I think that one way to get heat into space is to get it into the atmosphere from the ocean. Creating incremental ice by putting water on the surface of existing ice, or “seeding” ice formation by a spray during cold periods in the Arctic, transfer heat from water to air. (Both these ice formation technologies have a long history in the north. A warmer atmosphere radiates more heat into space, with a temperature dependence of T^4, where T is the absolute temperature.
Peter Flynn Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D. Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 1 928 451 4455 [email protected] *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Douglas MacMartin *Sent:* Tuesday, February 9, 2021 7:51 AM *To:* [email protected]; geoengineering < [email protected]> *Subject:* RE: [geo] THE COOLING CONUNDRUM REVERSING CLIMATE CHANGE TO REFREEZE THE ARCTIC Adrian – your list of ostensibly viable should include SAI too, as was pointed out earlier on this same thread. In principle one could inject SO2 or other in the spring at high latitude (and indeed, that may be the most economically viable, technologically achievable near-term approach – and to be clear I wouldn’t advocate doing anything simply because it’s cheap, simply pointing it out). Re MCB, I don’t know if there are sufficient susceptible clouds at high latitudes to do something focused on the Arctic, vs using it to cool lower latitudes and thus cool the Arctic by reducing heat transport – which, of course, if your sole metric is freezing the Arctic, would work. For any of these things one has to look at all of the impacts, and the science is still pretty immature beyond recognizing the overall ability to cool. *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Adrian Hindes *Sent:* Monday, February 8, 2021 6:37 PM *To:* geoengineering <[email protected]> *Subject:* Re: [geo] THE COOLING CONUNDRUM REVERSING CLIMATE CHANGE TO REFREEZE THE ARCTIC Ah of course, the straightforward thermodynamics of it aren't favourable to direct cooling through refrigeration. I suppose the only way to make it work would be to transfer the heat to outer space or deep underground. I don't know too much about how heat exchangers or thermal transport works, but having a read of the basal freezing section of your paper, Andrew, I can't imagine anything thermosyphon related would be appropriate for the Arctic. Aside from glass microspheres then, maybe only marine cloud brightening remains as an ostensibly viable Arctic refreeze technology? It'll be interesting to see what they discuss in the Climate Emergency Summit talk. -A On Sunday, 7 February 2021 at 7:43:10 am UTC+11 Andrew Lockley wrote: I'm unclear on the proposed mechanism, but any artificial refrigeration simply moves heat around. There is obviously an energy penalty for doing this - and for generating the electricity, in the first place. In short, all the additional thermal energy from the nuclear power plant will ultimately end up as waste heat, in the system you're trying to cool. You can't make a sealed room colder by locking a generator and refrigerator in it - even if that room is the size of a planet. Only by using energy to Accelerate hear transfer to space can anything be achieved. Pumping water through the ice can do this, as can freezing glacier bases to preserve them and their ice-albedo feedback. . I address some of these issues in my recent paper. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674927820300940 On Sat, 6 Feb 2021, 07:54 Adrian Hindes, <[email protected]> wrote: @Oliver although that's quite a few nuclear power plants, that's actually not so far out of the realm of possibility. On Friday, 5 February 2021 at 11:48:12 am UTC+11 Oliver Wingenter wrote: It would take 20 nuclear power plants running conventional refrigeration to cool the Arctic Ocean.and refreeze it. <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:10 PM Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: https://climateemergencysummit.org/the-cooling-conundrum-event-profile/ THE COOLING CONUNDRUM REVERSING CLIMATE CHANGE TO REFREEZE THE ARCTIC With rapidly rising global temperatures, the harm to people and nature is already too great. Signs that we are on the brink of triggering runaway global warming are increasing by the day, as the strain on major ecosystems reaches a new level of stress. Analysis shows that even a zero-emission pathway will not be enough alone to slow warming and avoid further devastation. This points to an urgent need to consider establishing an immediate way to cool the planet. Is reversing climate change a real possibility? What would it take to refreeze the Arctic and Antarctic ice to repair the climate? David Keith – Professor of Applied Physics, Harvard Ye Tao – Principal Investigator, Rowland Institute at Harvard Holly Jean Buck – Science Writer & Analyst -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-06JsW0OtEti5ZfcnPe9%2BM43bB4EEa4p-PRvhr7VVdz3XA%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-06JsW0OtEti5ZfcnPe9%2BM43bB4EEa4p-PRvhr7VVdz3XA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/1d332f63-84f7-42cb-91d4-afc4fa71593bn%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/1d332f63-84f7-42cb-91d4-afc4fa71593bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/b7cd0c76-abfb-4e6d-a841-b2139ca396f5n%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/b7cd0c76-abfb-4e6d-a841-b2139ca396f5n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CH2PR04MB6936CB5C29432480E24384D88F8E9%40CH2PR04MB6936.namprd04.prod.outlook.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CH2PR04MB6936CB5C29432480E24384D88F8E9%40CH2PR04MB6936.namprd04.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/a01c92422b17e8ec4279a28334c453e2%40mail.gmail.com.
