PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Bonkers suggestion for slowing down ice sheet melt
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Climate Change
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
UndercoverElephant



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 9987
Location: south east England

PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:01 pm    Post subject: Bonkers suggestion for slowing down ice sheet melt Reply with quote

https://phys.org/news/2019-07-west-antarctic-ice-collapse-ocean.html

Quote:

A team of researchers from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) is now scrutinising a daring way of stabilising the ice sheet: Generating trillions of tons of additional snowfall by pumping ocean water onto the glaciers and distributing it with snow canons.


No, it isn't April 1st. This is a real story.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ReserveGrowthRulz



Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 310
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I love the idea. Build a first class ski-result in Antarctica, the side effect of which is that it might keep a glacier bottled up, but even better, the good will generated by the gesture allows environmental damage to happen in a place that has tried so studiously to avoid it!

Makes far more sense than, you know, slowing consumption in OECD countries, requiring single child families globally, stopping the march of fossil fuel consumption by taxing it to the moon and letting market forces work to your advantage. Nope. The world's most exclusive ski resort it is!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 4041

PostPosted: Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Where is all the heat, liberated as the water freezes, going to go?
_________________
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11309
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More to the point where is all the energy to pump all that water going to come from? Solar panels?

Won't all that snow just add weight and make the ice flow quicker?

As to a sense of humour; this is a German University you're talking about!!
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
BritDownUnder



Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Posts: 599
Location: Hunter Valley, NSW, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Salt water has a lower freezing point than fresh water which is what the glaciers are made of so it may actually melt them further. Antarctica in winter could be cold enough I suppose to melt even salt water.

The liberation of all that latent heat could even change the climate further.

Maybe cover the ice sheets with kitchen foil to reflect the heat. I should charge the European Union five euros for my in depth research project.
_________________
G'Day cobber!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 7291
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Unlikely to be sensible for the reasons already given.

However a related idea would be to make snow from fresh water and apply this to regions that receive natural snow.
This is a well understood technology that is already widely applied in alpine ski resorts.
If a region receives say 2M of natural snow each winter, and if this persists for say 3 months, then applying man made snow in addition could result in the snow cover now lasting for 5 months.
Since white snow reflects sunlight, whilst exposed rock, soil or vegetation absorbs sunlight, this should help a little.
Plenty of renewable energy and fresh water would be needed. But both are available in many places.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Catweazle



Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 2235
Location: Little England, over the hills

PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, to stop global warming we simply need to paint much of the world white. Easy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lurkalot



Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 244

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Catweazle wrote:
So, to stop global warming we simply need to paint much of the world white. Easy.


In the back of my mind i seem to vaguely recall reading an idea to paint all the roofs of buildings white and i'm thinking there was a calculation as to how much sunlight would be reflected back out into space.
On a practical but much smaller scale i used to have a workshop with a flat felted roof which in summer would become very hot inside. I painted the roof white and it made it a far more comfortable place to be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 5285
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Snow making is an energy intensive operation. You have large, usually diesel, pumps pumping water from a water source up to the top of a mountain along side huge diesel compressors that supply the needed jet of air needed to spray the water out in droplets small enough to freeze into "snow" before they hit the ground. It would be a net loss if you were trying to save the planet with it.
Solar panels on roof tops or in farm arrays on the other hand should be a net positive. The solar energy they convert into electricity is not available to radiate back into the atmosphere and runs through the grid system to it's point of use. The fossil fuel electricity it replaces is no longer emitting CO2 so depending on the use of the electricity you have at least one positive and perhaps two if the electricity is not used to create heat.
So instead of painting Antarctica and Greenland white with paint or snow we should cover West Texas and most of the Shara with solar farms. Might even turn a profit doing it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 4041

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That’s a good idea. Which species that currently live there, will it drive to extinction?

Example: desert tortoises.
_________________
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 5285
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodburner wrote:
That’s a good idea. Which species that currently live there, will it drive to extinction?

Example: desert tortoises.

That is hard to say with any accuracy. It would take quite an effort to cover all of the tortoise habitat and even if you approached 100 % the tortoises might benefit from the additional shade provided by the PV panels.
Of course you would not install a PV farm on a penguin rookery or anything else as stupid but doing nothing has major negative environmental impacts so one must always weigh which course of action does the least harm.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11309
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We get similar opposition from anti wind farm locals about spoiling the views of the North Hampshire and Berkshire Downs by putting wind farms on them. The thought that the changing climate might spoil the view has not occurred to the objectors. And if we find a new miracle energy source the wind turbines could easily be removed and no one would be the wiser that they has ever been there. The lump of alkaline concrete below ground in the alkaline chalk isn't going to do much damage to anything apart from a few earthworms that might grind their teeth on it.
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 4041

PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2019 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Then there’s the birds knocked out by blades, and the bats. As for the shade for the tortoises, that suggestion is in the category of one the most banal and ill thought through which appear on the forum from time to time, as is KL’s ill thought through suggestion that the world be buggered if we don’t build them, so we’ll build them anyway, and bugger it that way. I would feel safer with nature’s changes than with more interference from industrial and corporate interests, supported by climate alarmists, who repeatedly forecast gloom and doom in twelve years. It’s always twelve years, just likeit’s 97%.

The desert tortoises have lived in their habitat successfully for many years, probably many millenia. So humans can improve their existance by giving them sunshades? You really don’t have much of a clue.
_________________
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 11309
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woodburner, you are putting words into people's mouths again. Where did I say that the world would be buggered if we don't build "them"? What proof do you have that if we build "them" we will bugger it that way? How please? Who is forecasting gloom and doom in 12 years? References please as people are always forecasting "it"? As for the 97% you are overestimating the amount of dissent in climate science circles. You, woodburner, haven't been able to come up with even one climate scientist who doesn't agree with the consensus so it's probably 100% who agree.

Then how many birds and bats are knocked out by turbine blades? References again because this is just another of your denier fairy tales.
_________________
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 4041

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So are you saying there will be no problem if wind turbines are not built?

As for putting words into people’s mouths, I must of course respect a master of the art. You, for example, recently called me a trump lover (or very similar) This was during one of your abuse torrents directed at me. So I suppose it’s another case of the pot calling the KettLe black.

I think Nils-Axel Mörner would have something to say about your exaggerating the already ridiculous 97% to 100%. Or is he someone else in the pocket of the major fuel companies?
_________________
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Climate Change All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group