New paper: What Impact Would Sun Dimming Have on Earth’s Weather?

From the journal Atmospheric Science Letters press release:

Could Dimming the Sun Change Teleconnections in Weather Patterns as we Know Them?

Solar radiation management projects, also known as sun dimming, seek to reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth to counteract the effects of climate change. Global dimming can occur as a side-effect of fossil fuels or as a result of volcanic eruptions, but the consequences of deliberate sun dimming as a geoengineering tool are unknown.

A new study by Dr Peter Braesicke, from the Centre for Atmospheric Science at Cambridge University, seeks to answer this question by focusing on the possible impacts of a dimming sun on atmospheric teleconnections.

Teleconnections, important for the predictability of weather regimes, are the phenomenon of distant climate anomalies being related to each other at large distances, such as the link between sea-level pressure at Tahiti and Darwin, Australia, which defines the Southern Oscillation.

“It is important that we look for unintended consequences of any sun dimming schemes,” said Braesicke. “We have to test our models continuously against observations to make sure that they are ‘fit-for-purpose’, and it’s important that we should not only look at highly averaged ‘global’ quantities.”

Dr Braesicke’s team believes that the link between tropical temperatures and extra-tropical circulation are well captured for the recent past and that the link changes when the sun is dimmed.

“This could have consequences for prevailing weather regimes,” said Braesicke, “particularly for the El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) teleconnection. Our research allows us to assess how forced atmospheric variability, exemplified by the northern polar region, might change in a geoengineered world with a dimmed sun.”

A dimmed sun will change the temperature structure of the atmosphere with a cooling throughout the atmosphere. In the troposphere, temperatures drop because less solar radiation reaches the ground and therefore less can be converted into heat. In the stratosphere, less shortwave radiation is available for absorption by ozone and, therefore, heating rates in the stratosphere are lower.

“We have shown that important teleconnections are likely to change in such a geoengineered future, due to chemistry-climate interactions and in particular, due to changing stratospheric ozone,” concluded Braesicke. “In our model, the forced variability of northern high latitude temperatures changes spatially, from a polecentred pattern to a pattern over the Pacific region when the solar irradiance is reduced. Future geoengineering studies need to consider the full evolution of the stratosphere, including its chemical behaviour.”

The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project

In an accompanying paper Ben Kravitz, from Rutgers University, reviews the new project to coordinate and compare experiments in aerosol geoengineering and evaluates the effects of stratospheric geoengineering with sulfate aerosols.

Since the idea of geoengineering was thrust back into the scientific arena many have wondered whether it could reduce global warming as a mitigation measure. Kravitz’s team argues that one of the most feasible methods is through stratospheric sulfate aerosols. While geoengineering projects are not yet favored by policy makers this method is inexpensive compared with other such projects and so may prove more attractive.

However, stratospheric geoengineering with sulfate aerosols may have unintended consequences. Research indicates that stratospheric geoengineering could, by compensating for increased greenhouse gas concentrations, reduce summer monsoon rainfall in Asia and Africa, potentially threatening the food supply for billions of people.

“Some unanswered questions include whether a continuous stratospheric aerosol cloud would have the same effect as a transient one, such as that from a volcano, and to what extent regional changes in precipitation would be compensated by regional changes in evapotranspiration,” said Kravitz.

A consensus has yet to be reached on these, as well as other, important issues and to answer these questions the team propose a suite of standardised climate modeling experiments, as well as a coordinating framework for performing such experiments, known as the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP).

Advertisements

85 thoughts on “New paper: What Impact Would Sun Dimming Have on Earth’s Weather?

  1. Geo-Engineering by people that can’t determine the natural variation in the Earth’s temperature is doomed to failure at a level almost impossible to comprehend.

    I can see mirrors placed in orbit that start blocking the sun, then something prevents future space missions and suddenly the Earth enters a billion year ice age because no one can get the mirrors down.

    This is entering very dangerous territory.

    John Kehr
    The Inconvenient Skeptic

  2. Medling with climate matters about which we know very little can surely be construed as very dangerous. I know certain people can’t help themselves and want to fix something that isn’t broke. They must be stopped.

