Large parts of the Arctic almost meet the requirement of being a polar desert due to the low levels of precipitation. If snowfall was excessive year after year, the Laurentide Ice sheet and its counterparts elsewhere would reappear. Making snow with snow making machines is out of the question due to the scale involved and with the higher temperatures, attempts to make snow naturally if that were possible, might simply wind up making it rain a lot which wouldn't be good either, since the melt ponds that would be formed would absorb even more solar radiation. The various aerosol plans also don't seem to do much for increasing precip. in the Arctic. Unless you keep the air cold, the snow would also melt. So the answer is to make the air cold to keep the ground from melting. The aerosol and/or cloud whitening ideas seems like the best way to do this short term on a meaningful scale.
----- Original Message ----- From: "dsw_s" <[email protected]> To: "geoengineering" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 2:58 PM Subject: [geo] Re: Baked Alaska Has anyone looked seriously into any means of increasing snow cover on the permafrost? That seems to me like the most likely way of slowing the thawing. On May 28, 6:58 am, John Nissen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Alvia, > > It's interesting that Dr Schuur talks only of CO2, whereas others > consider methane much the greater threat. > > But it's this nonsense at the end which upsets me. To imagine that > reducing emissions can stop permafrost thaw is rediculous. Clearly, if > insulation won't work, there is no option but solar radiation management > - and the sooner the better. > > How can Dr Schuur say such a thing? Does he not realise what a > desperate situation we are in, with the whole Arctic warming and sea ice > threatening to disappear? > > Cheers, > > John > > > Burning fossil fuels adds about 8.5 gigatonnes of emissions each year, > > but it is a process that can theoretically be controlled. > > > > Permafrost thaw, though, would be self-reinforcing and could be almost > > impossible to brake. > > > > "It's not an option to be putting insulation on top of the tundra," > > Schuur said. > > > > "If we address our own emissions either by reducing deforestation or > > controlling emissions from fossil fuels, that's the key to minimising > > the changes in the permafrost carbon pool." --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
