NationStates Jolt Archive

Thoughts? (http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1999968,00.html)

chrome the moon!

Is the guardian one of those tabloid sites? Cause this really sounds so much like fluff in the ears.

How on earth do you get concensus for something like that though. I mean you could try putting it through the UN, but if even one country decides that they don't want the control over their sun, being the basis of nearly all life on earth, in someone else's hands and you vote it through any way then you've moved to comic book evil genius status in one bound.

The Guardian is a 'broadsheet' that has changed the format it is presented in to a tabloid so that commuters can read it on the way into work. Supposedly it is a high brow paper...

The first I thought of when I heard this was Burn's attempt to hold springfield to randsom by blocking out the sun. The whole idea just seems bonkers to me.

Wouldn't chroming on the moon be just the same as chroming on earth?

The Guardian is a 'broadsheet' that has changed the format it is presented in to a tabloid so that commuters can read it on the way into work. Supposedly it is a high brow paper...

Well you can't blame them for the subject matter if the US government has come out with this.

Well you can't blame them for the subject matter if the US government has come out with this.I did quick bit of web research. Only one other paper has the same article, and that's another paper that c+ped the article into their own paper (remembering to attribute the Guardian as the author).

Anyway, the origins of the idea seems to be among British Scientists. The US government has just seized on the idea because it might mean not having to reduce emissions.

The paper isn't even quoting a finalised document, but a draft. They only use the idea to making an attention grabbing headling, the first paragraph and then the journalist begins to talk about something else.

Infact, the 'insider infomation' that they have put up on their website doesn't even mention reflective dust or giant space mirrors, just 'modifiying solar radiance'.

Bah, I've slowly been turning away from the Grauniad over the last few years... I remember when I was a tiny kid and I used to read 'The Editor' supplement as it was a digested version of 7 days worth or broadsheets and because by reading speed was pretty abysmal. *weeps*

Great Idea! difficult to implement though. I envisage a metal heavy asteroid being moved into geo-synchronous orbit(*new technologies needed), mined for it's resources*, the collector dishes constructed*, moved to positions over ground recievers(*), the solar energy collected and then converted to microwave and beamed to the recievers. The position of the asteroid would also enable the first permanent human extraterrestrial settlement* and a fast tower to be made*.
I estimate a completion time from inception of at least 60 years for the first few dishes and another 100 for the tower and habitat.
Your criticisms please.:rolleyes:

The idea of the US controlling another potential weapon of mass destruction = disturbing.

The idea of the US controlling another potential weapon of mass destruction = disturbing.

Yes. It's occurred to me as well that a orbiting heavy microwave beam would make a terrifying weapon. The only solution I can suggest would be for a truly powerful global senate to be instituted to finally bring to heel all the pointless and bigoted nationalism we have previously had to suffer throughout history.

Thoughts? (http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1999968,00.html)

Great idea! We'll let scientists meddle with future climate! Hopefully my underground bunker's supplies will hold out for the rest of my life so I don't freeze to death in Snowball Earth 2. I hate the cold. :p

Would your underground bunker be able to stand up to the array if they turned it into a giant solar death ray?

Would your underground bunker be able to stand up to the array if they turned it into a giant solar death ray?

I suppose I could put a big mirror over it. :p

Of course, America could just stop burning so many greenhouse gases like the rest of the world...

I suppose I could put a big mirror over it. :p

LOL!!
(seriously though, a robust and pan-global government would be needed, as well as orbital security - big picture thoughts are needed to grasp the concept.)

Of course, America could just stop burning so many greenhouse gases like the rest of the world...

But think of the costs. I'm sure it's much cheaper to blow Billions of Dollars in to the space than reducing the consumation of fossile fuels, which will go out sooner or later anyway.

And I'm sure the giant space mirror will be ready in a few decades, to prevent the flooding of all small islands, like - well - Great Britain. Perhaps it's too late for Kiribati and Tuvalu, but why they were so stupid and settled down where centuries ago?