  3. Still seems to me they are concentrating too much on “dimming” and not enough on spectral energy variation. Moving energy from UV to visible makes a huge difference even with a TSI of the same overall value.

    If the spectral distribution of the energy changes, so does its impact on Earth, even if the total energy doesn’t change. You end up with shallower heating of the oceans, less ozone created, less ionospheric activity, etc. Because, for example, there is shallower heating of the oceans, more of the heat that is created is radiated right back out into space as soon as the sun sets. If you only heat the very surface, the very surface cools pretty quickly.

  4. What a waste of research money. It could have been used to study real climate threats instead (e.g. the next glacial period or mini ice age, or asteroid impacts).

  5. “climate modeling experiments”. Running a model isn’t an experiment. It isn’t science. Is that what people have to say to get grants, or is that how “researchers” think now? Climate Change truly is the first postmodern science where the model is the reality and all “truths” are equally valid. The models don’t predict the weather and climate accurately now, so how could anyone have any faith in their prediction of what would happen with geoengineering?

  6. …Couldn’t we just change the orbit of the moon a tiny bit so all people abhoring any sort of warmth could have a sustainable shade…

  7. Ever heard of the Nuclear winter?

    As I’ve said many times before, we should invite all those people who really believe in global warming to a small remote atoll where we will show them how to stop global warming using a small but powerful nuclear weapon.

    … I guarantee they’ll be none of this global warming doomsday rubbish afterwards!

    Still, seriously, I once saw a satellite photo of smoke from woodburning stoves used for cooking in India and I suddenly realised just how powerful is the combined effect of many people releasing small amounts of particulates. Then if you remember the Victorian smogs they used to have in London before the clean air acts, and then the massive change from heating our own homes with coal to heating via clean gas and electricity, add to that the fad with putting out any and every natural fire.

    There’s not a doubt in my mind that the changes in dry pan evaporation rates was due to a massive change in the level of released particulates leading to a significant change in global temperatures (something the warmers have always tried to hide because they don’t want to admit that all the apparent rise can be explained by a reduction in global dimming).

    So, if we want to reduce global warming … we just scrap the clean air acts. After all if the warmers were really serious (which they are not …. except for the money!) they’d take any solution they could for the “worst” problem facing mankind. And the fact they are not looking at simple solutions like encouraging more air particulates, really shows that all this nonsense about the “worst” problem facing humanity is complete utter BS.

  8. How this study can be said to be comprehensive when we:-
    1, Do not completely understand climate, or what drives it.
    2, Are as yet unaware of all teleconnections, either planetary or solar connected.
    3, Do not yet understand all solar physics.
    4, Still refuse to accept that cosmic rays have a climate impact. ( At least the IPCC refuses to accept the cosmic ray theory of climate change)
    5, Seem to think that we are actually capable of geoengineering, or will be in the future when, hopefully, climate will be understood and we realize that the planet likes the climate that it gets naturally.

  9. Mad.

    Scientists.

    Remove their funding immediately. They claim that the Sun drives our climate when we just KNOW that CO2 does 99% of all the changifications.

  10. These people are quite, quite mad, never mind the sheer psychotic grandiosity of it all. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.

  11. Climate scientist; we keep refining our models by closely comparing them to actual observations until they can eerily predict the past and the present. We keep getting future predictions wrong though, must be a problem with the data or something….

    Geoengineering scientist; we keep refining our models by closely comparing them to actual observations until they can eerily predict the past and the present. Then we can make future predictions about various geoengineering…. what was that the climate guy said?

  12. Read that last paragraph again…”A consensus has yet to be reached”…Consensus by whom? YOU DONT OWN OUR GODDAMN PLANET…”The team proposes”…Team? Now why does that sound ominous?
    If it wasn’t so serious it could be a Friday Funny, echoes of Charlie Chaplin as fascist dictator playing with a globe of the world.

  13. What breathtaking arrogance………still I suppose the theory will allow for a full career worth of funding and save its proponents from having to get a real job!

