was a positive intervention-in a sense that it ushered in industrialization and improved our quality of life-and that the reversible dynamics of Earth's Fluid, Solid and Life Systems were strong enough to process any negative impact of the intervention. But as time went by, the seed of fossil fuel industry grew into a mammoth tree-its impacts turned from positive (or neutral) into negative-because they exceeded the capacity of Earth's reversible dynamics. This resulted in high concentrations of GHGs, accelerated warming, instability and adverse consequences. Despite this reality, our mother Earth is destined to get warmer (in subtlety) in the arrow of time-irrespective of what we do or don't do (more on Entropy and Everything Else).
If we think in that line, the rationale behind some actions (in terms of positive climate interventions) becomes clear. They, already in various phases of implementation all around the world are: (1) gradually but slowly phasing out the massive dependence on fossil fuels, as well as limiting the industrial emissions; and (2) in harnessing some of the natural energy sources such as: (a) the solar power using photovolatic panels, (b) the wind power, and (c) the hydropower (rivers and streams, tide and waves). These three sources seem to be the only ones that do not add to the net one-way contribution to the Sun-Earth energy balance. See more on Warming Climate and Entropy.
------------------------------
Dr. Dilip Barua, Ph.D, P.Eng, M. ASCE
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Website:
https://widecanvas.weebly.com------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 05-18-2020 02:01 PM
From: Alexander Granato
Subject: A Bold Solution for Global Warming
Hello Richard,
I just came across this discussion, and while that solution indeed sounds bold just from reading about the possibilities, what I'm focusing on are the troubling implications about such a technology you briefly mentioned.
1. By having this much of an ability to manipulate weather, that opens the door for further chaos with the weather across the world, given the ruling of the Butterfly Effect.
2. There would need to be a lot of consideration for what parts of the Earth are specifically going to receive this reduced amount of lighting. Regardless of how big the umbrella becomes, there will always be that section without any of the protection.
With all the possibilities and potential of our current and near-future technology too broad to properly account for, we should focus more on addressing the rise in greenhouse gases directly, like figuring out how areas with solar panels on Earth's surface could completely charge entire buildings.
------------------------------
Alexander Granato S.M.ASCE
Student
Bexley OH
614-900-7246
Original Message:
Sent: 09-27-2019 01:45 AM
From: Richard LaPrairie
Subject: A Bold Solution for Global Warming
I would appreciate feedback on this Global Warming theory. If we construct Solar Umbrellas above the Earth's atmosphere- sunlight could be reflected out into deep space and the Energy/Sunlight that contributes to Global Warming could be controlled. We could prevent Hurricanes and Tornadoes which are caused by sunlight creating high and low pressure zones in our atmosphere. Solar umbrellas would reflect light away from the Earth- and all would be equipped with Solar Cells to power and sustain them. In fact if these Space umbrellas could be controlled and adjusted accordingly we could actually control the weather.
Solar umbrellas could be constructed similar to a trampoline. Aluminum tubing with a reflective cloth like the astronauts wear. Not one huge piece but spliced together and assembled from below in a series of maze walls (Much like a mechanics trench) that could have docking clamps to keep them in place until launch. I am thinking good quality balloons filled with hydrogen. Hydrogen is of course flammable vs helium - which is not lighter and more expensive. Hydrogen has a bigger lifting capacity.
The balloons would lift the umbrella to the edge of the atmosphere (circa 300 miles) where they would float. All would need to be equipped with a solar powered iPhone that had a GPS so it could be tracked.
I am not sure how they, the Solar Umbrellas, could be controlled. A satellite has a much higher orbit and is held in place when gravitational force equals centrifugal force. These would not have a large weight- so how do we get velocity around the Earth? Does the atmosphere rotate as the Earth rotates? In addition to the GPS these should probably have a device that could release the balloons if required to remove them- just in case that option is needed.
Test runs could be made with smaller models (say 2000' in dia.) to see how this works. Launch them and track them. The cost would not be exorbitant- as compared to launching a rocket. I would like to hear your thoughts on this theory. Does anyone know of any research being done in this field?
------------------------------
Richard LaPrairie P.E.,M.ASCE P Eng MSME
LMI Engineering L.L.C.
Reno NV
------------------------------