Can We 'Cool The Planet' Through Geoengineering?

Answer, yes. I would suggest the simplest and most cost effective way to do such 'geoengineering' is to reduce the emission rather than try to counter their effects.

So anyone for reducing fuel waste and inefficiency?

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

Answer, yes. I would suggest the simplest and most cost effective way to do such 'geoengineering' is to reduce the emission rather than try to counter their effects.
So anyone for reducing fuel waste and inefficiency?

What a bunch of IDIOTS!

All this fanatical CULT-SPEAK to battle an imaginary Dragon.

The simplest way to battle the AGW FRAUD is to expose it as the fairy tale it is.

Watch how easy this is.
-------
Hey, Hyper-ody any luck finding:

- ANY Law of Science that supports the fantasy "Greenhouse Effect"?
- ANY MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE, that shows that CO2 in a colder atmosphere can heat up a warmer Earth?

I have asked you to post these HUNDREDS of times now and you never have been able to to do that.

There has been Billions spent on the AGW CRAP "science", thousands of papers have been written on it and you have the IPCC compling the so called "research" in it's QUACK REPORTS.

So, given all the "AGW experts", it should be a snap for you to post this...right??

- Post even ONE Law of Science that supports the fantasy "Greenhouse Effect"
- Post even ONE MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE, that shows that CO2 in a colder atmosphere can heat up a warmer Earth.

Come on, it should be a very, very easy task to post the above and prove me wrong...right?

You can't do that because THEY DON'T EXIST.

So when you respond to this post (most likely you will RUN FOR THE HILLS) and you can't post the above, all you will be left with is an "irrational" belief in AGW just like belief in the Tooth Fairy is "irrational".

I eagerly look forward to your next POST.

Ok, so science fiction could become fact. We could be living the lives of those characters in Blade Runner. Wait a couple more weeks and see if the Big volcano in Iceland erupts, that shoud throw enough sulphur and ash in the air to blanket the planet.

Starting up a few volcanoes should be an easy task, just pop a few tons of high explosive down their throats, light blue touchpaper and retire at 65.

We need more direct ways to tackle global warming....

nepsqb wrote:

We need more direct ways to tackle global warming....

Sorry but we have only limited means. Direct action is improbable. What are you going to do? Sink cooling fins in the earth and pump in cold water from the moon?

And then again, maybe it's not a problem.

Steve Case wrote:

And then again, maybe it's not a problem.

And then again, maybe you are clueless.

Not good to mess with Mutha Naycha, so sayeth Brutha Naycha - mutations...

And you've swallowed the whole thing, hook line and sinker.

LessHypeMoreFact wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry but we have only limited means. Direct action is improbable. What are you going to do? Sink cooling fins in the earth and pump in cold water from the moon?

If "direct action" is preferred, something that you might be able to grasp as being more 'realistic', why not start by eliminating ALL asphalt-paved surfaces?

You see, on hot summer days, cities can be up to 8 degrees F hotter than their suburban and rural surroundings. This phenomenon occurs because urban development results in large amounts of paved and dark colored surfaces like roofs, roads, and parking lots that absorb, rather than reflect, the sun's heat, causing the surface and ambient air temperatures to rise, a phenomena known as the "heat island effect".

http://www.fginternational.net/FGI8000.htm

The heat island effect can be counteracted slightly by using white or reflective materials to build houses, pavements, and roads, thus increasing the overall albedo of the city. Using light-colored concrete has proven effective in reflecting up to 50% more light than asphalt and reducing ambient temperature.

A low albedo (surface reflectivity) value, a known characteristic of black asphalt, absorbs a large percentage of solar heat and contributes to the warming of cities, warming that can continue well into the evening and night hours due to asphalt's ability to capture and store radiant heat.

By paving with light colored concrete, in addition to replacing asphalt with light-colored concrete, communities can lower their average temperature. As determined by a study conducted by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) in 2005.

http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/resources/pdf/C...

In addition to decreasing the ambient air temperatures of our cities and roadways (96% of which are asphalt-paved), the cost savings derived from switching from asphalt pavements to normal gray concrete pavements can save a city millions of dollars a year. Simulations of the influence of pavement albedo on air temperature in Los Angeles predict that increasing the albedo of 1,250 km of pavement by 0.25 would save cooling energy worth $15M per year, and reduce smog-related medical and lost-work expenses by $76M per year.

Pomerantz, M., H. Akbari, A. Chen, H. Taha, and A.H. Rosenfeld. 1997.“Paving Materials for Heat Island Mitigation,” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Report LBL-38074, Berkeley, CA.

So, if you prefer a more "direct", hands on approach, something that you can readily realize the benefits of, why not try resurfacing ALL of our roadways and parking lots with actual concrete?

It is a cheap, effective and readily available method of "geo-engineering" our planet cooler.

The heat island effect is localised and only problematic for residents of towns and cities.
Globally it isn't a problem when considering the tiny amount of Earth's surface that's actually paved.

Asphalt is currently MUCH cheaper than concrete in the short term, but concrete lasts longer.
Asphalt uses oil, so it will be phased out in the future by necessity.

Earthling wrote:

The heat island effect is localised and only problematic for residents of towns and cities.
Globally it isn't a problem when considering the tiny amount of Earth's surface that's actually paved.
Asphalt is currently MUCH cheaper than concrete in the short term, but concrete lasts longer.
Asphalt uses oil, so it will be phased out in the future by necessity.

Granted, the majority of this particular occurrence of needless heat generation IS localized, but it occurs to me that reducing the ambient air temperature by approximately 8 degrees in ALL areas utilizing "black top"/asphalt as a paving surface (roads, parking lots, driveways, supermarket lots, shopping centers, etc., etc., would culminate in a noticeable reduction in overall heating EVERYWHERE as our atmosphere IS, afterall, "global", ergo, if it proves to be cooler in the cities, then it will be just that much cooler in the suburbs, and even cooler still in the rural areas, as well as everywhere else, whether it's paved or not.

