Hi all,

This is a copy of a discussion concerning the ATMOSPHERIC VORTEX TOWER
project, sent to "Geoengineering group" for further discussion if it can
help.

Sincerely,

François MAUGIS.
============================================================================
===
Hi Andrew,

If nobody was interested by "speculative idea with no academic support" the
human civilisation schould not exist !

OK, as you suggest, I send a copy of our discussion to geoeng group.

Sincerely,

F. MAUGIS.
===========================================================================
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] 
Envoyé : lundi 5 janvier 2009 15:38
À : f.m.maugis
Objet : Re: [geo] Re: arctic engineering needs and sea-ice science


You need to put this to the geoeng group, or to specific individuals with
modelling facilities, to get some modelling done.  I certainly can't wiki a
speculative idea with no academic support.

A

2009/1/5 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>
> Hi, Andrew,
>
> You think right, my idea  is to send warm air to the stratosphere to 
> be cooled.
>
> As far as we are able to modellize what happen with a natural 
> hurricane, we can modellize what hapen with a VORTEX TOWER. In my 
> first mail (dated
> 30/12/2008) I gave you few figures (quantity of hot air per second) 
> but those figures come from an old document. I know that Daniel 
> GROS,the scientist in charge of this project made several models and 
> calculation for different size of towers. But, as far as this research 
> work concern a probable industrial application, only scientists can 
> get some of those confidential informations (to be asked directly to D.
GROS:
> [email protected])
>
> Anyway, the idea is simple: A vortex tower can be installed near hot 
> sea to produce hydrogen, in a desert to produce cool air and humidity, 
> etc. We have several application for this process. The question is: 
> Does it works ? And if it works, which quantity of vortex tower we 
> need to have an influence on the climate and the temperature of our
atmosphere.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> François MAUGIS.
>
> P.S.: I don't understand your idea to cool the atmosphere only in the 
> polars areas. Our atmosphere is a unique system with hot and cold 
> places. We know that the average temperature of the atmosphere is 
> increasing. The solution is to decrease this average temperature, and 
> the temperature of the polars areas shall decrease within the same
proportion.
> ======================================================================
> ======
> ==============================
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé : lundi 5 
> janvier 2009 11:35 À : f. m. maugis Objet : Re: [geo] Re: arctic 
> engineering needs and sea-ice science
>
>
> i read an earlier email on the thread, and i think the idea is to send 
> warm air to the stratosphere to be cooled.  Do you have any climate 
> modelling to support your ideas?
>
> A
>
> 2009/1/5 Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>:
>> as i understand this is just a renewable energy technology.  it has 
>> nothing to do with geoeng.  am i mistaken?
>>
>> A
>>
>> 2009/1/5 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>>> In my "naïve" opinion, geoengineering is engineering work to find a 
>>> solution to the global problems of our planet and specially the 
>>> climate
> change.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> François.
>>>
>>> P.S.: Don't you think that it could be usefull to send à copy of 
>>> this mail (or a syntesis) to the geoengineering group ?
>>> ====================================================================
>>> =
>>> ==
>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>> De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé : 
>>> samedi
>>> 3 janvier 2009 21:00 À : f.m.maugis Objet : Re: [geo] Re: arctic 
>>> engineering needs and sea-ice science
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not surprised, I simply don't see what the geoengineering angle is.
>>>
>>> A
>>>
>>> 2009/1/3 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>>>> May I remind you my mail dated 30 dec. 2008 and following P.S.:
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> =
>>>> ==
>>>> ======
>>>> P.S.: May I remind you that the vortex tower eject hot air at 15000
>>>>>>>> to 20000 m high. In hot countries, the capacity of the 300 m 
>>>>>>>> vortex tower is 1 840 000 cubic meter per second, the capacity 
>>>>>>>> of the 600 m vortex tower is 10 620 000 cubic meter per second.
>>>>>>>> It seems to me a very good cooling system for the planet.
>>>>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> ==
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>
>>>> Of course the VORTEX TOWER is supposed to be an energy-generating, 
>>>> but not only.
>>>>
>>>> Now, if an energy-generating plant is also able to cool the planet, 
>>>> all other energy-generating plants must be destroyed and replaced 
>>>> by this new process. That is my suggestion. And, as far as the 
>>>> price of the energy produced by the vortex tower is cheaper than 
>>>> energy produced by other process, I don't see why this proposal 
>>>> should not be
>>> done ?
>>>>
>>>> Don't you think so ?
>>>>
>>>> Any way, the vortex tower is really a hudge and brand new project, 
>>>> and I understand your surprise. But I assure you that this research 
