I do wish more commenters would read the original paper, https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4737323/Seitz_BrightWater.pdf?sequence=1
and view its long-posted slideshow before commenting ad hoc instead of ad rem; https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/32036632/download-the-bright-water-slideshow/26 They note that the light field changes in shape because of multiple scattering, 1. Those scattering induced changes are non-linear in thei impact because ( witness industria; algae production ) most floating organisms absorb light for photodynthesis in all directions- bottom and sides included, and tend to be translucent as well. 2.. Doubling surface brightess takes roughly one oart per million of one micron hydrosol bubbles, and accordingly changes the dissolved gas water chemistry by , you guessed it , about a part per million. As surface water at STP contains ~ 30,000 to 40,000 times more dissolved air to begin with, the biological impacts of the 1 to 10 ppmv 'bright water "regime as described and discussed in the paper may be expected to be far smaller than those arising form natural barometric variation. So please do some experiments to satisfy what seems a growing body of curiousity- the paper reportedly passed 40 citations last year. -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