But think of the costs. I'm sure it's much cheaper to blow Billions of Dollars in to the space than reducing the consumation of fossile fuels, which will go out sooner or later anyway.

And I'm sure the giant space mirror will be ready in a few decades, to prevent the flooding of all small islands, like - well - Great Britain. Perhaps it's too late for Kiribati and Tuvalu, but why they were so stupid and settled down where centuries ago?

Space resources are worth trillions upon trillions. the few billions needed to set the ball rolling are trivial in comparison and will have to be spent anyway eventually. THINK BIG PICTURE!!

I suppose I could put a big mirror over it. :p

But they don't have to aim at it. All they have to do is heat up the surrounding terrain, and the air temperature would rise to levels sufficient to slag your mirror just by ambient temperature.

On a side note, does anyone even think this is feasible? A giant mirror array in space? Where micrometeorite impacts are commonplace?

But think of the costs. I'm sure it's much cheaper to blow Billions of Dollars in to the space than reducing the consumation of fossile fuels, which will go out sooner or later anyway.

And I'm sure the giant space mirror will be ready in a few decades, to prevent the flooding of all small islands, like - well - Great Britain. Perhaps it's too late for Kiribati and Tuvalu, but why they were so stupid and settled down where centuries ago?

Maybe if they took a long look at future global climate, they would not have. Well, they only have themselves to blame. :)

So, looking at the report, it looks like the US is trying their hardest not to look like big bad polluters by openly refusing a plan to reduce emissions, and is instead trying to include stuff in the plan that would make it seem silly, like thousands of shiny balloons.

So, looking at the report, it looks like the US is trying their hardest not to look like big bad polluters by openly refusing a plan to reduce emissions, and is instead trying to include stuff in the plan that would make it seem silly, like thousands of shiny balloons.
But... they're so... shiny!

But they don't have to aim at it. All they have to do is heat up the surrounding terrain, and the air temperature would rise to levels sufficient to slag your mirror just by ambient temperature.

On a side note, does anyone even think this is feasible? A giant mirror array in space? Where micrometeorite impacts are commonplace?

It's the American way: pretend to be working on a problem by promoting technologies that won't be ready until the people in public office have long since moved on and out of memory. That's why we're developing hydrogen cars and ethanol instead of electic cars. :)

placing giant mirrors in space, hmmm, that seems like the logical thing to do, doesn't it :rolleyes:

but this does remind me of that scientist who said we should pollute even more to counter global warming, but he said that to start a debate iirc.

placing giant mirrors in space, hmmm, that seems like the logical thing to do, doesn't it :rolleyes:

but this does remind me of that scientist who said we should pollute even more to counter global warming, but he said that to start a debate iirc.

It's just another example of the unhealthy level of attention Global Warming gets. It becomes a distraction from environmental issues instead of a focusing point. What have people heard lately about recycling? How clean is our water? Strip mining? What about forest conservation? Do people realize how important trees are in regulating global climate, or how much carbon dioxide trees and ocean plants consume?

No. Because people are too busy pissing their pants as they measure the glaciers and shaking their fists at SUVs for their role in sinking Tuvalu.

The so-called global warming crisis has blinded us to exactly what needs to be done to save our precious position on Earth: Stydying, learning from and respecting the ENTIRE ecosystem.

It's the American way: pretend to be working on a problem by promoting technologies that won't be ready until the people in public office have long since moved on and out of memory. That's why we're developing hydrogen cars and ethanol instead of electic cars. :)

So the day American politics starts focusing on practical and workable ideas is the sign of the end times?

So the day American politics starts focusing on practical and workable ideas is the sign of the end times?

No, it's the sign that there's money to be made. :)

It's just another example of the unhealthy level of attention Global Warming gets. It becomes a distraction from environmental issues instead of a focusing point. What have people heard lately about recycling? How clean is our water? Strip mining? What about forest conservation? Do people realize how important trees are in regulating global climate, or how much carbon dioxide trees and ocean plants consume?

No. Because people are too busy pissing their pants as they measure the glaciers and shaking their fists at SUVs for their role in sinking Tuvalu.

