Hi Mark,
This is a continuation, of my first email to you. (it was sent
by accident, before I
finished it!)
When I was satisfied, that enough sites lower than sea level exist, I
envisaged excavating
channels from the sea to them and letting gravity transport the sea
water to fill the selected sites!
I then concentrated on some of the effects and possibility's to
be had by utilizing
this method of Geo engineering.
1) It can be stopped and is reversible.
2) It can be isolated from the Ocean.
3) It is simple and low tech'.
4) It can be seeded, with the correct form of nutriments, to encourage the
little
Co2 "gobbling critters"
5) With our existing prior knowledge, the management and manipulation,of
these inland
seas will become sustainable to our chosen environment.
6) Potential food source.
7) The more Ocean water transferred, the lower it's level!
8) Etc'.
9) Etc',etc' !
It will take too long, for one man alone, to turn this into REALITY!
. Suggestions welcome.
( A little help )
George snr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 5:39 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> George,
>
> You need to make yourself a spreadsheet and run the numbers. I've attached
> my PODenergy spreadsheet as an example. You can find the deepest points of
> areas below sea level with Internet searches. The PODenergy spreadsheet has
> some examples for the Salton Sea, California area. You can make some
> estimates of total area and depth of water. You can estimate hydropower for
> the depressions and power needs, if you plan to pump up. Figure it all out
> and then post your thoughts with some numbers. Something like:
> Filling the Salton Sea and Death Valley, California areas lowers world sea
> level by ___ meters. Generates ___ MWh per year during the ___ years of
> filling and ____ MWh per year replacing evaporation losses. Include
> calculations for moving the saltier water back to the ocean without a
> density current taking it to the ocean bottom.
>
> Mark E. Capron, PE
> Oxnard, California
> www.PODenergy.org <http://www.podenergy.org/>
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [geo] Re: Time to Get Right with Your God
> From: "george stocks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, September 27, 2008 5:46 am
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Hi, George Stocks here.
> I'v been doing some more delving into my beliefe, that, 'FILLING',areas of
> dry uninhabited land, that are, ' BELOW SEA LEVEL', with sea water, will
> help alleviate the awfull problem of:
>
> 1) THE RISING SEA LEVEL!
>
>
> 2) GLOBAL WARMING!
>
>
> And I still! believe in it's benefits!
> -----------(yippee)-----------!
> If sea water is removed from the Ocean, it's level will drop!
> The Inland Seas created by the transfer of rising sea water are;
>
>
> 1) Possible to make happen!
>
>
> 3) Able to be isolated.
>
>
> 2) reversable.
>
>
> 4) Will create extra cloud cover.
>
>
> 5) Can be seeded
>
>
> ) Is variable by choice.
>
>
> etc' etc' ! Is there anybody out
> there?
>
> George snr. ---------
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------
>
> )
>
>
>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
> 4)
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Alvia Gaskill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> I'm thinking maybe we should commission Barry McGuire to compose the
>> official geoengineering song:
>>
>> The Laptev Sea, it is exploding
>> Permafrost meltn', clathrates eroding'
>> Geoengineering is not part of the November votin'
>> You don't believe in sulfate aerosols or Latham/Salter's boatin'
>> The Arctic Sea has polar bear bodies floatin'
>>
>> But you tell me
>> Over and over and over again, my friend
>> Ah, you don't believe
>> We're on the eve
>> of destruction.
>>
>>
>> http://www.straight.com/article-164106/gwynne-dyer-climate-apocalypse-could-be-approaching
>>
>> Gwynne Dyer: A climate apocalypse could be approaching
>> By Gwynne Dyer
>> Publish Date: September 25, 2008
>> Scientists have their own way of putting things. This is how Dr Oerjan
>> Gustafsson of Stockholm University announced the approach of a climate
>> apocalypse in an e-mail sent last week from the Russian research ship *Jakob
>> Smirnitskyi* in the Arctic Ocean.
>> "We had a hectic finishing of the sampling programme yesterday and this
>> past night. An extensive area of intense methane release was found. At
>> earlier sites we had found elevated levels of dissolved methane. Yesterday,
>> for the first time, we documented a field where the release was so intense
>> that the methane did not have time to dissolve into the seawater but was
>> rising as methane bubbles to the sea surface."