  14. Oh no! Not another Consensus in the offing?

    Deja vu: We don’t really understand what effect element “A” (the Sun), has on element “B” (the Earth’s climate), yet we know for certain that element “C ” (manmade CO2) over powers element “A”! Brilliant (Ref:IPCC/TAR & IPCC/AR4 all in black & white & every pretty little colour they can think of – politicians are a bit thick hence the crayon work). With a mindset like that no wonder we get crap science!

  15. I think what they are trying to say would in plain English be ” If you shade the earth the planet will get cooler”

    So when the planet gets cooler the earth will be colder and there will be more ice, the more ice the cooler the earth will get and hence more ice. So on and so forth.

    A planet fit for polar bears end penguins?

  16. Judging by SC24 data some are interpreting a possible minimum as low as Maunder minimum.
    Could be ,ice fairs on the thames would certainly be the end for the warmists.
    Not to mention governments who are ill prepared.
    However it’s one of those events that are difficult to predict ,you know the events that happen.

  17. OMG ! ! ! The climate be a changing!

    IT IS WORTH THEN WE THOUGHT!

    I t I s C a t a s t r o p h i c C l i m a t e C h a n g e

    And It Be Anthropogenic Also Known As–Humans Did It.

    OMG! What will the humans do?

    But try and change it back to the golden olden horrors of the 80’s. o_O

    Watch it unfold in a science lab o’ the macabre close to home. It is better even ‘an re-animator for it is based on

    T R U E C L I M A T E C R I M E

    OoooOhOoooOhOoooOh . . .

    CUT!

  18. Solar radiation management projects, also known as sun dimming, seek to reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth to counteract the effects of climate change.

    So when it’s manmade it’s “climate change,” but when it’s the sun it’s termed as “counteracting” climate change. We’re meant to take seriously the words of a “scientist” who doesn’t even recognise the existence of natural climate change?

  19. I have seven beautiful grandchildren.
    It’s fascinating to watch them grow.

    They all go through the stage of experimenting when nobody is watching;
    without any understanding of the disasterous disruption to family life, that this can and far too often, does cause.
    It’s good they have fond parents who can clean up the mess afterwards.
    Who will clean up after the climatololololologists?

  20. Like most here, I think it’s high time we cut these kook’s budgets immediately! People talk about state and federal budget crises, but then spend millions of tax payer dollars on “geo-engineering” crud like this. As long as this kind of reckless spending persists, please don’t let anyone tell you we need more money for “science” and “education”!

  21. Blah, blah, blah, as if. What a hoax to get more money, and if they truly believe they can block the sun then they must believe Earth is the size of a basketball as many do due to being able to fly from New York to San Francisco in a matter of hours-screws up your perception of the size of our planet and how fragile it is, Not!

  22. If such schemes ever came to fruition, they would be extraordinarily dangerous and short-sighted. The simplest way to stop such folly is to cut off its funding. In the USA, the Congress can direct NASA, the NSF, and other agencies to stop underwriting grants for geo-engineering projects. Presumably public monies are similarly funding this nonsense in the UK as well. Write your congressman, or member of parliament.

    Of course, you will get accused of suppressing scientific research, but there is nothing to stop any determined ‘climate change’ zealot from continuing on his own hook. How many would, though, if the government gravy train dried up?

    /Mr Lynn

  23. Apart from all the criticisms already raised, by what authority do they intend to dim the sun? I presume they imagine some kind of debate in the UN, where after several months (or more likely years) of reasoned debate, they reach a consensus to lower the planet’s temperature.

    Even if such a consensus was ever reached (unlikely, considering that high latitude countries would be vehemently against it), there then has to be the agreement of national parliaments. Ok, the EU is mad enough to issue such a directive to member states, but I would expect most parliaments to rebel. But even if parliaments are brainwashed enough to go along with this scheme, it would meet fierce opposition from the people of those nations. There would be a veritable uprising, angry mobs rampaging through the streets. Sounds like a complete non starter to me.

  24. “Teleconnections, important for the predictability of weather regimes, are the phenomenon of distant climate anomalies being related to each other at large distances, such as the link between sea-level pressure at Tahiti and Darwin, Australia, which defines the Southern Oscillation.”