The so-called global warming crisis has blinded us to exactly what needs to be done to save our precious position on Earth: Stydying, learning from and respecting the ENTIRE ecosystem.

i don't think that global warming gets to much attention, but i agree that there are other environmental issues that get way to less attention in comparison with global warming.

The space mirrors is just one idea. There are some more much more interesting.

One of them was to deposit a lot of iron powder into the oceans to increase the reproduction of cyanobacteria. That would mean a increase in photosynthesis, which would use energy from the sun, diminish the ammount of CO2 in the atmosphere and increase the O2.

The space mirrors is just one idea. There are some more much more interesting.

One of them was to deposit a lot of iron powder into the oceans to increase the reproduction of cyanobacteria. That would mean a increase in photosynthesis, which would use energy from the sun, diminish the ammount of CO2 in the atmosphere and increase the O2.

but they can't know what the other effects will be can't they? so it's possible that this won't work out how they planned this, at all, and that it turns out to be a disaster.

The space mirrors is just one idea. There are some more much more interesting.

One of them <Snip>Yups. Another is to pump huge amounts of reflective aerosols into the atmosphere. Various kinds have been proposed.

Yups. Another is to pump huge amounts of reflective aerosols into the atmosphere. Various kinds have been proposed.

Now... we're going to solve a problem caused by our pumping chemicals into the atmosphere... by pumping chemicals into the atmosphere?

One hundred irony points! Let's go with it!

but they can't know what the other effects will be can't they? so it's possible that this won't work out how they planned this, at all, and that it turns out to be a disaster.

Yes, no one can really know what will hapen. There is a law called Law of Unforeseen Consequence, that mainly says that no matter how controled or understood the situation is, there is always room for consequences that couldnt be predicted or controled.

Anyway, I think its a much beter idea than sending mirrors to space. Why? Because not only it is much cheaper, but also because sending these mirrors would create so much space garbage that could seriously hinder further space exploration.

Now... we're going to solve a problem caused by our pumping chemicals into the atmosphere... by pumping chemicals into the atmosphere?

One hundred irony points! Let's go with it!Fabulous, aren't we?

But on the bright side, if we go with any of these .. Fantastic ideas, we can use funding for SETI-type projects to pay for it. I mean, after doing something like that, there's no chance in hell any intelligent alien life would ever risk making contat with us.

Yes, no one can really know what will hapen. There is a law called Law of Unforeseen Consequence, that mainly says that no matter how controled or understood the situation is, there is always room for consequences that couldnt be predicted or controled.

Anyway, I think its a much beter idea than sending mirrors to space. Why? Because not only it is much cheaper, but also because sending these mirrors would create so much space garbage that could seriously hinder further space exploration.

i don't know, i'd rather fuck up space than our own eco-system.
i always wonder why people want to solve problems, wich were created by technology, with more technology, in turn creating more problems than it solves.

It's just another example of the unhealthy level of attention Global Warming gets. It becomes a distraction from environmental issues instead of a focusing point. What have people heard lately about recycling? How clean is our water? Strip mining? What about forest conservation? Do people realize how important trees are in regulating global climate, or how much carbon dioxide trees and ocean plants consume?

No. Because people are too busy pissing their pants as they measure the glaciers and shaking their fists at SUVs for their role in sinking Tuvalu.

The so-called global warming crisis has blinded us to exactly what needs to be done to save our precious position on Earth: Stydying, learning from and respecting the ENTIRE ecosystem.
Amen.

How's your gonadal cooling developing?

Of course, America could just stop burning so many greenhouse gases like the rest of the world...
Since a good deal of the "rest of the world" are attempting to industrialise (thus increasing their own emissions), simply reducing American pollution will only slow things down, not fix them.

i always wonder why people want to solve problems, wich were created by technology, with more technology, in turn creating more problems than it solves.
Because it is better than dying a horrible, agonizing death?
You all act as if global catastrophe was something new, but it really isn't. In the days before the Agricultural Revolution, diseases weren't a major problem, but then everyone started gathering together in cities. Que the plagues and some of the worst disasters that humanity has ever encountered.
This problem, however, wasn't solved by everyone running back to the woods or signing treaties that limited the size of city-states, it was solved by the development of new technology (Medicine), which allowed humanity to continue staggering forward, like the drunken sailor we are.

