Luke:

In the stratospheric balloon  releases you have so far described, how many 
grams of helium are required to loft one gram of SO2?

On Wednesday, December 28, 2022 at 6:09:51 PM UTC-5 [email protected] 
wrote:

> Thanks Andrew, Olivier, Bala, and everyone else for diving in with 
> critiques here. I'm a cofounder of Make Sunsets and want to clarify a few 
> things: 
>
> *Honesty: *
> We have no desire to mislead anyone. If we make a mistake (which we will), 
> we'll correct it. 
> *Radiative Forcing:*
> I didn't make this "gram offsets a ton" number up. It comes from David 
> Keith's research:
> "a gram of aerosol in the stratosphere, delivered perhaps by high-flying 
> jets, could offset the warming effect of a ton of carbon dioxide, a factor 
> of 1 million to 1." 
> <https://keith.seas.harvard.edu/news/whats-right-temperature-earth>
> and, again: "Geoengineering’s leverage is very high—one gram of particles 
> in the stratosphere prevents the warming caused by a ton of carbon dioxide." 
> <https://longnow.org/seminars/02015/feb/17/patient-geoengineering/>
> By stating "offsetting the warming effect of 1 ton of carbon for 1 year," 
> I was trying to be more conservative than Professor Keith. I am correcting 
> "carbon" to read "carbon dioxide" on the cooling credit description right 
> now, and I'm adding a paragraph at the start of the post stating that 
> estimates vary, but a leading researcher cites a gram offsetting a ton. 
> For the several hundred dollars of cooling credits we've already sold, 
> I'll be providing evidence to each purchaser that I've delivered at least 2 
> grams per cooling credit. 
> Olivier, or anyone else: I'd be happy to post something by you to our blog 
> explaining what you estimate the radiative forcing of 1g so2 released at 
> 20km altitude from in or near the tropics will be and why. I will include 
> language of your choosing explaining that you in no way endorse what we are 
> doing.
> I very much hope to get suggestions from this community on instrumentation 
> we should fly to improve the state of the science here. Again, I'm happy to 
> do this with disclaimers about how researchers we fly things for are not 
> endorsing our efforts. Or even without revealing who the researchers are: 
> we'll fly test instruments and provide data, no questions asked:)
> *Telemetry: *
> My first 2 flights had no telemetry: in April, this was still in 
> self-funded science project territory. After burning some sulfur and 
> capturing the resultant gas, I placed this in a balloon. I then added 
> helium, underinflating the balloon substantially, and let it go. There is 
> technically a slim possibility that neither of these balloons reached the 
> stratosphere, as I acknowledged to the Technology Review reporter. I will 
> add Spot trackers to my next flights. These cut out at 18km, so I'l be able 
> to confirm that I achieve at least this altitude. If (and this is a big if) 
> I'm able to recover the balloons, I'll have a lot more data from the flight 
> computer 
> <https://www.highaltitudescience.com/collections/electronics/products/eagle-flight-computer>.
>  
> I will eventually switch to Swarms 
> <https://www.sparkfun.com/products/19236?utm_campaign=May%206%2C%202022&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=212205037&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9EyQOQ6C-9XuSOHa7CggOC8Pf2tEow_Fppo5pXgTHO8-7gV-aHrrYpnPcliws6Ju8j2PBAX3Tkog0oVpwk8XqWX2xo0w&utm_content=212206499&utm_source=hs_email>,
>  
> which should let me transmit more data regardless of balloon recovery.
> *Pricing: *
> Bala, you're totally right that this should be priced much lower. We're 
> trying to make enough with our early flights to stay in business until we 
> get meaningful traction with customers, and we plan to eventually drop 
> prices to $1 per ton or less.
> *Reuse: *
> We are not yet reusing balloons, and Andrew is correct that latex UV 
> degradation will limit our ability to do so with weather balloons. Given 
> that balloon cost is our main expense per gram, even a few uses per balloon 
> will dramatically improve the economics here.
>
> I expect to disagree with some of you, but I hope we can do so politely 
> and assuming good intentions.
>

-- 
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/4cccd605-41cb-4c84-a5b8-4a4c6b6c027an%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to