re "testing in canals and reservoirs"  

It's not a pretext , Andrew- it's a primary goal, hence the title of the 
paper in question :

 'Bright water: hydrosols, water conservation and climate change.'


On Wednesday, April 20, 2011 8:55:32 PM UTC-4, andrewjlockley wrote:
>
> Michael,
>
> I'm not saying the production of microbubbles is a new idea.  However, I'm 
> not aware of any programme of testing of the behaviour of such bubbles in 
> real waters from around the world.  The key issue is residence time, and we 
> simply don't know how that will be affected by the myriad types of waters 
> which the technology could be deployed in. Whilst testing in canals and 
> reservoirs under the pretext of reducing evaporation makes a lot of sense, 
> any deployment at scale will be in the sea, and so testing seawater is 
> logically a better test.
>
> My suggestion is that by concocting a simple series of 'homebrew' 
> experiments we can gather some really useful data which can help the 
> modelling of this technology tremendously.
>
> I for one would not know whether the silty waters of the Thames estuary 
> would make better microbubble waters than the bright green biologically 
> active water of Portsmouth harbour.  Do you have any data which could 
> answer this question, without recourse to an experiement?
>
> An experiment should settle the matter.  Furthermore, an experiment would 
> raise public awareness of, and interest in geoengineering.  It's not 
> practical for school children to launch balloons into the stratosphere, but 
> they could be very helpful in blowing bubbles into buckets of seawater with 
> a bicycle pump.  It may not be sexy, but my guess is it will be a good test 
> to gather some crude raw data for later modelling.
>
> A
>
> On 21 April 2011 01:38, Michael Hayes <[email protected] <javascript:>>wrote:
>
>> Andrew, "Bright Water" is not a new concept. It was proposed as a means 
>> to reduce hull drag some time ago. Funding is the issue!!!! 
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Andrew Lockley 
>> <[email protected]<javascript:>
>> > 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]<javascript:>
>>> .
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>> [email protected] <javascript:>.
>>> For more options, visit this group at 
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> *Michael Hayes*
>> *360-708-4976*
>> http://www.wix.com/voglerlake/vogler-lake-web-site 
>>  
>>
>>
>

-- 
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/-/2nP8GBDhVYAJ.
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.

Reply via email to