Because it is better than dying a horrible, agonizing death?
You all act as if global catastrophe was something new, but it really isn't. In the days before the Agricultural Revolution, diseases weren't a major problem, but then everyone started gathering together in cities. Que the plagues and some of the worst disasters that humanity has ever encountered.
This problem, however, wasn't solved by everyone running back to the woods or signing treaties that limited the size of city-states, it was solved by the development of new technology (Medicine), which allowed humanity to continue staggering forward, like the drunken sailor we are.

meh, you're right i guess, it's just a little rant of mine. i was just trying to say that maybe, instead of throwing aerosols or mirrors in the air and iron in the sea, we should maybe trie to stop cutting down rainforests, and stop polluting so much.
and most plagues weren't stopped because of medicine, but because of improved hygiene iirc.

This idea sounds stupid at first, but once you consider that the alternative is for every single person on the planet to decide out of the goodness of their heart to not burn petrochemicals any more... It suddenly seems a lot more feasible.

Space mirrors FTW.









*starts tyre fire, free of environmental guilt*

Amen.

How's your gonadal cooling developing?

My groin is sleeping for now. :)

We have been using to fight technology for thousands of years anyway.

Just yesterday I saw on the News that in NY it was like -10°c. Hell, without technology, heating technology, I doubt the people would be able to survive there.

So, either we keep investing in technology, or we wont be able to grow anymore.

About the iron powder: it was tested with great results in a small scale.

But isnt it an amazing idea? Iron is one of the most important elements in nature. In the seas, the ammount of iron is somewhat stagnant, since there arent miners in nature. That is why most sunken ships usually turn into sea colonies, providing iron for the sea life. If we could throw iron powder in the seas, iron from out own scrapyards, think on how life in the seas could develop. That is an amazing idea.

I thought the moon already did reflect sunlight...

I thought the moon already did reflect sunlight...

Huh?

... block the sunlight... Pump dust into the air to reflect sunlight away...

isn't that one theory about nuclear Winter? that too much sunlight gets reflected away?

About the iron powder: it was tested with great results in a small scale.

But isnt it an amazing idea? Iron is one of the most important elements in nature. In the seas, the ammount of iron is somewhat stagnant, since there arent miners in nature. That is why most sunken ships usually turn into sea colonies, providing iron for the sea life. If we could throw iron powder in the seas, iron from out own scrapyards, think on how life in the seas could develop. That is an amazing idea.There are problems associated with over fertilizing a habitat.
http://www.lmvp.org/jamesriverstudy/images/graphs/james-river-bloom.jpg
Also consider the global scale of the problem. How much iron would have to be deposited into the oceans to make a difference to CO2 emissions? Over a period of time will the iron disapear out of the system and have to be replaced? These plants will be eaten by lifeforms in the ocean... and fish faeces sinks.

Since a good deal of the "rest of the world" are attempting to industrialise (thus increasing their own emissions), simply reducing American pollution will only slow things down, not fix them.Indeed, the developed world is attempting to industrialisation, which at the present maximum level of industrialisation would lead to an increase in emissions. If, however, the west take an active role in decreasing emissions then the developing countries will follow suit as they would be able to reduce emissions without compromising growth. The developing countries would get the benefits of a reduction in local pollution levels such as smog (Shanghai would be a much nicer city in the summer). The west would get the benefit of being able to sell such technology to the the developing countries, thus boostering their economies which are increasingly coming under pressure from cheaper labour in the developing countries. Finally, the whole world gets the benefit of a sustainable environment and economy.

We have been using to fight technology for thousands of years anyway.

Just yesterday I saw on the News that in NY it was like -10°c. Hell, without technology, heating technology, I doubt the people would be able to survive there

you doubt the people could survive -10C?

