My apologies, but I do not see how anything like this could possibly work. The issue is not the transfer of heat energy to the atmosphere by direct heating‹the warmth of the ocean is what enables evaporation to occur and it is then the condensation of the water vapor that gives the energy for the hurricane. So, anything that is wet at the surface can cause evaporation. With all the wave action and spray there is likely more than enough water being lofted for there to be enough evaporation even if one does not get evaporation from the actual water surface that would be covered under this proposal. The wind generating the waves is being powered also by evaporation from over a very wide area.
And as for calculating the effect, we already have a sort of analog‹for when a hurricane passes over land. Indeed it slows down‹which is what is desired‹but a lot of that, I believe, is from increased surface drag and from drier air from over land areas being pulled in. And while wind amount may go down (and that can be important as damage goes by the cube of wind speed, and there are thresholds to due to building codes), there can be torrential rains far inland that do a great deal of damage. As for a rough calculation, hurricanes are likely drawing moisture into the atmosphere from near a thousand kilometers from the storm center‹they are huge, and they are moving, and the wind stirs up the waters for very long distances. If one really wants to try to make a difference, one has to limit the heat uptake of the waters over the whole years, which might get temperatures down a degree or two over a relatively large area. There are ideas for doing this‹like the Salter and Latham cloud scheme, etc. But trying to do enough just ahead of a coming storm is a huge task. Alvia¹s scheme is interesting because it is seeking to prevent the originating eddy from forming‹and at this point it has yet to begin taking advantage of condensation of moisture to drive it. In that poleward transport of energy by tropical cyclones is a significant amount of energy, that would also have to be replaced somehow, and so it would be interesting to think about whether we would have hurricanes were it not for the eddy initiation on Africa. Given that typhoons develop out in the Pacific without a desert whirlwind to start them, might it be that the TARP would only shift the origin of hurricanes to another location. Interesting question to study. Best, Mike On 8/15/09 7:41 AM, "Andrew Lockley" <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> wrote: > To clarify my earlier emails on the mechanisms involved: > > The pale plant materials would increase the albedo of the sea surface for a > short but critical period, causing a drop in SST. > The micro-convection near the surface would be impeded by any floating, > submerged material, so warm water cannot rise to replace water cooled by > evaporation (more important in poorly mixed waters) > If non-porous materials were used, such as woody waste, then any chips that > float high out of the water would be (relatively) dry, thus reducing the area > available for evaporation. > Free-running food oils would tend to form short-lived slicks which inhibit > wave action, reducing surface area. Such slicks block evaporation completely > where their surface remains intact. > > As for the costs, an area tracked by a hurricane would have to be covered to > an extent which would make a difference, but dispersal should not be a major > issue as the effects need only be short-lived. You're basically trying to > cool the waters the hurricane will pass over in the future. By using > materials with a small particle size, a large area of coverage can be achieved > at little cost. Further, large particles can be made in situ from compact raw > materials. Popcorn is quite a good example, as most people are familiar with > it being made. A handful of popcorn seed can cover a bathtub-sized section of > sea to an useful concentration. > > Can anyone reading this attempt the calculations needed to assess the efficacy > of the idea? Testing it experimentally is rather complex, as some effects > rely on cooling of the sea surface by preventing solar heating and others on > the insulation of the warm sea, preventing evaporation. Consequently, > tracking the temperature change of brine in a bucket in my garden does not > yield meaningful results. The best I can do is to test each aspect > individually. > > I will go buy some popcorn and a thermometer soon! > > A > > > 2009/8/15 Stuart Strand <sstr...@u.washington.edu> >> Perhaps you should estimate the cost first. How much straw per ha do you >> need to insulate enough to get 50% reduction in heat flux? Or to cover, to >> make it simpler. The sea area to be covered would be something on the order >> of the area of a hurricane. Purchase and shipping costs for the straw >> delivered off shore would be something like $120 /Mg DW CR, 2006 (Strand and >> Benford 09 minus ballast). So how cheap is it? >> >> >> >> You also need to estimate the rate at which the particles would be dispersed >> in the open sea. I am still not clear on the mechanism by which this is >> supposed to affect hurricanes. If it is to cool the ocean, how is heat >> transfer to be affected? By changing bulk thermal conductivity or the >> boundary layer (aquatic?)? >> >> >> >> Corn stover and bagasse are the most available sources of cheap biomass in >> the tropics, they are not foreign to the marine ecosystem, but the >> environmental impact would be unclear. The environmental effects would be >> greater than for technology such as CROPS because the terrestrial carbon >> would be dispersed over the water column for a longer time over a greater >> area. >> >> >> >> = Stuart = >> >> >> >> Stuart E. Strand >> >> 167 Wilcox Hall, Box 352700, Univ. Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 >> >> voice 206-543-5350, fax 206-685-3836 >> >> skype: stuartestrand >> >> http://faculty.washington.edu/sstrand/ >> >> >> >> From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com >> [mailto:geoengineer...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Lockley >> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 6:53 PM >> To: Alvia Gaskill >> Cc: oliver.wingen...