| Release sulfurous debris or use an alternative? |
| Yes - release sulfurous |
|
16% |
[ 1 ] |
| No - use alternative |
|
83% |
[ 5 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 6 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| miomaz |
 Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:29 pm Post subject: Pollute so bad that its good. |
 |
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 278
Location: Germany
|
Yet another crazy way was found to save us from golbal warming: Greenhouse gasses themself.
Paul Crutzen published an editorial about releasing great amounts of sulfurous debris, which should, just like Greenhouse gasses keep sunlight in, reflect the sunlight while entering earths atmosphere. The project would only cost a few hundred million and a couple a billion a year compared to the highly costly decarbonasation of a whole world. (google it for more info)
But it has a flaw: the mass pollution of the golbe is quite risky.
A failure would result in the exact other direction which the Geoengineers wanted to go: Like death and stuff - death's to permanent for me.
Should we take the risk or use some alternative?
Discuss!
_________________
I haven't come to fight my word, but to find the truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Zitterbewegung |
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 24 Dec 2007
Posts: 203
|
I am missing the option in the poll:
- nobody in his right state of mind would even think about such an endevour
_________________
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| miomaz |
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 278
Location: Germany
|
Still allot of scientists do; theoretically the release of the gas would actually deflect great amounts of sunlight.
I think it is a very risky thing to do, the lives of too many people are at stake. Its like choosing between getting a heart operation at a public hospital or getting it from a professional expensive team of doctors. The money is there - it is but a question of doing it.
_________________
I haven't come to fight my word, but to find the truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lynx_Fox |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 104
|
| miomaz wrote: |
| Still allot of scientists do; theoretically the release of the gas would actually deflect great amounts of sunlight.. |
Wouldn't say a lot. One or two out of tens of thousands of atmospheric scientist.
It's a ridiculous idea. If we're going to go for far fetched, blocking the sun by dusting up things at a safe orbital distance would be far better option and far less likely to mess up the atmosphere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ophiolite |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 4804
Location: Scotland
|
Or we could all just walk to work.
_________________
The Universe is not only weirder than we imagine it is weirder than we can imagine. J.B.S.Haldane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| BumFluff |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Senior
Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 394
Location: Canada
|
I don't think these scientists really understand what the greenhouse effect is.
_________________
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wienertakesall |
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:58 pm Post subject: The risk qould be quite big would it not? |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Poland
|
| Do you not think that the risk would be too big. What about effects on different regions of world: deserts, polar cap etc. About production of oxygen by plants? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| miomaz |
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 278
Location: Germany
|
I agree that, in the moment, it is a bad idea to pump the gas into the atmosphere. Still I believe that this method of defeating the greenhouse problem can actually take place: we are still polluting our globe with co2 and the rate of pollution is not shrinking, it grows every day, because of our stupidity of our generation, the next generation will hardly have a chance to stop global warming. That is why I believe that sulfurous debris, an evasion maneuver of the next generation, has a great probability of being used.
wienertakesall, in my second post i clearly state that I am against this idea.
_________________
I haven't come to fight my word, but to find the truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wienertakesall |
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Poland
|
| miomaz wrote: |
I agree that, in the moment, it is a bad idea to pump the gas into the atmosphere. Still I believe that this method of defeating the greenhouse problem can actually take place: we are still polluting our globe with co2 and the rate of pollution is not shrinking, it grows every day, because of our stupidity of our generation, the next generation will hardly have a chance to stop global warming. That is why I believe that sulfurous debris, an evasion maneuver of the next generation, has a great probability of being used.
wienertakesall, in my second post i clearly state that I am against this idea. |
OK, in emergency it would be possible and feasible and useful. Did you consider also that scientists believe that we are before beginning of new Ice Age. Perhaps the problem will just balance itself. Is it possible? Global warming cancels out with beginning of ever lower temperatures due to coming of new ice age?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lynx_Fox |
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 104
|
| wienertakesall wrote: |
| Is it possible? Global warming cancels out with beginning of ever lower temperatures due to coming of new ice age?? |
Probably not.
Covered the next ice age in the threat below. It won't arrive for a long time yet and be very mild compared to the last few.
http://www.thescienceforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=12162&start=0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| miomaz |
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 278
Location: Germany
|
global warming and the next ice age cause pretty extreme temperatures, mixing them together to obtain our present temperature is unlikely.
_________________
I haven't come to fight my word, but to find the truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 1412
|
I think it irrefutable the last few centuries spread of dry land agriculture has greatly reduced Earth's aerosol production. Aerosols themselves (fine particles AKA dust) increase albedo, and are key to cloud formation which totally owns the albedo scene.
Agricultural practice has become very good at preventing aerosols. We "learned our lesson" from the dustbowl. However most lands are kept in check by very fine management and we could upload huge volumes of aerosol as easily as leaving an irrigator idle or "failing" to plant a field one season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
