NASA looks at plan to blot out Sun

[ECH1969]

THE idea seems like something out of a Superman comic: a machine or missile shoots tonnes of particles into the atmosphere that would block the Sun's rays, cool down the overheated Earth, and reverse global warming.

But at the weekend scientists gathered in a closed session organised by NASA and Stanford University to discuss researching such a strategy. The idea is called geo-engineering: using technology to tinker with the Earth's delicate climate balance.

Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University, said his modelling showed the idea worked. "We found that if you blocked 20 per cent of the sunlight over the Arctic Ocean it would be enough to restore sea ice," he said.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/nasa-looks-at-plan-to-blot-out-sun/2006/11/19/1163871272174.html

[Poll_Blind]

1. Great, I'm sure we couldn't fuck THAT one up. Oh man... n/t

PB

[buddysmellgood]

3. LOL! Oh c'mon. It's a slam dunk. We'll be in an out in no time. Halliburton will do

it under a no-bid contract.

[Poll_Blind]

6. The oceans will greet us as liberators! n/t

PB

[countmyvote4real]

19. Bing. Bang. Boom.

Y'all nailed this thread right there at the top. I'm just licking your coat tails by saying so.

[Hard_Work]

49. mmmmm,

yummy coat tails...forbidden coat tails...*makes Homer slobber sound*

Funny, MY computer modeling is all naked women. What did I do wrong?

[Nightjock]

89. HOLY SHIT!

That was the best laugh I've had in days!!!!

[KansDem]

46. Hmmmm..."Halliburton?"

Sure, Halliburton manages to "blot out" the sun in order to reduce global warming. Then, it figures out how to "unblot" in ways that become financially lucrative:

Want more Sun for you garden or vacation?
Then Halliburton's Gimmee the Sun! Program is for you!
For only $299.95 a month, Halliburton will give you:
MORE Sun!!!
MORE Fun!!!
What are you waiting for? "Let all the Sun in" and call Halliburton today!
1-800-MORE-SUN

[corkhead]

55. I was thinking the exact same thing. you did it better.

:toast:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

132. The FREEPER's must be peeing their pants

laughing at the responses to this post. My gawd y'all. Let's get a grip on reality. This is not going to happen!

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

73. Relax, they could be trying to change the earth's orbit or something

Really dangerous;-)

[reprobate]

134. Now THAT's a jolly marvelous idea.

Moving us out from the sun about five million miles should be just the thing.

[Wise Doubter]

109. Wasn`t this a Twilight Zone episode ??

:-)

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

150. It could happen!

It was done on Futurama...Episode 57. when the Professor tels all the robots vent their exhaust up to push the Earth further from the Sun.

[Morgana LaFey]

133. I call ideas like this

"Patriarchy run amock."

They also thought of trying to change the orbit of Earth -- move it back slightly. Even more delusional/insane.

[Bill McBlueState]

139. I call ideas like this

"Trying to save the planet."

At least some people are trying to solve the climate problem.

[Nihil]

147. We already know HOW to save the planet ... it's DOING it that's the problem.

> At least some people are trying to solve the climate problem.

Yes but it isn't the tossers who are proposing pie (plate) in the
sky crap like this.

The ones who are actually DOING something are conserving energy
(not wasting it), they are reducing their resource consumption
(not proposing a whopping big increase for an untested project),
they are improving efficiency (not carrying on with the same old
shit that "we" have been doing for decades).

In short, they are addressing the *known* problems not the
"Hey shit, what if we ..." chatter that should be kept in the bar
on a Saturday night. They are certainly NOT encouraging the
brainless wonders to support them on a double-or-quit bet to end
all sucker bets ...

[Nevernose]

2. "Reverse" terraforming. Interesting.

This was dreamed up by scifi writers fifty years ago as a way of terraforming Mars.

[okoboji]

4. OMFG

I could just read the head lines now ..... "Oooops, Scientist used metric system to caculate sun blockage over Artic - Earth Doomed."

And as it turned out the doofus blocked 200%, instead of 20%, and it froze everything South of the equator....

[Theduckno2]

12. Wasn't the mirror on the Hubble Space Telescope ground incorrectly?

I think NASA had to engineer a fix for the optics and devoted a shuttle mission to the repair.

Talk about OOPS! I would say though; earth atmospheric temperatures do decrease after large volcanic eruptions (large volumes of ash in the atmosphere) but I am extremely dubious of this approach.

[okoboji]

32. Yes ...

but it was the Mars climate orbiter that they lost due to one Nasa team using English units, while another team used metric to place the space craft in proper orbit. This happened back in Sept of 1999

[krispos42]

60. NASA had two mirrors made by two seperate companies

The one by Perkin Elmer was installed, and the one by Kodak was a back-up. Guess which one was made right...

[Jamastiene]

148. Yes, Hubble's lens was built in metric and it needed to be

built in English or vice versa. It caused the viewing to be off somehow, from what I remember. I don't exactly remember which way it went, but it was a typical super smart person mistake, really dumb.

I think they are drinking too much over at NASA lately. This is a hair brained idea if I ever heard one.

[Kutjara]

5. Brilliant idea! Since we understand every nuance of the...

...Earth's complex weather systems in minute detail and can predict the weather with such unerring accuracy, what can possibly go wrong?

