Robert and Paul, John and 6 ccs. (note that Paul added “biochar.io”, but did not otherwise use that word. I am mainly responding for biochar reasons)
RWL1. I write because I agree with Paul on all 3 of Robert’s 3 ideas below. Paul said; "others can embrace the visions (plural) of how to save our planet. “ see other inserts below in both Paul’s and Robert’s messages today > On Nov 19, 2021, at 9:24 AM, Anderson, Paul <psand...@ilstu.edu> wrote: > > Robert, > > AWESOME!!! > Each of the 3 possible cooling interventions has merit for separate > discussions. > > Please keep me included in any discussion / work regarding the focus on > Large scale ocean-based algae farms floating on the main ocean currents > > I am a retired geography professor. I offer the following contribution: > > A. The green dot indicating an Algae farm in the North Atlantic Ocean is > either too far north or a second dot is needed in the Sargasso Sea. That is > the area in the center of the circulation of the North Atlantic Ocean. Also > referred to as the Doldrums because of LACK of winds and very little current > to drive the old sailing ships. It is also referred to for its position > as a subtropical high. > > It is the center of the very stable high pressure zone over the North > Atlantic at around 30 degrees north latitude, the zone of subtropical highs. > The main air flow is from the upper atmosphere downward with clockwise > rotation (which drives the winds and therefore the ocean currents around the > edges of the high pressure zone. High pressure also coincides with > (actually causes) cloudless sky, meaning more incoming solar radiation. > That helps grow the macro-algae (the Sargassum seaweed) > > I highly recommend this summary at > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargasso_Sea > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargasso_Sea> > NOTE: Yes, it is Wikipedia, which I think is a very useful resource for > basic information, and I encourage you to join me in annual donations to > assure its continuation. > [RWL2: A few questions for sargassum experts: 1. Is the vast majority of sargassum growth on the southern part of its journey from Africa to the Caribbean? 2. Any need to contain the moving patches of sargassum? (much cheaper to not do so, presumably) 3. Can harvesting take place only in the Caribbean? 4. How valuable would conversion to biochar be to the local region? (and might “tourism” funds from those countries be available to support this concept? 5. Are the other gyres all fairly similar? 6. Any estimates of annual dry tonnage - globally? 7. Which parts of the ocean seem best for harvesting as input to biochar? (I’ve heard good things about the southern coast of Australia.) Agree with Paul’s part B - can jump to RWL3 in Robert’s message. > `<image002.png> > > > B. My 20 years of work in retirement have been about pyrolysis for energy > and biochar. I assure you that the intended > Large scale ocean-based algae farms floating on the main ocean currents > is quite compatible with biochar production, but that is for later messages. > > I would alter that descriptor to read as: Large scale ocean-based > algae farms floating on the oceans. The reference to the currents is too > limiting. There are similar oceanic areas in the central zones of all of > the oceans at about 30 degrees north and also south latitudes. Taken > together, if they are (estimated to be) 10% of the world’s oceans, that would > be 7% of the surface of the planet, and located in the “best” zones for > favourable sunshine and plenty of water (if desalinated). Note that the > TOTAL land mass is only 30% of the surface of the planet, including rugged > mountains and very dry deserts. > > Not totally in jest, I will say that the development of the oceanic surfaces > in the areas of the subtropical highs could become the needed “Planet B” > where life on Earth (or at least major activities) could find some partial > salvation as we destroy our lives and livelihood on land. > > Robert, I am on board with you for this topic. I hope that others can > embrace the visions (plural) of how to save our planet. > > Paul > > Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD --- Website: www.drtlud.com > <http://www.drtlud.com/> > Email: psand...@ilstu.edu <mailto:psand...@ilstu.edu> Skype: > paultlud > Phone: Office: 309-452-7072 Mobile & WhatsApp: 309-531-4434 > Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP Go to: www.JuntosNFP.org > <http://www.juntosnfp.org/> > Inventor of RoCC kilns and author of Biochar white paper : See > www.woodgas.energy/resources <http://www.woodgas.energy/resources> > Author of “A Capitalist Carol” (free digital copies at www.capitalism21.org > <http://www.capitalism21.org/>) > with pages 88 – 94 about solving the world crisis for clean > cookstoves. > > From: carbondioxideremo...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:carbondioxideremo...@googlegroups.com> > <carbondioxideremo...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:carbondioxideremo...@googlegroups.com>> On Behalf Of > rob...@rtulip.net <mailto:rob...@rtulip.net> > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2021 4:38 AM > To: 'Arctic Methane Google Group' <arcticmeth...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:arcticmeth...@googlegroups.com>>; 'Healthy Climate Alliance' > <healthy-climate-allia...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:healthy-climate-allia...@googlegroups.com>>; 'Planetary Restoration' > <planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:planetary-restorat...@googlegroups.com>>; 'geoengineering' > <geoengineering@googlegroups.com <mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>>; > 'Carbon Dioxide Removal' <carbondioxideremo...