    Anyone that sees the winds that are result of pressure differentials in the atmosphere as ‘teleconnection’ should not be allowed near anything sharp. This man obviously has no understanding of the working of the climate systems.

  25. If this guy can get funding for a “study” like this, then I should be able to get funding for my study: If we genetically alter frogs to fly, will they still bump their ass when they hop?

  26. Perhaps there needs to be a mandatory refresher course in chaotic systems followed by a test people must absolutely pass before they’re allowed to buy food (just to make it compelling).

    It’s not enough we’ve created GM crops that are now in the wild, we wish to fiddle with a primary influence in our environment at a time when we have nothing but a strong belief bordering on religion about that we would irrevocably alter.

    The genie has left the bottle.

  27. There is nothing particularly clever about it, all well known constants of astronomy, only thing I did is to put them together in:
    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC6.htm
    -11.862 years = Jupiter sidereal period
    -19.859 years = Jupiter- Saturn synodic period
    -1940.5 year = a phase reference point for start of J-S synodic at the ‘nose’ of heliosphere
    – 3 years = average rise time (steepest part) of a sunspot cycle coincides with the rapid magnetic decline in the strength of polar fields.

  28. “Global dimming can occur as a side-effect of fossil fuels or as a result of volcanic eruptions, but the consequences of deliberate sun dimming as a geoengineering tool are unknown.”

    There were 3 recent VEI 6 eruptions that were followed by warming for 2 years from the events: 1883, 1902, 1912, so it would be safer to sit back and watch a few more volcanoes before jumping to conclusions about the effects.
    http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/largeeruptions.cfm

  29. Yes, let’s fit our planet with a giant pair of sunglasses. If we can successfully pull that off, then we will be in a position to build a stairway to Heaven.

  30. Until someone can show–IN DETAIL–how ice ages come about (not just the general attributions to Milankovich cycles and “hey dude, it snows and doesn’t melt”) and how they end, any effort to globally geo-engineer climate is a mad gamble.

    By ‘in detail’, I mean an explicit reconstruction (incl. precipitation source, rate of accumulation/compaction, and rate of advance) of the mechanisms for the growth of ice in the arctic regions to such a degree that it ‘pours’ south (meaning continued accumulation hundreds of miles north of the leading edge of the glacier). An exhaustive web search comes up with a scarcity of ‘theories for continental glaciation’ or ’causes of ice ages’. Most of what’s available is a collection of unexplainable assumptions.

    Without understanding the above, why mess with any of the rest?

  31. I can just imagine if this scheme ever goes ahead, I won’t be the only one running solar electricity who will be suing for compensation.

  32. The visual spectrum is a miniscule part of the entire spectrum . . . Dimming is relative.

    “The visible spectrum is the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that is visible to (can be detected by) the human eye. Electromagnetic radiation in this range of wavelengths is called visible light or simply light. A typical human eye will respond to wavelengths from about 390 to 750 nm”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum

    Wiki – it changes

  33. “Kravitz’s team argues that one of the most feasible methods is through stratospheric sulfate aerosols. While geoengineering projects are not yet favored by policy makers this method is inexpensive compared with other such projects and so may prove more attractive.

  34. “Kravitz’s team argues that one of the most feasible methods is through stratospheric sulfate aerosols. While geoengineering projects are not yet favored by policy makers this method is inexpensive compared with other such projects and so may prove more attractive.”

    Please check the following to get a base number.
    Mt Pinatubo “SYNERUPTION SULFUR DIOXIDE OUTPUT (June 7, 1991 – September 7, 1991)
    The Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS), carried in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Nimbus-7 satellite, measured 110,000 t of SO2 in the June 12, 1991, eruption plume, and 20,000,000 t on June 15-16 (Bluth and others, 1992). Clearly, the amounts of SO2 released during the main explosive events were several orders of magnitude greater than emission before or after the main explosive events.” http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/daag1/index.html

    So over 20,110,000 tons of SO2 were released to get a 2 year blip on world temperatures. What is the cost of pumping 10,000,000 tons of SO2 into the air every year?

