I did not mean glass mirrors, just some reflecting or blocking substance.

Best, Mike


On 4/28/09 3:55 PM, "dsw_s" <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> Why mirrors, rather than whatever's cheap, harmless, and opaque?
> 
> On Apr 28, 2:57 pm, Mike MacCracken <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dear Mr. Law: With respect to your suggestion, you need to do some
>> background reading:
>> 
>> The 1992 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report did a calculation of what
>> would be required for near Earth orbit. Offsetting a full doubling of the
>> CO2 concentration would require reducing the incoming solar radiation by
>> something like 1.8-2% of the incoming solar radiation. The NAS indicated
>> that to limit solar radiation by 1% (so about half the effect of a doubling)
>> would take something like having 50,000 orbiting mirrors, each about 10 by
>> 10 KILOMETERS in size (so, as they orbited, we¹d have many ongoing, but
>> short, mirror-induced eclipses of the Sun). Thin films  might well be
>> lighter, but would have to be kept in shape by structural materials, and
>> many are translucent, so greater area may be needed.
>> 
>> They also reported on a proposal to insert a deflector of solar radiation at
>> the L1 point (about 1.6M km toward the Sun), where there is equal
>> gravitational pull from the Sun and Earth‹but active management is required
>> to keep any object in place. This would require a deflector of radiation
>> that was something like 1800 km in diameter, as I recall (most cost
>> effectively put in place by building a manufacturing plant on the Moon).
>> More recently, Angel has suggested lofting via electronic launcher from the
>> Earth¹s surface something like a few trillion parasols, each about .8 meters
>> in diameter‹something that would again be quite a large project.
>> 
>> I¹ll leave out issues arising from the energy and environmental effects of
>> putting something like this in place‹but suffice it to say that these
>> projects would be enormously costly to put in place and would need to be
>> sustained for generations, and all they would accomplish is to mean we could
>> burn a bit more coal rather than pay the modest extra costs of nuclear,
>> renewables, etc. Indeed, if one wants to put so much investment into going
>> to space-based activities, it would seem far more plausible (to me) to be
>> investing in a space-based contribution to the Earth¹s energy supply (like
>> solar-powered satellites that would beam energy to the surface).
>> 
>> Best, Mike MacCracken
>> 
>> On 4/27/09 4:34 AM, "Raymond Law" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Everybody,
>>>  
>>> I was referred to joining this group with my layman's version of solution to
>>> the subject crisis. The solutions that I am outlining below are a  ' mixing
>>> and matching ' of common knowledge, across a spectrum of existing and
>>> commonly
>>> used construction products, robotic tools and the use of the space shuttle.
>>> And I believe that my suggestion  could be the quickest and cheapest
>>> solution
>>> as of today.  And I need everybody in the know to chip in and refine my
>>> concepts, e.g., pointing out the problem areas, the weakest links, etc.  And
>>> also, when, how and where to go next, in the hope of achieving this goal for
>>> the benefits of all mankind,  ASAP .
>>>  
>>>  
>>>                   
>> 
>> _____________________________________________________________________________
>> _>
>> _
>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Below is the outline of my concepts in the fast-track solutions in reversing
>>> the global warming crisis.  And I have to stress that these are only
>>> concepts
>>> and have yet to be developed furthers.
>>>  
>>> Main points of my Reversing Global Warming Project  :
>>>  
>>> 1.  The biggest heat source on earth's atmosphere is from the Sun and
>>> earth's
>>> inner heat pool.  Contrary to other believes, carbon dioxide and other green
>>> house gases would only affect the quality of our air, storing humidity and
>>> altering the reflective/refractive proficiency of solar energy, etc.  But
>>> they
>>> themselves do not generate heat.  And if we try to reverse global warming
>>> along this route, it would take too long for this route to be really
>>> practical.
>>>  
>>> 2.  However,   with today's technology and resources,  mankind can still do