>>>> programm is really very interesting. I hope that somme of the 
>>>> Geoeng group have a serious examination of it.
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>> François.
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> = == ====== ======================================
>>>>
>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>> De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé :
>>>> mercredi 31 décembre 2008 18:19 À : f.m.maugis Objet : Re: [geo] Re:
>>>> arctic engineering needs and sea-ice science
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The literature suggests an energy-generating, not geoeng use.
>>>>
>>>> A
>>>>
>>>> 2008/12/31 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>>>>> OK, we can consider that the principle of ATMOSPHERIC VORTEX TOWER 
>>>>> is a track of scientific research work.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, half of the research work has already been done, 
>>>>> mainly by Daniel GROS (SUMATEL company), but also by the canadian 
>>>>> engineer Louis MICHAUD on a slightly different way, please refer 
>>>>> to his first scientific publication (1975):
>>>>> http://vortexengine.ca/BAMS/BAMS%20ALL.pdf  in following
>>>>> site:  http://vortexengine.ca/Publications.shtml  where you schall 
>>>>> find also his following publications. As far as I know, it seems 
>>>>> that a russian [email protected] (see:
>>>>> http://www.ergo.boom.ru ) has also been working on that subject, 
>>>>> but we
> have not many details.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, only M. Daniel GROS is able to propose a scientific 
>>>>> and credible presentation of the subject. I have seen this 
>>>>> presentation (Power
>>>>> point) done lasr year in Bruxelles at the European Commission 
>>>>> (Research Department). In my opinion, it is really a fantastic but
>>>> realistic project.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> François.
>>>>> ==================================================================
>>>>> =
>>>>> ==
>>>>> =
>>>>> ======
>>>>> =========================
>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>> De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé :
>>>>> mercredi 31 décembre 2008 12:36 À : f.m.maugis Objet : Re: [geo] Re:
>>>>> arctic engineering needs and sea-ice science
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OK.  Without reference material I am a bit lost as to how to 
>>>>> categorise this.  Is it a cloud making technique, or what?
>>>>>
>>>>> The patent is enough of a reference, if you don't have anything else.
>>>>>
>>>>> A
>>>>>
>>>>> 2008/12/31 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>>>>>> The first part of my mail:
>>>>>> =================================================================
>>>>>> = == = = ===  The french company working on the ATMOSPHERIC 
>>>>>> VORTEX TOWER is SUMATEL
>>>>>>> Allée les Perce-Neiges - 73540 LA BATHIE (Savoie)- FRANCE.
>>>>>>> Phone:  0033.4.79.31.03.20. E mail: [email protected] - The 
>>>>>>> manager and scientific manager is Daniel GROS.
>>>>>> =================================================================
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> ==
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> ======
>>>>>> Can be published.
>>>>>> As far as TV and a great number of newspapers have described this 
>>>>>> project and as far as the main patent ( French patent N° 1439849 
>>>>>> - P.V. 983953 dated august third 1964)is not protected any more, 
>>>>>> we can consider that this project is already into the public domain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only industrial informations cannot be published for the moment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> François.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =================================================================
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> ==
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> ======
>>>>>> ===================================
>>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>>> De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé :
>>>>>> mardi 30 décembre 2008 19:08 À : f.m.maugis Objet : Re: [geo] Re:
>>>>>> arctic engineering needs and sea-ice science
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i can't put details of confidential projects into the public 
>>>>>> domain, can
>>>>> I?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2008/12/30 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>> I can only tell you that this project is still confidential, but 
>>>>>>> following informations can be published:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The french company working on the ATMOSPHERIC VORTEX TOWER is 
>>>>>>> SUMATEL Allée les Perce-Neiges - 73540 LA BATHIE (Savoie)- FRANCE.
>>>>>>> Phone:  0033.4.79.31.03.20. E mail: [email protected] - The 
>>>>>>> manager and scientific manager is Daniel GROS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Following information cannot be published:
>>>>>>> It seems that an important industrial group managed by BOUYGUES, 
>>>>>>> SUEZ, ALSTHOM, AIR LIQUIDE and probably somme others, prepare 
>>>>>>> the industrial devloppment of this project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hope this helps -- Happy New Year!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> François MAUGIS