Bloody hell, think of the Russians who've had to survive up to -40C before times of heating. The people of NY would just have wrapped up in the modern day equavelent to reindeer or whatever Russians wore to keep warm.

Space mirrors is a ridicolous idea. Has anyone thought of
a) Where would this unused light go (hey you could make a solar power plant with it actually...awesome...)
b) Who's gonna maintain it? the UN? NATO? every country under the sun?
c) If you drop a 2kg mass onto a thin sheet of reflective mirror from 10 meters up and it falls at 10m/s the mirrors gonna break. Meteors are much bigger, heavier and faster. (2000 tons is a small one, 5000 mph is a slow one)
d) Why dont America just decide to cut down on emissions, like everyone else?
Oh wait i forget, theyre only intrested in producing profit because theyre ridicoulsly Capatilist...:headbang:

you doubt the people could survive -10C?

Bloody hell, think of the Russians who've had to survive up to -40C before times of heating. The people of NY would just have wrapped up in the modern day equavelent to reindeer or whatever Russians wore to keep warm.

Space mirrors is a ridicolous idea. Has anyone thought of
a) Where would this unused light go (hey you could make a solar power plant with it actually...awesome...)
b) Who's gonna maintain it? the UN? NATO? every country under the sun?
c) If you drop a 2kg mass onto a thin sheet of reflective mirror from 10 meters up and it falls at 10m/s the mirrors gonna break. Meteors are much bigger, heavier and faster. (2000 tons is a small one, 5000 mph is a slow one)
d) Why dont America just decide to cut down on emissions, like everyone else?
Oh wait i forget, theyre only intrested in producing profit because theyre ridicoulsly Capatilist...:headbang:The mirror is an analogy. It would just be lots of particles. Like ozone. There is no solid mass of ozone, just a layer where the gas is more concentrated.

Yay more chemicals with unkown side effects!

It would make more sense just to put solar panels in space and generate electricity, eliminating the need for fossil fuels and thereby eliminating most of our greenhouse gas emissions while providing an abundant and stable supply of cheap energy.

It would make more sense just to put solar panels in space and generate electricity, eliminating the need for fossil fuels and thereby eliminating most of our greenhouse gas emissions while providing an abundant and stable supply of cheap energy.
How would you get that energy transfered back to Earth?
And I don't think the Space-Mirror's idea is ever going to be attempted.

It would make more sense just to put solar panels in space and generate electricity, eliminating the need for fossil fuels and thereby eliminating most of our greenhouse gas emissions while providing an abundant and stable supply of cheap energy.A couple of problems.

a) how do you protect the solar panels from space debris?
b) what about energy loss?
c) how do you get the energy back to earth. 1) Using a ray that transmits energy periodically requires a minimum orbit of 200km and faces substantial energy loss? SimCity2000 gains top marks for idealism though.
2) Using a cable? That requires a geostationary orbit (achieved only near the equator. A geostationary orbits are normally +30km high... I don't think we're anywhere near developing materials that would be able support their own weight over such a distance. In addition maintaining the cable would be a bitch...

I don't think we're anywhere near developing materials that would be able support their own weight over such a distance.

goat-spider-silk ;)

goat-spider-silk ;)I doubt it would also be a good conductor... :p

I doubt it would also be a good conductor... :p

You can never be sure with that stuff...

You can never be sure with that stuff...You can never be sure this is your last day alive. What's your point? :p

Simpsons did it! Simpsons did it!

A couple of problems.

a) how do you protect the solar panels from space debris?
b) what about energy loss?
c) how do you get the energy back to earth. 1) Using a ray that transmits energy periodically requires a minimum orbit of 200km and faces substantial energy loss? SimCity2000 gains top marks for idealism though.
2) Using a cable? That requires a geostationary orbit (achieved only near the equator. A geostationary orbits are normally +30km high... I don't think we're anywhere near developing materials that would be able support their own weight over such a distance. In addition maintaining the cable would be a bitch...