@gmail.com; geoengineering >> >> >> Subject: [geo] Re: Home experiment >> >> >> There are a variety of artificial materials that could be used, such as corn >> starch plastic strips, etc. as well as packing peanuts. >> >> >> >> There are lots of agricultural wastes that would be worth a go. Wheat straw, >> peanut shells, apple cores, potato peelings, etc. >> >> >> >> The logic for this approach is just that it seems a small difference in heat >> transfer to the storm could make a big difference to the storm's destructive >> power. Even a 1mph difference make a house fall down or not fall down. >> >> >> >> It's so cheap to trial this that it has to be worth a go. Fine a small >> natural harbour, chuck in a few split bales of straw and see what happens. >> There should be a degree-magnitude temperature difference compared to >> control conditions in time and space. >> >> >> >> Hands up who lives near the sea nand has ready access to groundnut waste, >> hay, etc. >> >> >> >> A >> >> 2009/8/15 Alvia Gaskill <agask...@nc.rr.com> >> >> I guess this makes you a "cereal killer." Cereal is also relatively >> expensive. Starch based packing peanuts would be whiter and also >> biodegradable, but the scale and other issues previously discussed in my >> opinion make this an infeasible pre-emptive measure. >> >> >> >> You may have seen on the weather this week that some Saharan dust interfered >> with the development of a tropical wave in the Atlantic, so there are ways to >> prevent the growth of storms. >> >> >> >> I still think that an examination of the effect of placing a white cover over >> part of the country of Niger (of Plame and yellowcake fame) on the discharge >> of waves into the Gulf of Guinea would be a worthwhile exercise. The hot >> Saharan air from there or even from other surrounding areas would have to >> pass over this cooler area and be subject to subsidence. This would prevent >> it from converging and if it never enters the water with any characteristics >> of a wave, it can't gain energy from the jungle or the ITCZ, it can't gain >> rotation from the Coriolis effect and it can never become an organized >> tropical cyclone. >> >> >> >> Stephen Salter and Bill Gates want to kill them on the way to school or or >> work, I favor the "strangle them in the crib" or earlier approach. BTW, that >> dinky little Cat 1 that hit Taiwan killed 500 people. The best hurricane is >> no hurricane at all. OK, I'm biased. >> >> >> >> In the fall of 1954, a 36-year-old pregnant woman in coastal NC was nearly >> killed when she attempted to remove downed tree limbs from her yard, thinking >> that a hurricane that had just struck the area had passed and instead was >> caught off guard by the winds from the backside of the storm as the eye was >> passing directly over her. She was my mother. I was along for the ride. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: Andrew Lockley <mailto:andrew.lock...@gmail.com> >>> >>> To: oliver.wingen...@gmail.com >>> >>> Cc: geoengineering <mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com> >>> >>> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 8:48 PM >>> >>> Subject: [geo] Re: Home experiment >>> >>> >>> >>> After a couple of days all the Special K sank. I think this is rather neat. >>> It gives you a couple of days to whiten and insulate the ocean - just long >>> enough to mess up a hurricane. Then it can either end up as food for >>> bottom-feeders or it will sequester the carbon. >>> >>> >>> >>> I think it could be worth a sea trial. If anyone lives near a relatively >>> secluded harbour and can afford to invest in a few boxes of breakfast >>> cereal, it would be a very cheap geoeng experiment. Perhaps we can attempt >>> to calculate from first principles whether Rice Krispies or Sugar Puffs >>> would be the best. Will the Honey Monster or the GRRRRRREAT Tiger save >>> Florida most effectively? >>> >>> >>> >>> An alternative is sawdust or matchwood, which would be more resilient and >>> would have better insulating properties as it would float out of the water >>> and is non-porous. However, it's not as short lived, which may be a >>> problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> I have to admit it would be extremely amusing if such a ridiculous idea >>> actually works. >>> >>> >>> >>> A >>> >>> >>> >>> 2009/8/13 Oliver Wingenter <oliver.wingen...@gmail.com> >>> >>> >>> Dear Andrew, >>> >>> If the water temperature is warmer than the air you will insulate the >>> water and make it warmer. What color will the Special K be after a >>> few days if it is eat? What happens to the (additional) fish near the >>> surface when the hurricane comes? If not the cooling effect will >>> increase the mixed layer depth and this will have an additional >>> cooling effect. >>> >>> Evaporation may increase because the surface area of the Special K is >>> higher than the water. Worth checking this out. >>> >>> Pick a substance that will break down in a few days and is benign. >>> There is a natural organic scum on the sea surface already. If you >>> add to it, you will alter bubble bursting and air-sea transfer. >>> >>> Good luck, >>> >>> Oliver Wingenter >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Aug 12, 5:50 pm, Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > I tested my theory that breakfast cereals could disrupt hurricanes with a >>>> > very small experiment. >>>> > I got some Kellog's Special K and floated it in briny water for 36 hours. >>>> I >>>> > tried two versions: soaked in olive oil, and dry. Both samples remained >>>> > afloat, just under the surface of the water, at the end of the >>>> experiment. >>>> > >>>> > I suggest that this will make a significant difference to heat transfer >>>> into >>>> > the hurricane, by a variety of mechanisms: >>>> > 1) Increasing albedo (Special K is pale yellow) which will reduce solar >>>> > heating of the sea >>>> > 2) Impeding circulation on small scales near the surface, reducing >>>> > evaporation >>>> > 3) Oil-mixed cereal may reduce evaporation directly, by reducing the wet >>>> > surface area >>>> > 4) A continuous oil layer will reduce wave disturbance, thus reducing >>>> > effective surface area. >>>> > >>>> > I think this idea is worthy of some further consideration. I really hope >>>> > someone can comment on the idea. It seems pretty cheap and >>>> environmentally >>>> > benign to me. >>>> > >>>> > A >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