  35. Isn’t it nice to know that you can make a living pondering stupid projects which are:
    (1) Un-necessary as we are not warming and also not warming in a continuing manner, which such projects would suggest. To assume that temperatures would go up for the foreseeable future means ignorance of our own history.
    (2) Ridiculously impossible to implement.
    (3) Ridiculously expensive.
    (4) Rank with unforeseeable consequences, as they really have no idea waht they are doing. I saw no inclusion of the convectional heat engine in any of this discussion. There is a great chance that dimming the Sun would have little effect as it would serve to turn down convectional cooling and cause a retention of heat.

  36. Stacey says:
    January 26, 2011 at 2:52 am
    fit polar bears end penguins? But I thought they were on opposite ends of the planet.

  37. Great,
    On one hand the Nutcases wish to push Solar Energy as a viable green (nearly CO2 free) alternative then in the other hand they seek to block the light that is needed to make it viable at all

  38. Geoengineering…. HA!

    They talk utter rubbish. Dimming the planet for a significant amount of time to have a significant and long lasting effect on climate????…. I think these numbskulls have come to think of themselves as Gods…. We all know what happens next.

    …. Just keep ’em away from the Kool Aid, fer cryin’ out loud….;-)

  39. To: J.Hansford

    Well, actually they are going to get under a tree to study he effect. Then maybe stand on their porch, then under a full roof, then in a cave. . . . I mean how much could that cost.

  40. “It is important that we look for unintended consequences of any sun dimming schemes,”

    That is the first time I have seen that mentioned in relation to AGW. And it had to be in an April Fools piece on the subject.

    Sad.

  41. If, as any tolerably numerate person does, you put your error bars in place after studying the uncertainties in the measurement data, you come to the inevitable conclusion that whether there has actually been any warming at all over the last 120 years is indeterminable. It seems to me that this needs to be sorted out before anyone even daydreams of uncontrollable amelioration experimentation on a global scale.

  42. Back when I was working on a Masters Thesis project, I had occasion to use a Vaccuum Tube (valve) pulse amplifier, to amplify signals from a photomultiplier tube. This amp employed two “Ring of Three” blocks; three tube feedback amplifiers. There were frequency selective filters in front, and between the amps , and the output was supposed to be able to put out 100 Volt pulses. It had been around the Physics Department for eons; and nobody knew when it last had had any maintenance; so it was not surprising when I found I couldn’t get more than a 90 Volt peak pulse out of it, and it seemed rather noisy compared to what I expected. So I decided to check all the tubes to see which tube was failing and had low gm; they all seemed to have a faint blue glow; which usually implied some sort of leak.
    So I got out the tube checker, and started to measure the gm of each of those tubes, to locate the weak one. Must be something wrong with the Tube checker, because It wouldn’t register much of any gm, on any one of the six tubes in those two stages. they were all shot. So off to the radio store to buy a whole set of new tubes. I checked them all on the checker to make sure they were good, and that it was actually working.

    Put it all back together, and I had no trouble getting 120 Volt peak pulses, and magically no noise of any consequence. Those old tubes had almost no amplification capability at all, yet the damn amp almost fooled me into thinking it was OK.

    Do these chaps at Cambridge University NOT understand the concept of NEGATIVE FEEDBACK, and how it operates to control the gain of a system, and make it nearly independent of the forward gain in the system.

    I predict that when these geo-engineering twirps succeed in dimming the sun; they will find something miraculaous will happen. The average amount of cloud cover on planet earth will drop to something less than it is now.

    All those owl boxes will still work though, and they will all read pretty much the same as they do now.

  43. As far as advanced geo engineering ideas go here is a more practical and reversible one:
    Current global warming is caused by the low albedo of The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, also described as the Pacific Trash Vortex, gyre of marine litter in the central North Pacific Ocean located roughly between 135° to 155°W and 35° to 42°N . The area is characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of pelagic plastics, chemical sludge, and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific Gyre.
    Re spraying the accumulated garbage with white water resistant paint would produce immediate benefit. By controlling amount of white garbage world temperature could be kept under control.

  44. “What Impact Would Sun Dimming Have on Earth’s Weather?”

    The fact that this question is even asked proves just how intellectually vacant climate junk-science truly is, and teleconnection is pure nonsense.