I'm no engineer, so I couldn't tell you. Of course, if we're considering constructing space mirrors to prevent global warming, why not put the money in to finding a way to generate power instead? I'd rather do that, eliminate as many of our emissions as possible, and get power out of it than try to control the climate with mirrors.

goat-spider-silk ;)
You fail. Try again.

Spider silk will not even come close to cutting it. Sure it's really damn strong but it can't stretch 200km even if it were made really damn thick. Not even them thar carbon nano-tubes are strong enough for the stretch. That's why nobodies been able to get a skyhook up and running.

This is by far the dumbest plan I have ever heard. 'Smoke causes global warming so to stop global warming we'll fill the air with smoke and blot out the sun.' Yeah. Sure.

Remember that Bond movie with the giant space mirror that could turn into a heat-ray? Well it turns out the Russians tried that sort of thing back during the Cold War and it failed. It didn't block the sun much at all and didn't reflect nearly enough to light up the Siberian tundra at night. And as for the smoke; people that have been telling us for years that polluting is a bad thing are now saying "give a hoot, pollute"?

bah earth is done for, I say we use our expertise at global warming and warm up mars, and get out of this rapidly degrading cesspool

I'm against space mirrors because they make my ass look huge.

2) Using a cable? That requires a geostationary orbit (achieved only near the equator. A geostationary orbits are normally +30km high... I don't think we're anywhere near developing materials that would be able support their own weight over such a distance. In addition maintaining the cable would be a bitch...


Based on existing technologies being developed, as well as proposed theories, what would be ideal would be first an orbital ladder formed of mass produced carbon nanotubes with a large object tied into the end as a counterweight, probably a towed asteroid or station (the station being more realistic).

Solar panels would then be able to be attached to the required power station and power sent back down to the planet via transmission cables built into the orbital ladder.

And Dosuun, the projected strength of carbon nanotubes, particularly if they were weaved to form a rope, is sufficient for the job. The only problem is manufacturing them in sufficient quantities.

It's actually pretty funny... the first thing i thought of after hearing the giant space reflector thing was that one Simpsons episode where Mr. Burns blocks out all the light so that the city has to live with nuclear power.

Anyway, its weird, but the dust theory actually works because it creates global dimming, the opposite of global warming, and that lets less sunlight in. Id elaborate, but its 12:40am.

Based on existing technologies being developed, as well as proposed theories, what would be ideal would be first an orbital ladder formed of mass produced carbon nanotubes with a large object tied into the end as a counterweight, probably a towed asteroid or station (the station being more realistic).

Solar panels would then be able to be attached to the required power station and power sent back down to the planet via transmission cables built into the orbital ladder.

And Dosuun, the projected strength of carbon nanotubes, particularly if they were weaved to form a rope, is sufficient for the job. The only problem is manufacturing them in sufficient quantities.There are just so many easier ways to create renewable energy than that. Surely. Like building a huge fuckoff array of solar panels in deserts and then developing superconductors to transmit the energy to the desired destination. On such a mass scale you could use spare electricity to separate solutes by electrolysis, they products can then be recombined at night to power steam-turbine power plants throughout the night... or you could just use batteries. The superconducting transmission lines could be kept supercold by burying them underground and using a reverse geothermal technique. Like a giant refridgerator using biodiesel as a local power source.

It's actually pretty funny... the first thing i thought of after hearing the giant space reflector thing was that one Simpsons episode where Mr. Burns blocks out all the light so that the city has to live with nuclear power.

Anyway, its weird, but the dust theory actually works because it creates global dimming, the opposite of global warming, and that lets less sunlight in. Id elaborate, but its 12:40am.Fuck off. :p I live in Britain. We hardly get enough sunlight as it is without some American government trying to tell us we need to make it darker. Then we'd be like scandanavia with everyone committing suicide left, right, and centre... okay, maybe not left. I doubt there's a single socialist left alive in this country. Which means we wouldn't even have a scandanavian welfare model to compensate for the lack of light. :(