Jump to content
Stefani Tee
Sign in to follow this  
science

Solar GeoEngeneering May Help Global Warming

Featured Posts

Economy

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/09/10/solar-geoengineering-we-better-do-it-or-well-burn/amp/

 

article is long and read for more detailed info

 

but basically using deflective particles in atmosphere wed get a simmilar effect to the global cooling of 1991 after a major vulcanic erruption that blocked some of the sunlight

 

the idea is not completely new tho some scientists in the past have been concerned about potential unforseen side effects

  • Like 1
  • YAAAS 2
  • Love 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flopplause

Most importantly is that we extract the excess CO2 out of the oceans, that is mostly causing the rapid warm up. When water is warm it takes a long time to cool... They want to geo engineer the oceans by using silicate rock compounds and also the atmosphere by CO2 extraction using trees, specific CO2 capture plants and also silicate rock compounds.

Also meadows with cows and other livestock should be encased by something with transparent walls and sunblocking roofs, and atmosphere regulation, so we can control and store the amount of methane produced. Water falling on the roof of such meadows can be absorbed and used inside of the enclosed meadows to water the grasslands...

Edited by Flopplause

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
7 minutes ago, Flopplause said:

Most importantly is that we extract the excess CO2 out of the oceans, that is mostly causing the rapid warm up. When water is warm it takes a long time to cool... They want to geo engineer the oceans by using silicate rock compounds and also the atmosphere by CO2 extraction using trees, specific CO2 capture plants and also silicate rock compounds.

Also meadows with cows and other livestock should be encased by something with transparent walls and sunblocking roofs, and atmosphere regulation, so we can control and store the amount of methane produced. Water falling on the roof of such meadows can be absorbed and used inside of the enclosed meadows to water the grasslands...

How do u take co2 out of water? Also wouldnt a huge amount of trees need to be planted to make any difference?

 

i know trees make little difference compared to the plankton in the ocean 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Helxig

The problem is usually that ideas like this are too expensive and no government wants to pitch in to fund it.

We have the ability to theoretically terraform an entire planet to be habitable, but the resources it would take are literally impossible, so of course we have ways to fix one problem here on earth. But who? And when?

I'll be myself until they fūcking close the coffin.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
42 minutes ago, Helxig said:

The problem is usually that ideas like this are too expensive and no government wants to pitch in to fund it.

We have the ability to theoretically terraform an entire planet to be habitable, but the resources it would take are literally impossible, so of course we have ways to fix one problem here on earth. But who? And when?

In theory tho this is supposed to be relatively cheap tho on the grand scheme of things

 

and u dont have to cover the whole planet. It could be used only in the artict at first for example which is the part of the planet warming up the fastest and has the problematic ice melt

  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flopplause
1 hour ago, Economy said:

How do u take co2 out of water? Also wouldnt a huge amount of trees need to be planted to make any difference?

 

i know trees make little difference compared to the plankton in the ocean 

https://projectvesta.org/#targetText=Olivine is the most easily,and traps the carbon indefinitely.

https://phys.org/news/2018-06-electrogeochemistry-captures-carbon-fuel-offsets.html

and yeah we would also need to plant 1 trillion trees

and also:

 

Edited by Flopplause
  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
1 hour ago, Flopplause said:

Yeah 1 trillion trees is insane

 

might be cheaper to feed the plankton tbh

 

ppl forget most of the oxygen and air cycle comes from the diatoms/plankton from the ocean whereas vegetation is a smaller share

 

for example the amazon forest is known for producing 20% of earths oxygen in nominal terms. But on a net basis it produces very little for the earth because most of what it produces it consumes itself making little difference on earths balance :shrug:

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
JFK
2 hours ago, Flopplause said:

 

 

I cannot take this woman seriously. I can but it's like she's Sia :laughga: 

 

Especially when she said aluminium :ladyhaha:

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woolfsmck
9 hours ago, Economy said:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/09/10/solar-geoengineering-we-better-do-it-or-well-burn/amp/

 

article is long and read for more detailed info

 

but basically using deflective particles in atmosphere wed get a simmilar effect to the global cooling of 1991 after a major vulcanic erruption that blocked some of the sunlight

 

the idea is not completely new tho some scientists in the past have been concerned about potential unforseen side effects

The more ways we replace fossil burning,  the better off for long term climate stability.

like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...