    I suppose the next time I go out in the morning and feel the sun apparently warming my skin I should realize it is caused by a glacier calving in Antarctica rather than the sun.

  45. Vince Causey writes @ 0542 Jan 26… in reply;
    I don’t think that we will have to wait for years in order to realise that we are already on a downward trend to much colder weather, perhaps for many, many years to come.
    What worries me, in UK, is that our ignorant government has no idea what is happening because it insists on employing advisors in order to appease other politicians, or, at least, other people with a political agenda, especially those of various hues of green.
    None of these well-paid people appear to have any conception that prolonged colder weather is surely much worse than warmer, and so are quite prepared to throw money at possible, man-made (emotive) warmer climes rather than at more probable colder winters (3 in a row, and we’ve another couple of months of this season yet).
    The upshot? Well, most of the money for providing energy (to keep the lights on at least, if not a heater or two) has disappeared in building windmills, and subsidising their pathetic output (averaging approx 25% of rated power annually) to the extreme detriment of millions of tax payers; not to mention having to maintain those coal guzzling, CO2 spewing, real power stations longer and longer, in order to maintain the provision of some 40% of the base load of UK electricity demand.

  46. “”””” Ira Ony says:
    January 26, 2011 at 12:32 pm
    As far as advanced geo engineering ideas go here is a more practical and reversible one:
    Current global warming is caused by the low albedo of The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, also described as the Pacific Trash Vortex, gyre of marine litter in the central North Pacific Ocean located roughly between 135° to 155°W and 35° to 42°N . The area is characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of pelagic plastics, chemical sludge, and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific Gyre. “””””

    You’d have a hard time coming up with a large area surface cover that has a LOWER albedo, than what is there now; the open ocean, which has a total reflectance at solar wavelengths of about 3%.

    And what is the virtue in spraying whatever rubbish is out there now, with even more rubbish.

    And recent reports’ right here at WUWT even have claimed that the Pacific Ocean garbage patch isn’t nearly as vast as we have been led to believe; maybe half vast; but evidently not vast. But the Cousteaus who have spun more miles out of playing in the ocean for the cameras; to raise money for their playing in the ocean; have a vested interest in having us believe that it is a serious problem.

    Yes I’m all for keeping such trash out of the oceans; it seems to be taken there by people who are out enjoying the oceans all the time. There’s not a lot of trash being taken there by third avenue wino bums.

  47. The Southern Ocillation (index) isn’t a teleconnection. Which is not to say Tahiti and Darwin aren’t teleconnected.

    Although the whole concept of teleconnection is mostly used to provide a psuedo-rationale for spurious correlations. Again, which is not to say climate doesn’t operate across large/hemispheric/global scale. It does.

  48. SciFi Film Noir idea: A form of mass hysteria takes hold and the herd starts to believe that run away “Venus effect” global warming is kicking in. A sinister group of people who worship sticks, rocks and smelt, seeing their golden opportunity to eliminate (or at least cull) “the human cancer” step up with a proposed “solution.”

    ‘Let us dim the sun and cool the feverish Earth!’ they proclaimed. Thus was hatched the ultimate in clandestine mass murder.

    As the great era of starvation and advancing ice began, the astute could perceive the vast yawning void ahead. When all was said and done, the mass murderers killed 5.5 billion souls and now play an endless dirge, chained to devilish instruments for all eternity from the depths of Hades.

  49. Ira Ony,

    “Current global warming is caused by the low albedo of The Great Pacific Garbage Patch”

    With all do respect……..I was just curious on how in the world you expected anyone to take your comment serious. Do have some Research or Data we can refer to? Climate Change is being blamed on alot things these days, but logically, your statement is easily refuted by pointing out that the vast majority of the “garbage” in these patches that have been discovered is below the surface.

  50. David, UK says: “Actually, ignore my last comment. I really should read things properly before posting. D’oh.”

    You are not alone. Unfortunately. Anyway, didn’t read the commment itself, so no problemo.

  51. “Dimming” the sun is the climax of Post-Normal
    scientific theoretical group masterbation.

    There shouldn’t be a single tax dollar tossed at
    furthering tihs plan.

