Re: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

Ozone effect is well known. I was talking about scattered light effect A On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, 00:52 Oliver Wingenter, wrote: > Here are some comments pertaining to Andrew's initial questions. Loss of > ozone would have an impact on several health aspects. This lecture by > Jose-Luis Jimenez

Re: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

Here are some comments pertaining to Andrew's initial questions. Loss of ozone would have an impact on several health aspects. This lecture by Jose-Luis Jimenez maybe a good start on a literature search to assess optical impacts on UV.

RE: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

The main reason to put in the middle of the ocean (or the first range of mountains that the air mass encounters) is to have a very stable atmosphere above the observatory, though it is true that Mt. Wilson above Pasadena used to be a very good site before the aerosol and light pollution… Laser

Re: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

Stephen Some of the biggest telescopes have been atop tall islands in the middle of the ocean like Hawaii and Grand Canaria to get away from light pollution and dust and aerosol scattering on land. Douglas I mentioned the UV because the medical concernns Andrew mentioned largely arise

Re: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

Two centuries ago Humboldt, Arago and others introduced 'Cyanometers', color wheels usedto measure how blue the sky appeared as altitude and locales varied. As I've already asked the inventor of the hand held Dobson Unit meter , Forrest Mims, to develop parallel gadgets for water

[geo] Governing geoengineering research for the Great Barrier Reef: Climate Policy: Vol 0, No 0

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2019.1592742 Outlook Article Governing geoengineering research for the Great Barrier Reef Jan McDonald [image: ORCID Icon] ,Jeffrey McGee

Re: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

For example, if it made skies whiter, it could potentially be more difficult (or easier) for drivers to pick out pedestrians. Over billions of people and decades, this could have a significant effect. Andrew Lockley On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, 17:01 Douglas MacMartin, wrote: > There’s not that much

RE: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

There’s not that much ground-based astronomy in UV, relative to optical and IR astronomy. Impact on optical astronomy is straightforward; if you lose 5% of the direct light, you need 5% longer integration time to get same number of photons. Impact on IR astronomy is less obvious, as limited by

Re: [geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

Russell Some of my best friends are astronomers but few of them use telescopes in mid ocean so you and I can remain on good terms. Stephen Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland s.sal...@ed.ac.uk,

[geo] Re: SRM optical impacts

Why would reductions in the downwelling tropospheric light flux increase any of the above?I'd instead ask instrumental astromomers what they think SO2 scattering would do in the UV , as they have a lot to lose from scattered light, which can cost them contrast and degrade the signal