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:carbondioxideremo...@googlegroups.com>> > Subject: [CDR] World Cooling Map > > You don't often get email from rob...@rtulip.net <mailto:rob...@rtulip.net>. > Learn why this is important <http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> > > [This message came from an external source. If suspicious, report to > ab...@ilstu.edu <mailto:ab...@ilstu.edu>] > Friends, > > Here are some ideas I have been working on. > > <image001.jpg> > > > This World Cooling Map depicts three possible cooling interventions: > Large scale ocean-based algae farms floating on the main ocean currents. > [RWL: Covered above] > Fleets of marine cloud brightening vessels [RWL3: My guess is that it would be significantly cheaper to operate (and prove the concept) at first on island and continental shorelines. After a hundred or so stationary, we can shift to “fleets”. 3.. Refreezing the North Pole with an ice canal connecting the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. [RWL4: I have not previously seen this canal concept. The diagram shows also an “ice-wall-trough" with ice-“walls and floor" below. That seems pretty difficult to accomplish with wind forces always working to close the gasp - as well . What dimensions are envisioned? Are there other (maybe ice breaker ships?) approaches that may have already been proposed for keeping a winter-time path open? The “canal” concept can create a lot of valuable “salty ice”. But nowhere near as much as if the main “canal” has (maybe) hundreds of perpendicular side “ canals" extending in hundreds of miles. Alternatively, there could be dozens of parallel “”Pacific-to-Atlantic” canals. I vaguely recall that there is a sizable (a foot or two elevation difference - because of more evaporation near the Atlantic) between the Pacific and Atlantic ends. True?? Might that somehow be used to "shave off" intruding ice? And power ice-making salty water? (Wind might be cheaper - but there is a lot of water power equipment in use). I would urge some map simplifications: a, one map each of our two hemispheres. b. Explore use of Buckminster Fuller’s 20 equilateral “dymaxion” triangles - maybe only a few for each gyre, c, Can we get by with only the surface currents? (Why worry on this map about the two deeper currents?) d. Follow Paul’s guidance on the 30 -35 degree gyres. > > These proposals can be developed with a high level of safety. They would > immediately cool the ocean, reduce CO2 and methane, increase planetary > brightness, protect biodiversity and increase biomass. > > The goal is to cut planetary temperature and reduce risks of extreme weather > and sea level rise, setting a path toward planetary restoration and climate > repair. > > The scale of the proposal reflects the necessary magnitude of climate > stabilisation, presenting a path to eventually remove hundreds of gigatons of > CO2 from the air through simple technology with major economic benefits. > > A refrozen Arctic should be a wilderness protected zone. A shipping canal > across the Pole can support wilderness protection by paying for refreezing of > the whole Arctic. A direct connection between the Pacific and Atlantic > Oceans through the North Pole can bring immense gains for prosperity and > security that should be integrated with climate restoration. Wind and tidal > energy can pump seawater above the surface in winter to increase summer ice > thickness and extent. The major environmental benefit of refreezing the > Arctic Ocean is that turning the pole from dark ocean to white ice in summer > will convert it from a heat sink to a reflector, removing a vast amount of > heat from the ocean system to outer space. Large positive environmental and > climatic impacts of refreezing the Pole arise from restoring the Polar region > to its historic ice coverage. Benefits include restoring habitat, > stabilising the jet stream, preventing methane release and ending Greenland > ice melt. RWL5: The straight line canal ithrough the North Pole is certainly the shortest - but there is an existing clockwise-circular path that might help on costs. The existing routes are very close to Russia. - probably for cost reasons. > > Ocean based algae production can make biomass on large scale, which can be > converted into a range of commodities. [RWL6. “conversion" especially for biochar - needed by most of the world’s soils (and of course for climate reasons) What do John Nissen and AMEG think of the canal idea?? Thanks to Robert for today’s 3-part message. Ron > > Comment welcome. > > Best Regards > > Robert Tulip > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to carbondioxideremoval+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:carbondioxideremoval+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/031901d7dd31%24916c2a40%24b4447ec0%24%40rtulip.net > > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2FCarbonDioxideRemoval%2F031901d7dd31%2524916c2a40%2524b4447ec0%2524%2540rtulip.net%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=04%7C01%7C%7C29eb3166fe814de68e9208d9ab48b963%7C085f983a0b694270b71d10695076bafe%7C1%7C0%7C637729152473405789%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=uYz7APXLYPoKLZhglb58T1ZH2GB0V5YzhLVihw7Qr70%3D&reserved=0>. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to carbondioxideremoval+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:carbondioxideremoval+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/SA2PR03MB5932E6E3AC3B199200FA519BDB9C9%40SA2PR03MB5932.namprd03.prod.outlook.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/SA2PR03MB5932E6E3AC3B199200FA519BDB9C9%40SA2PR03MB5932.namprd03.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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/F132E7E7-97E1-47D0-BE34-D1FE743F61D3%40comcast.net.