>> Gustafsson's preliminary report, published in The
>> Independent<http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html>on
>> September 23, is a development far more frightening than the current
>> financial crisis, although it will get only one-thousandth of the coverage.
>> The worst that the financial crisis can bring is some years of recession.
>> The worst that massive methane releases in the Arctic can bring us is
>> runaway, irreversible global warming.
>> Molecule for molecule, methane gas is 20 times more potent than carbon
>> dioxide as a warming agent. However, since methane doesn't stay in the
>> atmosphere as long––around 12 years, on average, compared with 100 years for
>> CO2––and human activities do not produce all that much of it, concerns about
>> climate change have mostly been focused on carbon dioxide. The one big worry
>> was that warmer temperatures might cause massive releases of methane from
>> natural sources.
>> There are thousands of megatonnes of methane stored underground in the
>> Arctic region, trapped there by the permafrost (permanently frozen ground)
>> that covers much of northern Russia, Alaska, and Canada and extends far out
>> under the seabed of the Arctic Ocean. If the permafrost melts and methane
>> escapes into the atmosphere on a large scale, it would cause a rapid rise in
>> temperature, which would melt more permafrost, releasing more methane, which
>> would cause more warming, and so on.
>> Climate scientists call this a feedback mechanism. So long as it is our
>> emissions that are causing the warming, we can stop it if we reduce the
>> emissions fast enough. Once feedbacks like methane release start to drive
>> the warming, it's out of our hands: we might even cut our emissions to zero,
>> only to find that the temperature is still rising.
>> Fear of this runaway feedback is why most climate scientists (and the
>> European Union) have set a rise of two degrees Celsius (3.5 degrees
>> Fahrenheit) in the average global temperature as the limit which we must
>> never exceed. Somewhere between two and three degrees Celsius (3.5 and 5.2
>> degrees Fahrenheit), they fear, massive feedbacks like methane release would
>> kick in and take the situation out of our hands.
>> Unfortunately, the heating is much more intense in the Arctic region. The
>> average global temperate has only risen 0.6 degrees Celsius (1.1 degrees
>> Fahrenheit) so far, but the average temperature in the Arctic is up by 4
>> degrees Celsius (7 degrees Fahrenheit). So the permafrost is starting to
>> melt, and the trapped methane is escaping.
>> That is what the research ship "Jakob Smirnitskyi" has just found: areas
>> of the Arctic Ocean off the Russian coast where "chimneys" of methane gas
>> are bubbling to the surface. What this may mean is that we have no time left
>> if we hope to avoid runaway global warming––and yet it will obviously take
>> many years to get our own greenhouse gas emissions down. So what can we do?
>> There is a way to cheat, for a while. Several techniques have been
>> proposed for holding the global temperature down temporarily in order to
>> avoid running into the feedbacks. They do not release us from the duty of
>> getting our emissions down, but they could win us some time to work on that
>> task without running into disaster.
>> The leading candidate, suggested by Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric
>> chemist Paul Crutzen in 2006, is to inject sulphur dioxide into the
>> stratosphere in order to reflect some incoming sunlight. (This mimics the
>> action of large volcanic eruptions, which also lower the global temperature
>> temporarily by putting huge amounts of sulphur dioxide into the upper
>> atmosphere.)
>> Another, less intrusive approach, proposed by John Latham of the National
>> Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado and Prof. Stephen
>> Salter of Edinburgh University, is to launch fleets of unmanned,
>> wind-powered vessels, controlled by satellite, that would spray seawater up
>> into low-lying marine clouds in order to increase the amount of sunlight
>> that they reflect. The great attraction of this technique is that if there
>> are unwelcome side-effects, you can turn it off right away.
>> These techniques are known as "geo-engineering," and discussing them has
>> been taboo in most scientific circles because of the "moral hazard": the
>> fear that if the public knows you can hold the global temperature down by
>> direct intervention, people will not do the harder job of cutting their
>> emissions. But if large-scale methane releases are getting underway, the
>> time for such subtle calculations is past.
>> Starting now, we need a crash programme to investigate the feasibility of
>> these and other techniques for geo-engineering the climate. Once the thawing
>> starts, it is hard to stop, and we may need them very soon.
>> ------------------------------
>> *Source URL:*
>> http://www.straight.com/article-164106/gwynne-dyer-climate-apocalypse-could-be-approaching
>> >>
>>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