>>> nothing in suppressing the heat coming up under our feet ; therefore, the
>>> quickest and surest route is to pull a sun shade/blind over earth.
>>>  
>>> 3.  With today's knowledge and computer power, and the country's
>>> understandings of earth's atmosphere, positioning acres of solar
>>> refractive/reflective thin films  ( widely used in new buildings' window
>>> panes, worldwide and are currently having large volume production in U.S.,
>>> China and the European Union )  in geo-stationary orbit, or much lower
>>> orbits
>>> if this visor is only need for a finite period of time,  should not present
>>> any major problems to the country. .  Using mirrors will not be practical in
>>> its handling and in its weight to surface area ratio.
>>>  
>>> 4.  The average radius of the earth is a known factor, add to it the average
>>> height of the geo-stationary or much lower orbits for placing these solar
>>> films is also a known factor.  Thus, we can easily calculate the total
>>> supposed surface area of earth and the hypothetical surface area of the  
>>> 'enlarged'  earth,  basing on  earth's average radius plus the average
>>> height
>>> of these orbits for those solar films.
>>>  
>>> 5.  Space scientists and geologists  should be able to determine the total
>>> average  'enlarged'  area of earth that are exposed to the Sun, couple that
>>> with climatologists computation and putting them all together, they should
>>> be
>>> able to tell us the existing heat energy input per hour from the Sun's ray
>>> hitting earth, non-stop.  Because there is always a side of earth facing the
>>> Sun.
>>>  
>>>       Having computed that solar energy intake per given time,  then they
>>> should be able to tell us the relevancy of these energy that is directly
>>> affecting the warming and cooling of earth.  And say, if the earth needs to
>>> be
>>> cooled down by  ' X ' degrees in temperature, consequently, we would need to
>>> reduce by how many percent of the Sun's solar energy that might be hitting
>>> earth.
>>>  
>>> 6.   The refractive/reflective proficiency of all types of solar thin films
>>> are of known factors,  couple that to the need of reducing the Sun's solar
>>> energy in terms of computed quantity,  they should be able to categorically
>>> determine how many acres of solar films would be needed to blanket earth
>>> from
>>> the geo-stationary or lower orbit.  Again, we have more known factors
>>> available.
>>>  
>>> 7.  Finally,  deploying all these solar films would necessarily be needing
>>> the
>>> help of the Space Shuttle and some miniature, remotely-controllable
>>> robots/jets.  These robots/jets, even though simple in designs and
>>> construction, would be needed in drawing those solar thin films out of the
>>> Space Shuttle's cargo bay and trailing those solar films into the
>>> pre-designated orbit/area in space.
>>>  
>>>      And after these solar films are ready for retraction,  these solar
>>> films
>>> and miniature robots/jets would serve one more purpose as  space trash bags
>>> for collecting all those space junks of known and convenient trajectory
>>> along
>>> these solar films' earth-bound pathways.
>>>  
>>>      Naturally,  we would still need to conduct thorough studies on the
>>> effect
>>> of how the extreme temperature-variations in outer space would affect the
>>> integrity and performance of those solar films.
>>>  
>>> 8.  Care would need to be taken not to over-cool the earth.  I have been
>>> telling my friends that earth's global warming is a solvable problem.  But
>>> global cooling on earth is still beyond humans capability and resources
>>> availability.  The recently unusual cold spells all over the northern
>>> hemisphere could be a perfect testimony to mankind's  inability to
>>> counteract
>>> global cooling.
>>>  
>>> 9.   Lastly,  these solar films must not be positioned over vegetation/green
>>> belts and oceans,  as the green vegetation in those areas are wholly
>>> responsible for the production of the oxygen that mankind survives on.  The
>>> best locations for positioning these solar thin films would be over the
>>> North
>>> and South Poles  ( this would also help to produce more ice over the poles,
>>> if
>>> so deemed needed ! )  and over deserts  ( this would help to cool down the
>>> deserts, albeit a little bit ).
>>>  
>>> Looking forward to hearing from you guys,  ASAP  !
>>>  
>>> Raymond Law
>>>  
>> 
>> 
> > 



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