In terms of nature's little geoengineers, and hoped-for negative feedbacks in the arctic, there might also be some neighborly "natural SRM" going on under the arctic ice alongside the "natural CDR" described in this posting. At Los Alamos there's been some interesting modeling of sea-ice edge biochemistry that predicts a rise in DMS-produced cooling with ice break-up. I'd have to check, but it was a non-negligible figure in locally averaged W/m2 - maybe 6 or 7, if memory serves......the hero would appear to be Nitzschia Frigida, an edge/bottom-ice-dwelling diatom that puts out plenty of DMS for several weeks of the spring/early summer.....
On the other hand, like Vernadsky saying long ago that eHux and such could circle the globe in a few days through its reproduction rate, biotic potential usually far outstrips performance. That will probably stand for the human geoengineers, too, of course. But maybe if both work together? Cheers, Nathan On Monday, June 11, 2012 10:16:07 AM UTC-4, Russell Seitz wrote: > > Despite their spectacular visibility, Arctic blooms absorb light as well > as backscattering it in ways more complex than microbubbles. > > It is by no means clear what water temperature changes the interplay of > backscattering, undershine, and evolving population density will yield, for > dissolved rganic matter and suspended metabolic debris levels vary from > organism to organism let alone ecosystem to ecosystem. > > One hopes multlspectral and hyperspectral imaging will yield some > correlations soon. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/AQDvGzNMeE8J. 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.
