Alvia

We should not knock each other's new ideas too early but if I multiply 
the area of the earth by 3.7 watt/m2 I get 1884 TW .

At $2 bn/TW the ICE 911 scheme does look a bit expensive.  Are you 
quoting the figures correctly?

Stephen

Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design
School of Engineering and Electronics
University of Edinburgh
Mayfield Road
Edinburgh EH9 3JL
Scotland
tel +44 131 650 5704
fax +44 131 650 5702
Mobile  07795 203 195
[email protected]
http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs    



Alvia Gaskill wrote:
> I wasn't aware of ICE911 as it hasn't been discussed before in the 
> many discussions of geoengineering that have occurred in the last 
> several years.  The concept is rather vaguely described at the website:
>  
> http://www.ice911.org/Ice911%20Update%20072109.pdf
>  
> and appears to involve the use of plastic or some other kind of 
> polymeric material to cover glaciers, floating sea ice and sea water, 
> although the project leader says plastic is not involved.  Stephen 
> Schneider, long time critic and opponent of geoengineering (and this 
> would be considered geoengineering) is however, involved as an 
> advisor. http://www.ice911.org/team.shtml  Like they say, everybody's 
> a believer in a foxhole, 9-15-09 being the date for the third worst 
> loss of sea ice on record and should by all reason increase the number 
> of foxhole occupants.
>  
> The pdf page says that $2 billion of Ice911 raw materials can offset 1 
> Terawatt of incoming solar flux.  Wonder if the absorption of 
> upwelling solar IR is factored into this? 
>  
> I can't provide much else in the way of details of the idea, but the 
> website seems heavily weighted towards getting donations to make the 
> project work.  In today's post Madoff-Bush-Lehman Bros. world, 
> contributions will be a little harder to come by without some facts to 
> back them up, no matter who endorses the idea.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Peter Read <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *To:* [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *Cc:* Leslie Field <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, September 23, 2009 5:00 PM
>     *Subject:* For info Fw: [geo] Re: Manifesto for Geoengineering
>
>      
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Leslie Field <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *To:* Peter Read <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *Cc:* Leslie Field <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *Sent:* Thursday, September 24, 2009 5:26 AM
>     *Subject:* Re: [geo] Re: Manifesto for Geoengineering
>
>     Hi Peter,
>
>     My email reply to you didn't post to the google group, as I'm not
>     a member.  Not sure that's an action item, just wanted to let you
>     know I got a "bounce" notice from that address.
>
>     Best regards,
>       Leslie
>
>
>
>     Leslie Field wrote:
>>     Hi Peter,
>>
>>     Thanks for the cc.  One quick clarification is that Ice911
>>     doesn't use floating plastic islands. 
>>     (Two problems with plastics in general:  plastics can have some
>>     unwanted eco impacts, and plastics can suppress evaporation.)
>>
>>     Our small-scale tests have been very encouraging so far, and
>>     we're working on getting some larger-scale tests in place this
>>     season.
>>
>>     Best regards,
>>       Leslie
>>
>>       Leslie Field, Ph.D.
>>       Ice911 Research Corporation
>>       www.ice911.org
>>       [email protected]
>>       (650) 823-2020
>>     [[Snipped - PR]]
>
>
>     >

-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.


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