ASCE Collaborate has switched to a new platform called Thrive.
We appreciate your patience during the transition. What is Thrive? View more information here. Any questions or feedback? Please contact [email protected]. View Video Tutorials here.
An ASCE membership login is required to participate in discussion forums and ASCE Mentor Match.
I think we should layout the various alternatives, determine the extraneous constraints & consequences and t select that ones that give us the biggest bang for the buck.
This is the standard approach to engineering problems.
in this case what are you going to do the covering deteriorates and the wind tears it up and blows it into the ocean.
its ok to come up with ideas. Just make the decisions logically, considering all the possible consequences over the lifetime of the improvement.
The idea is very simple in concept – but no doubt daringly novel. Hope it will work, although as far as the material is concerned, the efficacy of polypropylene with other reinforcements was questioned (e.g. by Konrad Mech). But seems to be working on a small scale in Germany (As Bevin pointed out)!
From the energy balance perspective, I wonder how energy transferred (one way – hot to cold according to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics) from the boundaries of the covered glacier is addressed. These boundaries are: (1) the uncovered adjacent sides of grounds/glaciers, and (2) perhaps even the bottom that may be connected to open warm water. Are these boundary effects found negligible to justify the undertaking? In addition, one may wonder how much energy is predicted to be reflected as opposed to the expected absorption/retention of some.