>>>>>>> [email protected] 
>>>>>>> ================================================================
>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>> ==
>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>> ======
>>>>>>> ===========
>>>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>>>> De : Andrew Lockley [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé :
>>>>>>> mardi 30 décembre 2008 16:34 À : [email protected] Objet : Re:
>>> [geo] Re:
>>>>>>> arctic engineering needs and sea-ice science
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gimme a reference and i will add it to the wiki
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2008/12/30 f.m.maugis <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and specially John NISSEN and Jennifer FRANCIS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I completely agree with your conclusions and specially those:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> " Reducing carbon emissions and moving to a low carbon economy 
>>>>>>>> will not help on this timescale of sea ice disappearance. "
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> " I'm afraid we must resort to emergency geoengineering to cool 
>>>>>>>> the Arctic region, save the Arctic sea ice, slow methane 
>>>>>>>> discharge from permafrost, and stabilise the Greenland ice sheet."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All available tools must be used, I also agree with that, but 
>>>>>>>> nobody gave an opinion concerning a brand new tool, the 
>>>>>>>> ATMOSPHERIC VORTEX TOWER
>>>>>>> !
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As far as natural hurricanes are a means for our planet to 
>>>>>>>> stabilise the climate, dont you think that the rapid 
>>>>>>>> construction of many of such atmospheric vortex towers in the 
>>>>>>>> hottest places of the planet, is able to help to cool our 
>>>>>>>> planet and
> the Artic region ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please find attached informations in english and french 
>>>>>>>> concerning this hudge "climate and energy project".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hope to get some comments from Geoengineering Gogle group.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> François MAUGIS
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> P.S.: May I remind you that the vortex tower eject hot air at 
>>>>>>>> 15000 to 20000 m high. In hot countries, the capacity of the 
>>>>>>>> 300 m vortex tower is 1 840 000 cubic meter per second, the 
>>>>>>>> capacity of the 600 m vortex tower is 10 620 000 cubic meter per
second.
>>>>>>>> It seems to me a very good cooling system for the planet.
>>>>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> ==
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>>> ________________________________ De :
>>>>>>>> [email protected] 
>>>>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]] De la part de John 
>>>>>>>> Nissen Envoyé : mardi 30 décembre 2008 00:50 À :
>>>>>>>> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc :
>>>>>>>> [email protected]; [email protected]; 
>>>>>>>> David Wasdell; Peter Wadhams Objet : [geo] Re: arctic 
>>>>>>>> engineering needs and sea-ice science
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I looked up Jennifer's posting here:
>>>>>>>> http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/17/ice-retreat-in-arc
>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>> ic
>>>>>>>> - m i s ses-last-years-mark/ I see she says, at the end of her
>>>>>>>> comment:
>>>>>>>> "Ice-free by 2013 still seems highly plausible to me."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jennifer is one of a growing band of polar scientists who think 
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> 2013 is more likely than 2030, and it could be sooner still.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We are getting massive positive feedback from the albedo effect 
>>>>>>>> (as high albedo sea ice gives way to low albedo water), which 
>>>>>>>> will accelerate local warming and then global warming.  As 
>>>>>>>> David Wasdell put it, for his Westminster briefing document:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Planet Earth, We Have A Problem.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But reducing carbon emissions and moving to a low carbon 
>>>>>>>> economy will not help on this timescale of sea ice 
>>>>>>>> disappearance.  I'm afraid we must resort
>>>>>>>> to:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Emergency Geoengineering
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> to cool the Arctic region, save the Arctic sea ice, slow 
>>>>>>>> methane discharge from permafrost, and stabilise the Greenland ice
sheet.
>>>>>>>> Stratospheric aerosols and marine cloud brightening could do it.
>>>>>>>> We must put one or both of these techniques into practice as 
>>>>>>>> quickly as we can, while continuing our mitigation efforts with 
>>>>>>>> renewed
>>>> vigour.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That should be a top resolution for President Obama in 2009!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers from Chiswick,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>> From: Andrew Revkin
>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] ; [email protected]
