Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(22,024 posts)
19. Even this scheme actually involves some expense
Fri Jun 8, 2012, 11:08 AM
Jun 2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_sulfate_aerosols_(geoengineering)#Delivery_methods
[font face=Serif][font size=3]…[/font]

[font size=4]Delivery methods[/font]
[font size=3]Various techniques have been proposed for delivering the aerosol precursor gases (H[font size="1"]2[/font]S and SO[font size="1"]2[/font]). The required altitude to enter the stratosphere is the height of the tropopause, which varies from 11 km (6.8 miles/36,000 feet) at the poles to 17 km (11 miles/58,000 feet) at the equator.
  • Aircraft such as the F15-C variant of the F-15 Eagle have the necessary flight ceiling, but limited payload. Military tanker aircraft such as the KC-135 Stratotanker and KC-10 Extender also have the necessary ceiling and have greater payload.
  • Modified Artillery might have the necessary capability, but requires a polluting and expensive gunpowder charge to loft the payload.
  • High-altitude balloons can be used to lift precursor gases, in tanks, bladders or in the balloons' envelope. Balloons can also be used to lift pipes and hoses, but no moored balloon has ever been deployed to the necessary altitude.
…[/font][/font]


http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/09/02/finally-a-garden-hose-to-the-sky/
[font face=Serif][font size=5]Finally: A Garden Hose to the Sky[/font]
Freakonomics
09/02/2011 | 2:37 pm

[font size=3]Well, it’s actually happening. An idea reported extensively in SuperFreakonomics has come to fruition, and some mad scientists are getting their way (and a little government funding) to build a garden hose to the sky — and potentially save the world by cooling it down.

A team of British researchers called SPICE (Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering) is trying to pump particles of water into the atmosphere as a test run before moving onto sulfates and aerosols that would reflect sunlight away from earth, mimicking the aftereffect of a massive volcanic eruption. SPICE is building the garden hose at an undisclosed location, with £1.6 million in U.K. government funding and the backing of the Royal Society.

Check out Steven Levitt's interview with Jon Stewart from 2009, where he discusses the idea (beginning at about the 2:20 mark). And below, from SuperFreakonomics Illustrated, is a look at Intellectual Ventures’ plan to pump liquified sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere.



[/font][/font]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Geoengineering experiment cancelled amid patent row joshcryer Jun 2012 #1
A charter for geoengineering joshcryer Jun 2012 #2
... and I've been there with you ... Nihil Jun 2012 #14
+1 drokhole Jun 2012 #15
From 7 years ago dipsydoodle Jun 2012 #3
Nobody actually needs to SEE the stars. That's what we have satellites for... GliderGuider Jun 2012 #4
I'm not sure resort is the right word The2ndWheel Jun 2012 #5
Mind you, this is just one scenario. (i.e. adding sufates to the upper atmosphere.) OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #6
Other schemes are not cheap. Global dimming happens for free* when you pollute. joshcryer Jun 2012 #18
Even this scheme actually involves some expense OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #19
I didn't say it was free, I said it was cheaper than the alternatives. joshcryer Jun 2012 #23
"Global dimming happens for free* when you pollute." OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #24
Did you not see the asterisk? joshcryer Jun 2012 #25
Sure did! OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #28
Jevon's Paradox would be a useful parable here. IDemo Jun 2012 #7
I am tired of “Jevons’ Paradox” OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #9
Then we're disagreed on the issue IDemo Jun 2012 #10
In the first place, this is a misapplication of “Jervons Paradox” OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #11
You must have missed the word "parable" in my post IDemo Jun 2012 #12
Jervons was wrong OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #13
Never mind aesthetics caraher Jun 2012 #8
What Are People Really Talking About When They Talk About "Geo-Engineering"? drokhole Jun 2012 #16
Aerosols are the cheapest way to do it, and thus is how it is going to be done. joshcryer Jun 2012 #17
These approaches are also not effective OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #20
Reducing incoming sunlight does not help with ocean acidification, drm604 Jun 2012 #21
Correct! OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #22
Nothing to see here... joshcryer Jun 2012 #26
It's not that there’s nothing to see here OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #27
Scientists warn geoengineering may disrupt rainfall joshcryer Jul 2012 #29
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Geoengineering would turn...»Reply #19