Hi all, I would be very keen to explore methods of cooling rivers, with a view to urgent deployment on rivers flowing into the Arctic. The size and lifetime of bubbles is crucial for maintaining reflective properties. But lifetime is most puzzling from the physics [1]. Thus experimentation is vital. And one needs to consider that these rivers may contain outflow water from wetlands and thermokast lakes which have a high concentration of dissolved methane. We also need to consider the combination of biological methods of reducing such methane with the bubble brightening technology.
The cooling of rivers flowing into the Arctic is important because of escalating methane emissions from shallow seas in the Arctic [2]. But help in cooling the Arctic generally could prove vital because Arctic amplification is now thought to be a major driver of climate extremes [3], precipitating a growing food crisis as reported in the Huffington Post [4]. The collapse of sea ice can now be expected before 2015 as the sea ice volume continues its decline (closely following the exponential trend curve for each month) [5], further exacerbating the situation [6]. Cheers, John [1] http://www.jsst.jp/e/JSST2012/extended_abstract/pdf/104.pdf [2] Shakhova, personal communication [3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4spEuh8vswE [4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-reese-halter/missing-sea-ice-ameg-and-_b_1753994.html [5] http://climateforce.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/piomas.png [6] http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/08/04/634901/arctic-death-spiral-continues-new-record-low-sea-ice-volume-appears-likely/ -- On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>wrote: > Russell, > > I've been thinking further about testing the 'brightwater' idea. > Reference Seitz, R. (2010). "Bright water: Hydrosols, water > conservation and climate change". Climatic Change 105 (3–4): 365–381. > doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9965-8 > > I'm interested to know whether the salinity of the water is likely to > have a material effect? > > My suggestion is that testing in rivers would be a good first step. > There is limited mixing with unaltered water, and there should be a > clear correlation between distance and time, which would potentially > allow residency testing in a variety of different temperatures and > turbidity environments with ease. Costs of such testing could be > considerably lower than in open water, as an unmanned bubbler could be > placed in a static location, left running, and samples taken > downstream. By using a pseudorandom pulse, it should be possible to > get a very clear indication of the effect of mixing and dilution on > the bubble flow. Albedo and turbidity measurements could be taken > continuously. > > However, all of that is irrelevant if it doesn't work in rivers. > Perhaps you, or another reader, could comment. > > Thanks > > A > > On 21 April 2011 01:28, 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 > > -- > 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.
