I agree fully with Gene's point. I think that geoengineering must stick just to one very simple point until research attracts adequate capital funding for developing more elaborate systems. The layman just get confused when too many options are placed for them. (In the end geoengineering will have to be acceptable to public and politicians alike, otherwise it isn't geoengineering.) Sulphur dioxide (I prefer sulphuric acid aerosol) distribution is a very simple method and very fast to deploy from the planes. New technologies are not necessary and most of its good and bad effects are known from volcanoes and industrial emissions. The research work should establish the safe altitude or time and quantity where it does not influence the Arctic ozone layer. The atmospheric half-life of the coolant aerosol should be established in field experiments and then deployed. The acidification is to be monitored as the Arctic soils can release mercury into water if there is acid rains. But the quantities puffed by the City of Norilsk and Nickel are huge at ground level to 150 metres whereas we are talking about limited amounts of high altitude releases.
I hope the group can prioritise and identify the best candidates for short-term or immediate deployment, as it seems increasingly to me that only when things get terribly out of control and people feel helpless, they then turn into radical solutions. I might sound like prophet of doom and gloom, but so far, ocean acidification and global warming issues from carbon dioxide are responded this lacklustre way. Therefore, the dirty but working unrefined sulphur dioxide or sulphuric acid aerosols seems the primary target for action, i.e. when things like sea ice cap thins out and disappears or methane bursts from permafrost and sea beds require the instant cooling efforts. Kind regards, Albert > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [geo] Speaking of losing the Arctic... > Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:56:37 -0400 > > Does anyone know a viable and affordable way to restore the ice? Of course > it will go in any case; the only issue is timing. Although CO2 and other > phenomena accelerate the rate of warming the current temperature is > increasing AND HAS BEEN FOR A LONG TIME independent of mankind's activities. > Of a certainty geoengineers know what can be done but no one is listening. > As a group pick one, for example, SO2 distribution over the Arctic, and > speak with one voice. Maybe then you will be heard. That is a challenge. Are > you up to it? > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rau, Greg > Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 11:47 AM > To: geoengineering > Subject: [geo] Speaking of losing the Arctic... > > SCIENCE: Vanishing ice allows storms to sharply erode Alaska's Arctic coast > (04/18/2011) > Lauren Morello, E&E reporter > Portions of the Arctic coast are eroding by more than 26 feet per year, a > problem that is likely to worsen as climate change intensifies, according to > a new study. > > The problem is most severe along the shores of the Laptev, East Siberian and > Beaufort seas, concludes the "State of the Arctic Coast 2010" report, > compiled by more than 30 researchers in 10 countries. > > The analysis, which examined roughly a quarter of the Arctic's coastline, > found the region's shores are eroding by an average of about 1.5 feet per > year. > > > A house perched on Alaska's Arctic coast became a victim of erosion. Photo > courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. > > > Driving the erosion is a potent cocktail of receding and thinning sea ice, > warming seawater and stronger waves. > > As the extent of Arctic sea ice declines, it leaves more -- and warmer -- > open water. Wind combines with that water to generate waves that batter the > region's coasts. > > Without the icy barrier that has traditionally protected the Arctic's > vulnerable permafrost, huge chunks of the coastline can disappear during a > severe storm. > > A 2009 analysis by University of Colorado scientist Robert Anderson found > that between Point Barrow and Prudhoe Bay, Alaska's northern coast is > eroding by up to 100 feet per year. > > Several native settlements along Alaska's coast have made plans to move > their communities inland to escape the erosion threat, despite steep costs. > > The new study notes that the erosion problem will intensify as climate > change becomes more severe. > > The report was sponsored by the International Arctic Science Committee, the > Land-Ocean Interactions in the Coastal Zone project, the Arctic Monitoring > and Assessment Programme and the International Permafrost Association. > > > -- > 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. > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
