Hi All
I cannot reconcile
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/2016JA022689
with what Olivier says is the IPCC position without saying things which
might annoy the IPCC.
Can anyone else?
Stephen
On 19-Aug-18 5:48 PM, Andrew Lockley wrote:
As discussed in my original post, a significant scaling of synthetic
cosmic rays is possible, over background levels (3-5 orders) This may
give a large climate signal, sufficient to analyse the effect with a
view to using it for CE.
Does anyone have a view on the potential usefulness of high-volume,
standard-energy cosmic rays?
A
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018, 16:35 Olivier Boucher,
<olivier.bouc...@lmd.jussieu.fr
<mailto:olivier.bouc...@lmd.jussieu.fr>> wrote:
Hello Andrew,
see section 7.4.6 of IPCC AR5 :
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter07_FINAL.pdf
The summary is
"Cosmic rays enhance new particle formation in the free
troposphere, but the effect on the concentration of cloud
condensation nuclei is too weak to have any detectable climatic
influence during a solar cycle or over the last century (medium
evidence, high agreement). No robust association between changes
in cosmic rays and cloudiness has been identified. In the event
that such an association existed, a mechanism other than cosmic
ray-induced nucleation of new aerosol particles would be needed to
explain it. {7.4.6}"
Best
Olivier
Cosmic rays cause cloud condensation nuclei. They are therefore
believed to affect cloudiness, and therefore climate. If we made
more cosmic rays, that would likely make it more cloudy. Whether
this was a warming or cooling effect would depend on whether it
was cirrus or cumulus clouds (NB, sometimes making cirrus
ultimately removes water, resulting in less cirrus)
Cosmic rays are almost all protons, with an typical energy peak
distribution of 0.3GEv. (4.8×10^−11 J). No idea if that's the
right energy for CCN, but we can tweak that later.
Creating artificial cosmic rays is possible, using a linear
particle accelerator. This is similar to an ion thruster, as used
in space probes.
To affect climate, you'd probably have to get densities of the
order of 1/s/sqm (more on that, later).
360 million square kilometers of ocean is 360tn sqm or
3.6x10^14sqm. You don't really want to send particles into
people, and the cleaner air over the oceans makes them more
effective.
A kilo of hydrogen contains 6x10^26 protons.
That means 1kg of H2 gives you enough material for 1.6x10^12s =
roughly 50 years - so a satellite could easily carry enough
material to do the job.
Power is 3.6x10^14 x 4.8x10^-11J/s = 17kW - again, well within
what a satellite could muster (roughly 100sqm of solar panels, at
around 20% panel efficiency (conservative) and 50pc conversion
(made up) efficiency).
Cheap satellites are about $50m - well within the capabilities of
a rich philanthropist. Even if this is not cheap, it's still only
perhaps 500m
If I'm out by 5 orders (1 ray per sq cm, not per sq m each
second), then that's only 10,000 satellites. That's expensive,
but not outlandish. Superficially, that would be $500bn at the
lower cost, but there is likely a 10x or 100x experience curve
cost reduction, meaning the whole programme would be about
$5-50bn max.
As an alternative, you could use aircraft or balloons, but beam
attenuation would be a serious issue. 40km balloons can be
launched, albeit with small payloads. They would fly at the
bottom of the mesosphere, over 99.9pc of the atmosphere. So maybe
beam attenuation would be tolerable, at that height. I don't know
how to calculate it, but I'm guessing it would be cms to kms - so
not really far enough to make a difference to climate. You could
perhaps have mountaintop accelerators with very high powers, and
a sweeping beam (like a lighthouse). If the power requirement was
GW-range, then maybe the beam range would be a hundred km, or so.
That might be enough to work, but it would have some pretty
significant effects on local atmospheric chemistry - so probably
not a good idea.
Any thoughts from anyone?
Andrew Lockley
--
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
<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to
geoengineering@googlegroups.com
<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAMS State of the Climate 2017
<https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/bulletin-of-the-american-meteorological-society-bams/state-of-the-climate/>
has an aerosol section in the Global Climate chapter
--
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
<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to
geoengineering@googlegroups.com
<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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
<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com
<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design, School of Engineering,
Mayfield Road, University of Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
