I've already looked at this. The meteor missile (modern) and blood
hound (cold war) use ram rockets. Nammo make ram artillery, and
there's Chinese manufacturers, too. It's not inexpensive to start
these ramjets, considering rockets or barrel wear. Coil guns might be
viable. There's manufacturers eg velontra.com <http://velontra.com/>
making small hypersonic jets, which don't require a hard start.
Ballistic flight makes recovery difficult.
On Sun, 5 Nov 2023, 18:15 Gilles de Brouwer, <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
A low cost SAI option?
Regarding the trillions or billions to do SAI geoengineering,
consider this option:
Watch "How ramjets may change the role of artillery on the
battlefield" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/0vIPNElDkns?si=9Z_mUQUXBm-4dBxF
<https://youtu.be/0vIPNElDkns?si=9Z_mUQUXBm-4dBxF>
At 4:21 you can see the 150km range parabolic trajectory goes as
high as 105km altitude!
Maybe Iowa battleship 16 inch guns with this ramjet tech could
send stuff to orbit.
Or could this be a low cost SAI geoengineering option?
1. How much would it cost to refurbish and send these old
battleships to the Arctic and Antarctic waters and deliver to
much higher altitudes? The armor plating would make the
battleships iceberg damage resistant.
2. How much longer would the particles stay at useful altitudes?
3. Would they stay in place much longer with little wind at these
very high altitudes?
4. Would it be more effective than aircraft delivered SAI?
Note from the Iowa Class Wikipedia page: "...all four are museum
ships part of non-profit maritime museums across the US."
Gilles
On Sat, Nov 4, 2023, 5:16 PM Jim Baird
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
From the Physics and Economics of Thermodynamics
Geoengineering, reference 77 of the Healthy Climate Action
Coalition Petition to World Leaders: The Case for Urgent
Direct Climate Cooling, The cost of removing 1139 Gt of CO2
with this technology (Negative Emissions CO2 OTEC) would
therefore be $175 trillion. CDR technology for creating
synthetic fuel from atmospheric CO2 or for other purposes
currently costs about $600 per ton, with a goal of reducing
this to below $100. [48] So, a goal of returning atmospheric
CO2 levels to preindustrial from a 2054 level of 1577 Gt is
likely to cost at a minimum $114 trillion.
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> *On
Behalf Of *Gilles de Brouwer
*Sent:* November 4, 2023 4:21 PM
*To:* H simmens <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:* healthy-planet-action-coalition
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>;
via NOAC Meetings <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>; Planetary
Restoration <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>;
geoengineering <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Subject:* Re: Hansen Vs. Mann - Is Global Warming Linear Or
Exponential? - CleanTechnica
My comment left on the article:
Steve I like your writing, but "Trillions" is obviously
wrong. Billions is more realistic even with expensive new
high altitude aircraft, but maybe much less expensive with a
small fleet of specialty airships.
All the SAI geoengineering risks are scare mongering without
data to back it up and such dogma unscientific opinions from
"scientists" are damaging to science as an institution. AI,
for example genetic algorithms or better could design an SAI
strategy that minimizes the negatives, as it's an
optimization problem with infinite variables which is why
progress is so slow. Coupling computational models with small
scale real atmosphere experiments with full public data
access for review is critical to make a smart decision to
potentially avoid billions starving, cooking, and/or dying of
thirst, or migrating.
Thanks,
Gilles de Brouwer
On Sat, Nov 4, 2023 at 3:10 PM H simmens <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
This article provides the author an opportunity to
declare war on Geo engineering by for example claiming
that scientists estimate that Geoengineering will cost
“on the order of tens of trillions of dollars”.
Nice to know that we can count on the media to be fair
and balanced.
Herb
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/03/hansen-vs-mann-is-global-warming-linear-or-exponential/
<https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/03/hansen-vs-mann-is-global-warming-linear-or-exponential/>
Herb Simmens
Author of /A Climate Vocabulary of the Future/
“A SciencePoem and an Inspiration.” Kim Stanley Robinson
@herbsimmens
HerbSimmens.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition
(HPAC)" 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/healthy-planet-action-coalition/3D131483-011F-4A9A-9B2D-3BA99C9A9F05%40gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/3D131483-011F-4A9A-9B2D-3BA99C9A9F05%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" 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/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAGQ2tEqsU%3Drm7ZJpo4p67O9p-HHL0f_%3Dq9Xd2Q5nj6bLUFvkqw%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/CAGQ2tEqsU%3Drm7ZJpo4p67O9p-HHL0f_%3Dq9Xd2Q5nj6bLUFvkqw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
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/CAGQ2tEq6GP68_404MZonwgf4NZFypGLHeTzcvK0V%3DNPoZEMEWQ%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAGQ2tEq6GP68_404MZonwgf4NZFypGLHeTzcvK0V%3DNPoZEMEWQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "NOAC Meetings" 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/noac-meetings/CAJ3C-05sBDn1Bf5JgCiKxHeXLfaWjVQRP7T-VZK_zKTGDgnf8Q%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/CAJ3C-05sBDn1Bf5JgCiKxHeXLfaWjVQRP7T-VZK_zKTGDgnf8Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