But perhaps YOU have an idea of your own, Earthling, that you'd care to offer up instead of some dismissive critique of another's, at least rational (no mention of blasting volcanoes open with dynamite here), viable and easily attainable, suggestion for a geo-engineering project that is both inexpensive (comparably) and demonstrably readily realizable results...?

just an allusion wrote:

<quoted text>
Granted, the majority of this particular occurrence of needless heat generation IS localized, but it occurs to me that reducing the ambient air temperature by approximately 8 degrees in ALL areas utilizing "black top"/asphalt as a paving surface (roads, parking lots, driveways, supermarket lots, shopping centers, etc., etc., would culminate in a noticeable reduction in overall heating

Increasing the albedo would help, but the scale would have to be huge. Which could be done, I'm sure, by a combination of methods

Concrete isn't the way to go though. Lime cement production is a major CO2 producer, even if you don't count in the fuel burned to transport it. We should be eliminating unnecessary use of concrete (eg kneejerk city bylaws requiring sidewalks that nobody uses).

There's an avenue of research available to somebody, to develop a cost effective way of putting a light colored surface on pavements.

Another area of research is to develop environment friendly types of concrete, and building technologies that can use them.

neighbour wrote:

<quoted text>
Increasing the albedo would help, but the scale would have to be huge. Which could be done, I'm sure, by a combination of methods
Concrete isn't the way to go though. Lime cement production is a major CO2 producer, even if you don't count in the fuel burned to transport it. We should be eliminating unnecessary use of concrete (eg kneejerk city bylaws requiring sidewalks that nobody uses).
There's an avenue of research available to somebody, to develop a cost effective way of putting a light colored surface on pavements.
Another area of research is to develop environment friendly types of concrete, and building technologies that can use them.

HAHAHA...

You are back!

Here is a link to my response regarding your "science denial" post about how energy can flow from cold to hot objects.
Remember your "clear lightbulb" irrational rant?

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
----------
Now "neighbour" is back babbling about "environment friendly types of concrete"....HAHAHA.

What a HOOT!

nepsqb wrote:

We need more direct ways to tackle global warming....

Actually we just need less ignorant morons who believe the hoax.

just an allusion wrote:

Granted, the majority of this particular occurrence of needless heat generation IS localized, but it occurs to me that reducing the ambient air temperature by approximately 8 degrees in ALL areas utilizing "black top"/asphalt as a paving surface (roads, parking lots, driveways, supermarket lots, shopping centers, etc., etc., would culminate in a noticeable reduction in overall heating EVERYWHERE as our atmosphere IS, afterall, "global", ergo, if it proves to be cooler in the cities, then it will be just that much cooler in the suburbs, and even cooler still in the rural areas, as well as everywhere else, whether it's paved or not.

I'm not at all sure you've stopped to consider the possible minuscule overall global effect of such a small, but enormously expensive global plan of action would have on reducing AGW.

just an allusion wrote:

But perhaps YOU have an idea of your own, Earthling, that you'd care to offer up instead of some dismissive critique of another's, at least rational

My post wasn't a 'critique' or 'dismissive' in any way, it was intended to be informative.

just an allusion wrote:

(no mention of blasting volcanoes open with dynamite here)

It's time you learned when someone is jesting.

just an allusion wrote:

viable and easily attainable, suggestion for a geo-engineering project that is both inexpensive (comparably) and demonstrably readily realizable results...?

Let's consider your ideas of, "viable, easily attainable, inexpensive."
Scroll down to section, "4.6 Surfacing" on this page, although its pricing structure is probably out of date:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/T0579E/t0579e06.htm
If you have a driveway, ask a contractor how much he would charge you to resurface it with concrete, which, BTW, has already been pointed out to you, is a high producer of CO2.

Wounded Warmists Attack: It’s What Happens ‘When Prophecy Fails’

The AGW community is behaving exactly like the UFO cult studied by psychologist Leon Festinger in his classic study of cognitive dissonance.

"One of the scientists quoted in the emails is Stanford University researcher Paul Ehrlich. He writes:

Most of our colleagues don’t seem to grasp that we’re not in a gentlepersons debate, we’re in a street fight against well-funded, merciless enemies who play by entirely different rules.

This is the same Paul Ehrlich who in 1968 wrote in his book The Population Bomb:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over.… In the 1970s and 1980s hundred of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.

This prediction was of course wrong, but most disturbing was his fascistic advice: he advocated the use of “compulsory birth regulation (using) the addition of temporary sterilants to water supplies or staple food.” He was quoted in 1992 as saying:“Giving the world cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving a child a machine gun.” In 1990, he said:“We’ve already had too much economic growth in the United States. Economic growth in rich counties like ours is a disease, not the cure.”

With his history of misanthropy and totalitarianism, it’s no wonder that Ehrlich went on to become a man-made global warming crusader."

"A creature or group that is damaged psychically will respond like a wounded animal. The ensuing attack will be more aggressive and prolonged — an attempt to convince their “enemies” that they are correct, just as Leon Festinger predicted long ago."

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/wounded-warmists...

Paul Ehrlich is probably responsible for spawning the new generation of fearmongers that exist in modern society.
In one way or another, his ideas seem to have filtered through to many of the younger generation of 50 year olds and under.
The future looks black, but it has nothing to do with natural forces, only stupid humans who believe they're in control.

NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually we just need less ignorant morons who believe the hoax.

Except P.T. Barnum noticed that there is an inexhaustable supply of morons.