The below is forwarded at Russells suggestion. My thinking on the matter is that even much larger bubbles will provide a useful analogue for experimentation - hence my suggestion of using a diffuser and hand pump to trial the idea in different waters to check lifetimes.
If anyone can think of good homebrew experiments to test the idea in different waters, please reply. A ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Russell Seitz" <[email protected]> Date: 22 Apr 2011 00:23 Subject: Re: Testing brightwater To: "Andrew Lockley" <[email protected]> I hope you will find the paper and its references helpful in informing your beliefs , but that presumes some familiarity with physical properties of water and the component gases of air ,including their solubility curves - CO2 is vastly different from say N2, but you want to create a briefly visible hydrosol of sorts . just twist the cap of a warm bottle of club soda. It will flash white as microbubbles nucleate. You then have a few hundred milliseconds to twist the cap back on before the bubbles grow several thousandfold in diameter, and displace enough water to spray you in the face. If you can get such a system to settle down instead of erupting , at a point before the nucleated bubbles become visibly large and so prone to rise, and you dilute it to ~ 1ppmv, you will have a DIY hydrosol. It won't look like much to the naked eye, though, unless it's several meters thick- you can scarcely brighten water unless it's deep enough to be dark in the first place. I hope this crude illustration helps, and if it does , please share it with the group On 21 April 2011 14:09, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: > > Is transparency change a good proxy? It looks so from your tank . You'd need to correct for the existing murkiness using a control which settles at the same rate. > > My suggestion is that a bicycle pump with a diffusion nozzle should work. Failing that you could use a soda fountain cartridge, but that's co2 not air. You can use the cartridge to pump air, but that's a bit complicated. > > I don't know what's the best method, but I believe a homebrew experiment mat be possible . I hope you can help me work this up. > > A > > On 21 Apr 2011 16:26, "Russell Seitz" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Water transparency and undershine are two different things > > > > On 21 April 2011 11:23, Russell Seitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> With what will you supersaturate the water with air? > >> > >> > >> On 21 April 2011 05:11, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> It was a serious suggestion Russell. With the right nozzle, I'm sure a > >>> school yard experiment can yield useful results, using change in opacity > >>> measured visually. > >>> > >>> Take two buckets, bubble one. Leave them in the school yard. Measure > >>> invisibility depth of a bright coin hourly, then daily, until there's no > >>> longer a difference. > >>> > >>> How is that not a useful test? > >>> > >>> A > >>> On 21 Apr 2011 05:38, "Russell Seitz" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > " a bicycle or car tyre pump, clock, standard diffuser nozzle and a > >>> ruler > >>> > with a coin taped to it (for checking cloudiness)." > >>> > > >>> > Don't forgot the coyote . > >>> > > >>> > On 20 April 2011 20:28, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Hi > >>> >> > >>> >> It seems to me that Brightwater is suitable for 'homebrew' testing, and > >>> >> indeed would greatly benefit from this work. Water bodies are very > >>> variable > >>> >> by salinity, choppiness, cloudiness, temperature, etc. > >>> >> > >>> >> Is it possible to create a set of standard tests which can be conducted > >>> by > >>> >> people to test BW in their local area? A bucket filled with seawater in > >>> >> California may behave very differently to a bucket of seawater in > >>> Scotland. > >>> >> > >>> >> I would imagine that it would be possible to test the idea using a 2 > >>> gallon > >>> >> bucket, a bicycle or car tyre pump, clock, standard diffuser nozzle and > >>> a > >>> >> ruler with a coin taped to it (for checking cloudiness). A colour- > >>> >> comparison chart may also be useful. Sure, these would be very basic > >>> >> results, but they would be very helpful if (for example) we discovered > >>> that > >>> >> water near river mouths was better than water from open ocean > >>> shorelines. > >>> >> I'm guessing that all the equipment that wasn't available in an average > >>> >> home would be able to be bought and posted for likely a lot less than > >>> 50 > >>> >> dollars. > >>> >> > >>> >> I may be offending the sensibilities of those with big labs and high > >>> >> standards, but my guess is we could quickly gain some very useful data > >>> on > >>> >> this with the participation of some people on this list, and maybe > >>> beyond. > >>> >> Who knows, maybe this could become a very popular experiment in schools > >>> and > >>> >> colleges? > >>> >> > >>> >> A > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > Russell Seitz > >>> > Fellow of the Department of Physics > >>> > Harvard University > >>> > Cambridge MA 02138 > >>> > 617 661- 0269 > >>> > > >>> > www.adamant.typepad.com > >>> > > >>> > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or proprietary > >>> > information. and the unauthorized distribution copying or dissemination > >>> of > >>> > this message, text,and any attached or displayed content is strictly > >>> > forbidden. © Russell Seitz 2008 all rights reserved. > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Russell Seitz > >> Fellow of the Department of Physics > >> Harvard University > >> Cambridge MA 02138 > >> 617 661- 0269 > >> > >> www.adamant.typepad.com > >> > >> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or proprietary > >> information. and the unauthorized distribution copying or dissemination of > >> this message, text,and any attached or displayed content is strictly > >> forbidden. © Russell Seitz 2008 all rights reserved. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Russell Seitz > > Fellow of the Department of Physics > > Harvard University > > Cambridge MA 02138 > > 617 661- 0269 > > > > www.adamant.typepad.com > > > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or proprietary > > information. and the unauthorized distribution copying or dissemination of > > this message, text,and any attached or displayed content is strictly > > forbidden. © Russell Seitz 2008 all rights reserved. -- Russell Seitz Fellow of the Department of Physics Harvard University Cambridge MA 02138 617 661- 0269 www.adamant.typepad.com This message and its attachments may contain confidential or proprietary information. and the unauthorized distribution copying or dissemination of this message, text,and any attached or displayed content is strictly forbidden. © Russell Seitz 2008 all rights reserved. -- 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.
