My understanding is that the transparent atmosphere does not radiate efficiently. The sea surface has a low albedo, and is thus a very effective radiator. It's also at a very high temperature, compared to the surrounding air and ice surface.
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021, 16:58 Peter Flynn, <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/a01c92422b17e8ec4279a28334c453e2%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/CAJ3C-05GjC5uF%3D_%2BU%2BPuqT7AcXjSEW_c2xhi1bqfavMocytfDw%40mail.gmail.com.
