Ken
But if sulphate aerosols spread to lower levels would they not act as
cloud condensation nuclei and so form a blanket of drop large enought to
reflect the long waves?
Stephen
Ken Caldeira wrote:
If we are talking about Latham's proposal, there would be no reason to make clouds in
Dear Michael--For Arctic SRM, my view is that there are a number of reasons
to use tropospheric and surface based approaches (so cloud brightening,
sulfate aerosols, microbubbles, etc.), in particular because the reflective
effect is only needed for a few months per year when the sun is well up in
Hi Nathan--Just a note that the sulfate layer is mainly based on what
happens above the boundary layer (so lifetime is of order a week) and the
NAAQS levels of SO2, etc. are at the surface, so not directly comparable.
Once surface SO2 emissions were reduced by switching away from coal for home
Hi, Mike - Thanks. I was just trying to draw basic links between local
RF effects and actual air levels at the ground
since the general response to the question about troposhperic use was
that it's too dangerous. But let's say that,
in my imagination, I was in fact imagining something specific,
Dear Nathan--
On lifetime, it matters a lot if one does or does not have an inversion due
to the surface being cold. If there is a lot of convection and vertical
motion, as in the eastern US and summer, the lifetime is shorter. But
sulfates from US reach over to Europe (and from UK to
Peter and Tenney--
I think your proposed proscription of sulfur is too harsh a restriction. As
far as people are concerned, the problems have come with high concentrations
and lots of other toxins mixed with them from fossil fuel power plants. As
far as ecological impacts are concerned, aside
I think there have been two main reasons for focus on sulfur, at least for
the stratosphere:
1. It can be released as a gas (SO2 or H2S) that can then oxidize to form
particles of approximately the right size, greatly reducing problems of
dispersion upon release.
2. Volcanoes did it and it
The statement of I disagree that the pilotless conversion is simple.
makes my point that you seem to lack working knowledge of modern aviation.
M
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Andrew Lockley and...@andrewlockley.comwrote:
I disagree that the pilotless conversion is simple.
The trajectory
c'mon scientists, i need you to cut this to threads.
More details at projectcharles.org http://projectcharles.org/2101.html
A few notes:Remember that the ocean provides most of the hot moist air and
the sun provides the power that heats the moisture that drives the
convection cycle just like in
Hi Michael‹I (and the list, from what I can tell) got this email last Friday
at 5:47 PM EDT, so several days ago. Let¹s not jump on Andrew‹sometimes he
is off for a while, sometimes the technology fails (and he then contacts Ken
or me to see if we have any luck with system), etc., so best not to
Folks,
One of the big selling points of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection was that
it had a real world example, Pinatubo. Let's use that advantage and look
closely at the *Winter* time data 5 yrs before and 5 years after. I
personally am not comfortable with accepting a casual discounting of the
Peter--There are a lot more problems/issues with stratospheric sulfate than
possible effects on Asian crop production—that is just where one study has
been done. There are issues with respect to the increased ratio of diffuse
to total radiation for agriculture and solar energy, issues on effects
Hi, all -
Thanks for the responses.
I think that something that could be very helpful for AMEG to assess the
possible options – although I hate to ask too much of Mike, I think he’s
the only person of relevant expertise who is currently engaging with the
group and who could help with this –
Hi, Tenney -
The sulfur aerosols only last a week or so, so don't worry too much on that
score.
You should be much more concerned about GHGs, and that's what these ideas
are both trying to address, in that large Gt methane releases could
certainly change everything.
In fact, both these ideas
Folks
Part of this thread is spinning into an exercise in drafting a statement. I
suggest that this activity move off-line to a smaller group.
A few specific comments:
1. “we have a method that does not use sulphur”. Maybe. As a method of SRM, sea
salt aerosols offer many potential advantages
15 matches
Mail list logo
