Andrew
The survival rate for the Hindenburg was much higher than for aircraft fuelled 
with kerosene because its lightness means it leaks upwards. Heavy vapours like 
propane or butane are very much more dangerous if they sink into cellars or 
bilges. The hydrogen flame has a very low emissivity. No pump is needed. I can 
give you a valve design weighing less than one gram. Think open prairie for 
launching.
Stephen

From: Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>
Sent: 29 December 2022 11:05
To: Stephen Salter <[email protected]>
Cc: Luke Iseman <[email protected]>; geoengineering 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [geo] Make Sunsets: Clarifications!

This email was sent to you by someone outside the University.
You should only click on links or attachments if you are certain that the email 
is genuine and the content is safe.
Large weather balloons don't have much over pressure relative to volume, so 
venting is a challenge. Valves and pumps add weight. Hydrogen has ground 
handling risks, due to flammability (Hindenberg), and any leaks risk buoyancy 
loss and the canopy descending loaded. The most extreme scenario is that an out 
of control failed balloon descends into an enclosed building through an open 
door, skylight, or Courtyard. In windy conditions, drift into a small 
industrial unit is perfectly possible, through the roller shutter doors - which 
could be automatically or accidentally closed behind, trapping the balloon and 
its flammable payload. This could allow a loaded canopy to leak out into a 
fully enclosed space, with ignition risks.

While such scenarios appear outlandish, with thousands or millions of launches, 
they become real risks.

Andrew

On Thu, 29 Dec 2022, 10:19 Stephen Salter, 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi
I do not understand the bit about bursting. Control of a venting valve protects 
the balloon and allows release at the chosen altitude.
Helium is irreplaceable and needed for super cooling. Is there a reason not to 
use hydrogen?
Stephen

Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design
School of Engineering
University of Edinburgh
Mayfield Road
Edinburgh EH9 3DW
Scotland
0131 650 5704 or 0131 662 1180
YouTube Jamie Taylor Power for Change



From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On 
Behalf Of Daniele Visioni
Sent: 28 December 2022 23:51
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Cc: geoengineering 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [geo] Make Sunsets: Clarifications!

This email was sent to you by someone outside the University.
You should only click on links or attachments if you are certain that the email 
is genuine and the content is safe.
Luke,
I will keep finding this rather murky as long as you keep being so hand-wavy 
about your numbers and then claiming you can offset a “substantial amount of 
warming” in your homepage.

Weather balloons have different bursting altitudes depending on 1) payload 2) 
amount of helium used to inflate 3) material.
You can find an example here with a calculator down below that lets you 
calculate max bursting height based on inflation
 https://www.highaltitudescience.com/products/near-space-balloon-1200-g
Which balloons did you use?
How much did you inflate them?
Did you check with the producer if the mix of SO₂ and He in the balloon would 
affect their calculations, and if so how?
The forcing we’re talking about changes depending on altitude of release as 
well: at 19 it’s different than at 25 (and depending on your definition, 
sometimes the tropopause is above 18km..), and above 29km sulfate aerosols 
evaporate because temperatures are too high to form liquid aerosols. If the 
balloon doesn’t burst at the right altitude, what would happen to the oxidized 
S is not so simple - frankly I don’t know the answer off the top of my head, 
there are a few factors that could influence this. Do you have studies showing 
what would happen there based on lack of water vapor and different temperature 
and OH levels?
If you don’t - and you don’t have any tools to measure it yet - maybe you 
should at least tone down the claims already present on your website?

For some ranges of stratospheric releases of sulfate we have some numbers for 
SAI we can be somewhat confident about - not just in term of the forcing but in 
terms of downstream effects on the stratospheric composition - but this may not 
be true for what you are proposing or claiming you are doing.

Lastly, in your Twitter account you claimed in a post 2 days ago that there are 
“supporters and scientists who believe in you”.  I would avoid claiming you 
have the support of scientists if you don’t - or show proofs if you do.  As far 
as any scientist I know is concerned they don’t seem particularly impressed - 
and your lack of clarity goes against any of the calls for open and transparent 
research (not to mention inclusive decision making) this community has asked in 
previous public statements.

Daniele


On 28 Dec 2022, at 18:09, Luke Iseman 
<[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/550ec54e-4b36-4b6e-b4be-834229c870cen%40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/550ec54e-4b36-4b6e-b4be-834229c870cen%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]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/9942AB80-E648-4DCE-8E51-B7FC7EFF1352%40gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/9942AB80-E648-4DCE-8E51-B7FC7EFF1352%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with 
registration number SC005336. Is e buidheann carthannais a th’ ann an Oilthigh 
Dhùn Èideann, clàraichte an Alba, àireamh clàraidh 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 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/AM8PR05MB80359D6D052CF2BA3940E360A7F39%40AM8PR05MB8035.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/AM8PR05MB80359D6D052CF2BA3940E360A7F39%40AM8PR05MB8035.eurprd05.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/AM8PR05MB803536F8AFC6B3C3401335D9A7F39%40AM8PR05MB8035.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com.

Reply via email to