List cc Drs Richter and Bonnelle
1. On 28 February, Dr. Bonnelle sent the list (and others) a notice of his
preparing a manuscript for COP21. I responded and yesterday received a new
copy of that. Some of you may wish to ask him for the revised version.
2. At the same time, I received the following message from Dr. Richter, a
colleague of Dr. Bonnelle, because I had also asked about solar towers. I
have since read the very long open source article (>300 citations) which is at
the site given below. There is a lot on solar towers, but also much more.
The full citation is:
Ming, Tingzhen, Renaud de_Richter, Wei Liu, and Sylvain Caillol. "Fighting
global warming by climate engineering: Is the Earth radiation management and
the solar radiation management any option for fighting climate
change?."Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 31 (2014): 792-834.
3. This seems to be an important article for this list, based on these
quotes from the article:
a. " But as this review is the first to propose the concept of longwave energy
removal methods, a careful evaluation and examination by other scientists is
necessary, recommended and highly desirable. "
b. "This paper shows that geoengineering is not the last resort against
global warming and that other strategies might help to solve the current
problems without the need to just buy time by relieving GW symptoms without
addressing the ocean acidification problem, nor the CO2 accumulation in the
atmosphere."
4. There is only a tiny bit in here on CDR, so this is not an article for
those of us primarily interested in the CDR side of Geo. The article should be
of interest to SRM proponents, as this article's authors would not be called
fans of SRM.
One big difference for me is being forced to now say that the non-CDR
side of Geo is ERM as well as SRM. There is a lot here also on "unusual"
renewable energy.
5. The 5 minute video mentioned below is a good synopsis of this very recent
article - which I suspect will be new "Geo" information for many.
Ron
On Mar 11, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Renaud de_RICHTER <renaud.derich...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Dear Ronal,
>
> Maybe Denis is less active in the field of solar chimneys, but he is the
> author of "Solar chimney project in Arizona: an energy budget basic check"
> http://publications.solar-tower.org.uk/200_MW_La_PAZ_SCCP_in_Arizona.pdf
>
>
> Concerning my contributions, I try to explore several Denis' ideas on a
> larger field, in order to increase atmospheric convection and thus to cool
> down the Earth.
>
> In a recent open source paper http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.032
> with our coauthors we presented new opportunities for Solar Chimneys and
> "Energy Towers" to Fight Global Warming. I hope the article can interest you.
>
>
> As the paper is quite long, to give you a very brief overview of it, here is
> a short summary.
>
>
>
> As you know, many papers, reports and books have been written about
> "geoengineering" => which is presented as: "a plan B to cool the Earth in
> case mitigation and adaptation strategies fail".
>
> Solar Radiation Management (geoengineering) is controversial, presents risks
> and poses ethical questions and governance problems.
>
> We propose Earth Radiation Management instead (including atmospheric
> convection enhancement), and these methods are not geoengineering but
> mitigation strategies.
>
>
>
> A short (5 min) presentation can be listen at:
> http://audioslides.elsevier.com//ViewerLarge.aspx?source=1&doi=10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.032.
>
>
> On the one hand:
>
>
> * Geoengineering is controversial and poses enormous problems of governance
> and ethics;
>
> * Proposals for solar radiation management (SRM) are often regarded by the
> public as "playing the sorcerer's apprentice ", or "playing God";
>
> * SRM acts as an "umbrella" to decrease the solar radiation (short wave
> radiation) that reaches the Earth surface;
>
> * But the global warming caused to greenhouse gases (GHGs) is attributable to
> the Infra Red radiation (LW long wave radiation) ...
>
> * It is difficult to compensate for an excess of Long wave radiation (IR) at
> the planet surface by reducing Short wave solar radiation in the
> stratosphere, as geoengineering does...
>
> * SRM would "save time", but does not help to stop CO2 emissions and does not
> solve the problem of ocean acidification.
>
> * SRM will cost money every year, and SRM must be maintained for 100 or 200
> years...
>
> One of the numerous problems with geoengineering is that once you start, you
> can't really stop!
>
>
> On the other hand, the main ideas we have developed in our paper are the
> following:
>
> * The GHGs act on the Planet as a continuous insulation (at global level),
> that would be too much effective and too efficient. In a building, usually
> when insulation is ineffective, one must try to find and reduce the thermal
> bridges (acting by thermal conduction). In the case of the planet, as it is
> the opposite, why not create thermal bridges (acting by thermal radiation) to
> make the insulation by GHGs less effective? We can cool the Planet if
> therefore we can make thermal shortcuts between the surface of the Earth and
> the upper atmosphere to increase the amount of IR that leaves Gaia to the
> outer space. We called it Earth radiation management (ERM) by analogy to SRM.
>
>
> * For this purpose we propose to develop "unusual" renewable energies (see
> book: "21 unusual renewable energies for the 21st century" Denis Bonnelle,
> Ellipses Editions , ISBN-13: 9782729854072), as these are proven technologies
> and the science behind is strong.
>
>
> * And these unusual renewable energies can, at the same time:
>
> 1. cool the planet by creating "thermal shortcuts" and atmospheric convection
> enhancement;
>
> 2. provide "carbon-free" electricity and therefore allow to gradually reduce
> the number of fossil power plants over the world;
>
> 3. therefore reduce CO2 emissions, gradually reduce and stop global warming,
> ocean acidification and rising sea levels...;
>
> 4. unlike the SRM which costs money every year and leaves the problem of GHGs
> as legacy to our grand-grandchildren, after the initial investment, the ERM
> would earn money, bring growth, jobs and allow our grandchildren by 2040 to
> have all the energy which 9 billion people living on the Planet will need.
>
>
> Is this family of unusual renewable energies utopian?
>
> No, they are not utopias!
>
> As you all know, in Texas and in Arizona (USA) two of them (SUC solar updraft
> chimney and DET downdraft energy tower) are at the stage of industrial
> development (prototypes have been tested two decades ago).
>
> In Canada a third one (AVE atmospheric vortex engine) found the necessary
> funding for its R & D.
>
> The fourth (HP heat pipes) is an extremely popular technology and widely used
> in many industries, but yet few studies have focused on giant installations.
> Although about half million of HP are used to prevent the permafrost from
> melting for example in Alaska, Siberia and Mongolia!
>
> The 5th (radiative cooling by clear sky) could be developed rapidly at large
> scale, as materials and knowledge are available...
>
>
>
> I remain with my co-authors at your disposal for any further information you
> may need.
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Renaud de_Richter,
>
> Montpellier, France
>
>
<snip 3 messages not on topic>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
