Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Terraforming Earth's Climate: Crazy ideas.


lost_shaman

Recommended Posts

On 6/2/2018 at 1:43 PM, godnodog said:

And again CO2 levels this high were in a time there were no Homo of any kind.

So what? That's completely irrelevant to anything. No correlation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1 hour ago, Coil said:

Too little effect

At that distance of `1,000,000 miles, due to the inverse square law, shading 0.00035% of the sunlight reaching L1 that travels onto Earth this will result in a shading at Earth's surface of 4.2 w/p/m2. That's more than enough to outweigh anything CO2 is doing.

1 hour ago, Coil said:

too much spending on satellites and a lot of sails

Probably no more than two Falcon Heavy's to deliver a fleet of 100 of these small Satellites. I hardly see this as breaking anyone's Bank or budget.

 

1 hour ago, Coil said:

and what power is needed to adjust these sails of a large area.

We put them just outside of L1 in an elliptical orbit, this means they will fall away into solar orbit, but they deploy their individual Sails and gain momentum which widens their orbit as they gain speed and causes them to pass across L1 shading the Earth for a few days. Then before they are able to escape the eliptical orbit they individually retract their Sails and fall away back towards their original orbit, and this simply repeats with the Fleet acting individually but in unison so you always have one or several with Sails deployed passing through L1 shading Earth with these large super thin Solar Sails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2018 at 2:29 AM, lost_shaman said:

Let us assume that the Climate Change scare is worst case and now we have to think about Terraforming Earth's Climate. 

Now what are your Crazy ideas to do this? I'm sure everyone is rolling their eyes thinking of "Chemtrail" conspiracies! That's why I choose the word Climate over Atmosphere because it's the Climate that we are discussing and my example below to start off the thread doesn't involve altering the Atmosphere.

So my crazy idea involves launching a fleet of small Satellites just in front of the L1 orbit. These Satellites being just slightly outside of L1 will all employ large Solar Sails that they will use to maintain a stable orbit around L1. These would be synchronized in an elliptical and slightly off plane orbit around L1 and the Solar Sails will both control the path of the Fleet but also block Sunlight and UV rays at the Tropics. The "epiphany" here is that we can control the fleet and how it acts so basically we would have the ability to remotely add or subtract a non negligible amount of Solar radiation reaching the Earth.

So there is my idea. What's yours?

It is to be hoped that things don't get bad enough to require terraforming earth.

BUT:  we are already past the point where climate will return to "normal" if we just quit polluting.  So what could we do?  Take CO2 out of the atmosphere.

How?  Some proposed ideas:  grow biomass and bury it in the ground.  We are already doing this.  We call them landfills.  Simply bury organic material in dry landfills where it won't decompose.  Instead of recycling paper, bury it.  Or we could grow a crop, like a grass.  Or we could collect stubble after the main crop has been harvested.  The US Great Plains have lots of land that could be used for this, much as I'd hate to see it.

Or, if we could figure out how to make a fuel of of atmospheric CO2.  I understand there is some progress in this direction, but it is still rudimentary.

Or, we could inject CO2 into basalt formations.

 

Orbiting sun shades and such devices are just treating symptoms.  We need to treat the problem which is too much CO2 in the air.  Orbiting sun shades do nothing about ocean acidification.

Doug

Edited by Doug1029
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lostshaman, your general lack of understanding of the very basics principles of biology, evolution, chemestry and ecosystems are "facepalming" me.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/5/2018 at 1:34 AM, godnodog said:

Lostshaman, your general lack of understanding of the very basics principles of biology, evolution, chemestry and ecosystems are "facepalming" me.

 

If you are going to attack me personally at least provide specific examples where I can refute your nonsense and hopefully get a few laughs!!! Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, lost_shaman said:

If you are going to attack me personally at least provide specific examples where I can refute your nonsense and hopefully get a few laughs!!! Thanks. 

How about your use of articles from climate-denier websites like Wattsupwiththat?

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lost_shaman said:

If you are going to attack me personally at least provide specific examples where I can refute your nonsense and hopefully get a few laughs!!! Thanks. 

How about you go ack to school and learn some basics as I gave you plenty of verifiable examples provided by maimstream reaserchers. You can disagree with interpretations, but unless you can provide supported data that differs greatly from mainstream methods of gathering data, its clearly up to you to show otherwise, but I would bet you would somehow try to reverse this.

You want specific examples here you go from Harvard School of Public Health study that conform previous studies.

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/15-10037

 

"What scientists have discovered about the impact of elevated carbon dioxide levels on the brain

Significantly, the Harvard study confirms the findings of a little-publicized 2012 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) study, “Is CO2 an Indoor Pollutant? Direct Effects of Low-to-Moderate CO2 Concentrations on Human Decision-Making Performance.” That study found “statistically significant and meaningful reductions in decision-making performance” in test subjects as CO2 levels rose from a baseline of 600 parts per million (ppm) to 1000 ppm and 2500 ppm.

Both the Harvard and LBNL studies made use of a sophisticated multi-variable assessment of human cognition used by a State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical University team, led by Dr. Usha Satish. Both teams raised indoor CO2 levels while leaving all other factors constant. The findings of each team were published in the peer-reviewed open-access journal Environmental Health Perspectives put out by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, a part of NIH.

The new study, led by Dr. Joe Allen, Director of Harvard’s Healthy Buildings program, and Dr. John Spengler, Professor of Environmental Health and Human Habitation at Harvard, used a lower CO2 baseline than the earlier study. They found that, on average, a typical participant’s cognitive scores dropped 21 percent with a 400 ppm increase in CO2. Here are their astonishing findings for four of the nine cognitive functions scored in a double-blind test of the impact of elevated CO2 levels:

The researchers explain, “The largest effects were seen for Crisis Response, Information Usage, and Strategy, all of which are indicators of higher level cognitive function and decision-making.” The entire article is a must-read as is the LBNL-SUNY study.

NASA has also observed CO2-related health impacts on International Space Station (ISS) astronauts at much lower CO2 levels than expected and has identified a mechanism by which CO2 levels could affect the brain, as I will discuss in Part 2. As a result, NASA has already lowered the maximum allowable CO2 levels on the space station. The ISS crew surgeon who is the lead for studying the impact on astronauts of CO2 (and other gases) told Climate Progress he considers the original LBNL-SUNY study “very credible.” Indeed, NASA itself is now starting terrestrial studies to look at the impact of CO2 on judgment and decision-making for the astronaut cohort — and it is partnering with the same SUNY team of behavioral psychologists.

All of this new research is consistent with — and actually helps explain — literally dozens of studies in the past two decades that find low to moderate levels of CO2 have a negative impact on productivity, learning, and test scores. See here for a research note and bibliography of some 20 studies and review articles."

 

From my part I ended my participation on this post.

0346xSHIoeLdDq6ae.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.