>>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected] ; 
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 4:26 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: [geo] arctic engineering needs and sea-ice science hi 
>>>>>>>> all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I consulted with a few sea-ice wizards on the exchanges here 
>>>>>>>> related to Arctic trends, and Jennifer Francis at Rutgers 
>>>>>>>> weighed in with the following thoughts. Note the importance of 
>>>>>>>> the boundary layer changes as well. There are many important 
>>>>>>>> factors besides albedo and ocean solar
>>>>>>> absorption.
>>>>>>>> Winter cloudiness etc important factor. But also note the 
>>>>>>>> importance of not over-interpreting short-term wiggles as trends.
>>>>>>>> Much more on Dot Earth and in my earlier coverage of the 
>>>>>>>> sea-ice question. This post (shortcut) is a good starting point:
>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dotIceTrends Here's jennifer's comment (I 
>>>>>>>> sent her that sea-ice graph that was making the rounds here)>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Andy --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The first figure you attached with the extrapolation from the
>>>>>>>> 2007 summer ice loss is very unrealistic, in my opinion. Both 
>>>>>>>> the observed record and model simulations of ice extent exhibit 
>>>>>>>> a great deal of interannual variability, and most sea ice 
>>>>>>>> researchers would expect this behavior to continue superimposed 
>>>>>>>> on a continuing downward
>>>>> trend.
>>>>>>>> Some years the decline will be dramatic, as it was in 2007, and 
>>>>>>>> some years there will likely be a recovery, as random 
>>>>>>>> atmospheric patterns act on the ice cover. What's different now 
>>>>>>>> as opposed to
>>>>>>>> 2 decades ago is that the ice is now so thin that any unusual 
>>>>>>>> forcing
>>>>>>>> -- be it a persistent wind pattern, cloud cover, heat transfer 
>>>>>>>> from lower latitudes -- will have a much bigger effect on the 
>>>>>>>> ice, as thin ice is more easily moved by wind and/or melted by 
>>>>>>>> increased heating. The small ice cover of recent years allows 
>>>>>>>> more solar energy to be absorbed by the open surface during 
>>>>>>>> summer, but exactly how that extra heat affects  the system 
>>>>>>>> over the following months is still being worked out. Some 
>>>>>>>> recent research suggests that during falls after low-ice 
>>>>>>>> summers the lower atmosphere warms, the atmospheric boundary 
>>>>>>>> layer gets deeper, and low clouds increase, all of which tend 
>>>>>>>> to retard regrowth of sea ice in the fall and early winter. It 
>>>>>>>> also appears there's a large-scale influence on winter weather 
>>>>>>>> patterns over much of the northern hemisphere. The reason I'm 
>>>>>>>> telling you all this is that it appears there is no obvious 
>>>>>>>> mechanism for the ice to rebound significantly unless there is 
>>>>>>>> a multi-year period of colder-than-normal temperatures, but 
>>>>>>>> this is not likely as greenhouse gases continue to increase at 
>>>>>>>> rates even faster than the most pessimistic
>>>>>>> IPCC scenario.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regarding water temperatures, the main effect is through the 
>>>>>>>> added absorption of solar energy in summer, which accelerates 
>>>>>>>> the melt during late summer. Warmer winter temperatures in the 
>>>>>>>> Atlantic sector also appear to be responsible for most of the 
>>>>>>>> retreat of the ice edge during winter in that region, but not 
>>>>>>>> on the Pacific
>>> side.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe this is more info that you needed and much of it you 
>>>>>>>> already know, but it's not a simple explanation. Regarding the 
>>>>>>>> shipping text you sent, it looks like a bunch of hooey to me. 
>>>>>>>> 51 ships in the area will not have a perceptible effect on the 
>>>>>>>> clouds. The "good" low clouds they're talking about are already 
>>>>>>>> almost 100% emissive of infrared energy, and adding ship smoke 
>>>>>>>> to them is not going
>>>> to matter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hope this helps -- Happy New Year!!
>>>>>>>> Jennifer
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>>>>> ~
>>>>>>>> ~~
>>>>>>>> ~
>>>>>>>> ~
>>>>>>>> ~
>>>>>>>> ~
>>>>>>>> Jennifer Francis, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>> Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University 
>>>>>>>> Co-Director of the Rutgers Climate and Environmental Change 
>>>>>>>> Initiative
>>>>>>>> 74 Magruder Rd, Highlands NJ 07732 USA -- Tel: (732) 708-1217, Fax:
>>>>>>>> (732)
>>>>>>>> 872-1586
>>>>>>>> [email protected] | http://marine.rutgers.edu/~francis/
>>>>>>>> At 9:14 AM -0700 12/29/08, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Re Arctic ice, the issue is not just albedo, but also thermai
> inertia.
>>>>>>>> The effective heat capacity of the exposed ocean is hugely 
>>>>>>>> greater than the ice.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tom.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andrew C. Revkin
>>>>>>>> The New York Times / Science
>>>>>>>> 620 Eighth Ave., NY, NY 10018
>>>>>>>> Tel: 212-556-7326 Mob: 914-441-5556
>>>>>>>> Fax:  509-357-0965
>>>>>>>> www.nytimes.com/revkin
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to