I've been working on genetically engineered organisms that can modify the arctic climate. If you are interested give me your name and title and address. I want it for a nondisclosure agreement to protect my IP. You can contact me at [email protected].
On Dec 14, 8:40 am, David <[email protected]> wrote: > This information is probably useful to casual viewers of this group / > list / what have you. It's very elementary in nature. > > I've been thinking about the Arctic Ice. This lead me to look up a > rather important number that I had forgotten (lack of use). That > number is the heat of fusion of water: 6.013 kJ/mol. Each kg of water > that melts absorbs about 334 kJ of energy. And each that freezes > releases the same amount. > > The incidence angle of sunlight at the poles is quite low (and non > existent in their respective winters). So albedo effects are not > nearly what they would be in the tropics. > > Reason leads me to conclude that the energy that is melting the ice is > largely from the convection currents in the oceans. Furthermore, I > would expect the rate of melting to accelerate as the surface area to > volume ratio increases. Inland ice would have to rely on other sources > of energy to melt it. Although any glaciers that have direct access to > the sea would get a sizable assist from gravity. Ice flows downhill as > the old saying goes. > > That's a fair amount of energy considering the mass of ice involved. > I'm not familiar with the existing climate models. I assume they would > take the ice into account as a massive thermal buffer. > > Another important number for water is the heat of vaporization: 40.63 > kJ/mol. Turning a kg of water into vapor would require 2,255 kJ of > energy. Some of that vapor would rise to form clouds. The energy that > is released during condensation is that much closer to space. > > I assume the ultimate goal here is to pump heat back into space or > prevent it from reaching the ground in the first place. Cloud cover > does a fair job of reflecting sunlight back into space. Of course it > insulates the ground beneath it too. > > These facts may lead to some interesting ideas on the use of seawater > on a large scale for geoengineering. One just needs to find profitable > applications to make it pay for itself. > > I have a tangential question. Why can't Venus be terraformed? I know > the idea borders on fantasy. But why not genetically engineer (or just > breed) extremophile Archaea to be seeded in the upper atmosphere of > Venus? -- 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.
