The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[redpoint5]

I'm fairly convinced that what Neil says; that human activity has contributed the most significant portion of warming recently, is accurate.

What I'm not convinced of is that it's going to be a catastrophe, though it's undeniable that rapid change stresses all life.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I'm fairly convinced that what Neil says; that human activity has contributed the most significant portion of warming recently, is accurate.

What I'm not convinced of is that it's going to be a catastrophe, though it's undeniable that rapid change stresses all life.

Everything we can see in the universe follows that same rules. Warmer fluids are less dense than when they are cooler, and they hold less gases in solution as they warm. Water evaporates more in warmer conditions. Heat drives the ocean currents, and the weather.

There will be feedback amplifications, if we wait too long. Like water releasing carbon dioxide (that it has been absorbing). Like melting the tundra (notice I didn't say PERMAfrost). Like lowering the albedo of the polar regions. Like melting clathrates (i.e. methane ice). Like more and more water vapor in the atmosphere. Like releasing carbon from the soil after we dump more artificial chemicals on it. Like more wildfires.


If we push it too far, we get to hydrogen sulfide. We don't want to go there.

[freebeard]

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=gradualism+vs+catastrophism&ia=web

[redpoint5]

I wonder how many km^2 of mylar or similarly reflective material would need to be deployed in orbit around the earth at a given optimal altitude to counteract the warming, bringing about stasis in temperature?

If that were feasible, then I wonder how much further the step would be to expand/contract the light attenuator as needed? Maybe even fully deploy to reduce the severity of developing storms. We'd need to solve the problem of the mirror acting as a solar sail and getting blow away. That means it would need periodic energy inputs to counteract the push from the sun. Perhaps there's some stasis point between the earth and sun where the gravity of the sun wants to pull mirror toward it, but the push from the sunlight perfectly balances that out.

From something I just read:

First conceived by engineer James Early in 1989, the original design was a vast, 2,000 km-wide glass shield – a structure so heavy, it would need to be constructed on the Moon. More recent suggestions include clouds of Moon dust, 55,000 wire-mesh mirrors or a planet-girdling ring of tiny umbrellas.

It might be a good idea to set up camp on the moon just to learn how well we can figure out how to manufacture stuff on there and then cheaply send it out into space due to the low gravity and zero atmosphere.

The article I read also mentioned this, which I think about an absurd amount of the time:

Angel’s solution is so outrageous, for years it was thought to be impossible because it defied the laws of physics: a giant electromagnetic gun embedded in a mountain. The system would accelerate cargo to launch at the mountain’s summit using a form of electromagnetic energy to convert electricity into thrust. Known as the Lorentz force, it already powers magnetic levitation, Maglev, trains, and the US Navy’s latest weapon. By side-stepping the need for fuel, the cost of launch may be as low as $20 (£13.90) per pound, enough to catapult the shade into orbit for just a few trillion dollars.

[hayden55]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I wonder how many km^2 of mylar or similarly reflective material would need to be deployed in orbit around the earth at a given optimal altitude to counteract the warming, bringing about stasis in temperature?

If that were feasible, then I wonder how much further the step would be to expand/contract the light attenuator as needed? Maybe even fully deploy to reduce the severity of developing storms. We'd need to solve the problem of the mirror acting as a solar sail and getting blow away. That means it would need periodic energy inputs to counteract the push from the sun. Perhaps there's some stasis point between the earth and sun where the gravity of the sun wants to pull mirror toward it, but the push from the sunlight perfectly balances that out.

From something I just read:



It might be a good idea to set up camp on the moon just to learn how well we can figure out how to manufacture stuff on there and then cheaply send it out into space due to the low gravity and zero atmosphere.

The article I read also mentioned this, which I think about an absurd amount of the time:

Have you seen the post where they talk about large cities being much warmer than areas around them has a lot to do with the road surfaces being black, all the roofs being black, and even solar panels being black. lol
The surface reflectivity being a ton lower with a sizable portion of the local land area ends up warming the area. I think NYC now makes it a legal requirement to paint your roof white now to combat some of the increased energy absorption lol.

[freebeard]

I wonder how many km^2 of mylar or similarly reflective material would need to be deployed in orbit around the earth at a given optimal altitude to counteract the warming, bringing about stasis in temperature?

If that were feasible, then I wonder how much further the step would be to expand/contract the light attenuator as needed?

Not around the Earth, at L1:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_orbit

Counter-rotating fan blades (w/ cyclic and collective) for station-keeping in the solar wind. (and artificial gravity)

You only need to cover a fraction because everything has fresnel.

edit:
I looked into it. Vacuum has a refractive index of 1, air is slightly higher. Water is 1.33.

But I suspect Earth's albedo is lower at center of face than on the limb.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_refraction

Astronomical or celestial refraction causes astronomical objects to appear higher above the horizon than they actually are. ....
Whenever possible, astronomers will schedule their observations around the times of culmination, when celestial objects are highest in the sky. Likewise, sailors will not shoot a star below 20° above the horizon.

[redpoint5]

Maybe we should start breeding/engineering white cows so they reflect more sunlight back into space.

[oil pan 4]

Just need to capture about 0.001% of the energy released by the sun and make all power generation obsolete.

[freebeard]

....white cows....

You obviously don't like the idea as much as I do, of helicopter space stations flying upstream in the Solar wind.

[freebeard]

www.bloomberg.com/news/: Wind Turbine Blades Can’t Be Recycled, So They’re Piling Up in Landfills
Companies are searching for ways to deal with the tens of thousands of blades that have reached the end of their lives.

“Wind turbine blades at the end of their operational life are landfill-safe, unlike the waste from some other energy sources, and represent a small fraction of overall U.S. municipal solid waste,” according to an emailed statement from the group. It pointed to an Electric Power Research Institute study that estimates all blade waste through 2050 would equal roughly .015% of all the municipal solid waste going to landfills in 2015 alone.

Let's compare it to something entirely else that's bigger.

It sounds to me like a job for basalt fiber:

Originally Posted by DDG

Recyclable Resource - Basalt Fiber Tech Proprieties
basaltft.com
Recyclable Resource . Basfiber ® is an eco-compatibility material, characterized from an easier recyclability if compared for example, to glass fiber. In fact the principal problem in glass fibers recycling is that they melt during incineration, sticking to the inside of the incinerator chamber.