  52. “”””” vukcevic says:
    January 26, 2011 at 1:46 pm
    George E. Smith says:
    …….
    Hi George
    Number of good points there.
    All the best “””””

    Say vuk , I took a look at your decaying oscillation; izzat the sun going out before our eyes, or is that the rotting of the great Pacific Garbage Dump stuff ?

    GES

  53. Wasn’t creating a problem to fix a problem, er I meant geo-engineering, the fundamental frakk-up legend of the Matrix trilogy?

    Too Sci-Fish?

    How about that captain cookish legend of why the kiwis got to be fox meat while the rest of the island got infested with rabbits? It’s about similar I think, mann-people trying to “fix nature” without knowing enough about the nature of the things they’re trying to fix.

  54. I can’t resist, so with apologies:

    Some little man-made sunshade can influence the earth’s temperature, but variations in the solar output in all its forms, can’t.

    Okay, its all clear now.

  55. Maybe we should just encourage specific volcanos to erupt at selected times. Plants can get their CO2 and the lovers of 20th century weather can get what they want. Problem solved.

  56. AC said:
    “Basically the Russians were looking for MORE light for their country and were playing with space mirrors. Prompting the question for both camps… Should we really be adding or taking way solar inputs?”

    Why don’t the warmists who want to be cooler and the Russians who want to be warmer just swap houses? Problem fixed.

  57. Mike Haseler says: Jan 26, 2011 1:29 am
    “And the fact they are not looking at simple solutions like encouraging more air particulates”

    That will also help the Greenies reduce population too.

  58. Correct me if Im wrong but wasn’t sun dimming the sky is falling theory of the 70’s? Now they want to artificially simulate it? SIGH!!

  59. AC said:
    “Basically the Russians were looking for MORE light for their country . . . .

    “golly gee” I thought that was why lightbulbs were invented!

  60. Let them play hot potato with a bottle of Nitroglycerin.
    The outcome should come as no surprise in both proposed cases.

  61. P.G. Sharrow says:
    January 26, 2011 at 9:04 pm
    Great Idea; Send all the warmers to Siberia. Then everyone can be happy!

    Putin won’t take idiots.

  62. Of course, I get around to this when most people’s attention is elsewhere.
    However, I will ass my 2c worth here for posterity:

    I think that WUWT maybe needs to add a new area to keep reminders of all of the hair-brained ideas that people ALMOST implemented which seemed like a wonderful idea at the time but in retrospect would have been disastrous.

    My contribution comes from the 1960s.
    Back in those primeval days, there were no geosynchronous satellites, so a lot of long distance communication relied upon short-wave radio.

    As most people probably know, propagation of SW signals over large distances relies upon reflection of the signal from various layers in the ionosphere. The layers have different properties depending on the time of day, season of the year, sunspots and a whole host of other factors, mainly driven by how much solar radiation is received.

    Its incredibly difficult to predict propagation and communication is often erratic to non-existent.

    A bunch of very clever (American) scientists came up with the idea of launching several tons of small copper needles into a low earth orbit (which was all they could achieve in those days). These would form a highly reflective layer, and make SW propagation very dependable.

    Of course, if they had done this, it would have made using geosynchronous communication satellites impossible. SETI would be impossible, communication with men going to the moon and beyond would be impossible.

    This would have been a catastrophy. Not as potentially life-threatening as dumping lots of sulfate particles into the atmosphere, but the world would be a quite different place now.

    There are certainly other good ideas that would have been catastrophic. We need to compile a list.

  63. I think it’s a great idea. We could pay utilities to burn high-sulfur coal, give them subsidies to remove their scrubbers, send coal from Newcastle instead of chopping down trees in the Amazon for biofuel, etc. Restart the old Soviet empire factories spewing particulates into the air, send the US EPA packing, and replace them with people from the companies that got fined the most, and pay them extra to make sure we can see the air again.
    On the other hand, Los Angeles wouldn’t have to meet any new mandates.

  64. The prolific snows which have hit the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast this winter–during January in particular–are without precedent.

    Blizzard of 1958, anyone?

Comments are closed.