Can anyone else sense an ecological disaster in the making?

[Nihil]

31. I'm getting worried about the amount of visibility that ...

... this dumb-ass plan is getting around the world ... very worried ...

> Can anyone else sense an ecological disaster in the making?

At first I laughed (hey, nice joke) but having seen a few variants on
this theme proposed I am getting a less than pleasant feeling about it.

But, silly me, there is nothing to fear ... after all, this guy in the OP
> said his modelling showed the idea worked

I'd be far more impressed if he came up with a passable model to explain
the current climate changes without adding any random elements. Until
that time, he can stick his idiot plans where the sun doesn't shine ...

[TankLV]

103. ...and there are WMD - they're around in Tikrit and some other places - that's a FACT...

[rateyes]

81. NOTHING can go wron...

go wron...go wron....go wron...go wron....................................................................................................................

[GoddessOfGuinness]

107. oops...wrong spot.

:eyes:

[Alexander]

7. Does the song "Paint it Black" ring a bell with anyone?

"I wanna see the sun, blotted out from the sky!"

Hmm....taking Jagger's lyrics a little too seriously, eh NASA?

[poverlay]

8. We are so screwn... n/t

[Prophet 451]

9. The ideas been around for years

Using technology to manipulate the global enviroment has been around ever since the concept of teh nuclear winter was figured out. Frank Miller used it as a big plot point of The Dark Knight Returns.

[Solon]

10. This is why I'm for terraforming Mars...

Mars, as far as we are aware, is VERY similar to Earth, not exact, but close enough, its day is only about 40 minutes longer than ours, its axial tilt is also similar, leading to similar seasons. I figure that if we could terraform Mars, since its a more or less, sterile environment, then that would lead to useful data on how planet wide climate systems can be affected by human geo-engineering. It will be similar enough to Earth to provide useful information, I figured if we could do it there, we could then do it here, but the right way, with less screw ups.

[Ignacio Upton]

24. It doesn't have a strong magnetic field

Which is supposed to protect it from solar winds. Solar winds strip away particles in an atmosphere that we as humans need to live.

[Occulus]

26. Could we strengthen Mars' magnetic field ourselves?

A MONUMENTAL undertaking lasting decades, if not centuries.

Can we really think that far ahead?

[Solon]

27. Subsurface magnets maybe?

The Moon doesn't have a magnetic field either, and without an atmosphere, staying on the surface unprotected from solar winds can be damaging to the human body, yet, there is a "strip" of magnetic field where humans can be protected, most likely subsurface magnetite, a LOT OF IT.

To be honest, its not needed, at least in the short term, I'll explain in my reply to Upton's post.

[thingfisher]

106. Yeah, we can start

terraforming (or should it be Marsaforming) Mars just as soon as we pay off the friggin' Iraq War debt. Wel be looking for another rat hole to throw our tax dollars into.

[Solon]

28. If we can get the Martian atmosphere up to 1 atm...

on the surface, that atmosphere should last for thousands of years. In the LONG term, i.e. hundreds of thousands or millions of years, it wouldn't last. However, there is a LOT of ferric oxide on Mars, in addition to many other gasses locked up in various places. Not all of it will be used to get the atmospheric pressure up. So, over a period of time, those gasses can be released through chemical processes as needed to keep a constant atmospheric pressure.

The composition of this atmosphere can be kept constant through the establishing of large ecosystems of plants and animals. In addition to, initially, uses of algae and extremely durable bacteria(extremophiles). Even with the melting of the Water-Ice Cap and the vaporizing of the Dry Ice cap, Mars would still have approximately the same land area as all of Earth's dry land, even if one of Mars' poles is dominated by an Ocean(depends on depth of ice cap). Also, another thing, since Mars has only about one third of Earth's gravity, in order to get up to 1 atm, Mars atmosphere would have to extend out about 24 kilometers, Earth's extends out about 6 kilometers, and Mars' current atmosphere extends out 11 kilometers. This provides more protection from ionized particles from the Solar Wind.

Having a sustainable photosynthetic bio system on the surface of the planet is perhaps the most important. To be honest, we actually have the technology now to terraform Mars, at least to radically change it. We could do a straight greenhouse effect warm up, it will probably take a decade. The most radical way to do this is to fine a large body asteroid, or better yet, a comet, and, either using ion drives, or a mass driver, divert its orbit to intersect Mars. However, this wouldn't be a straight slam into the planet, that is foolhardy and destructive, instead, you have it enter an orbital insertion around Mars, similar to how we did put the MRO in orbit around Mars. The MRO(Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter) did approached Mars at an oblique angle, and aero-braked in its upper atmosphere, slowing it down enough to enter a low circular orbit, after completing several revolutions around the planet.

A note about the MRO, it has found large tracks of hydrogen under the Martian surface, using radar, high resolution cameras, etc. These sources of hydrogen are most likely water ice under the red surface, or, possibly, aquifers, liquid water under the surface.

Sorry about the side track, but another note, I'm assuming that Mars would be unoccupied, completely, during this first step in the terraforming process. While Mars does have a large amount of water ice, its still a dry planet, even if ALL that ice is melted. Anyways, so, I propose a changing in the orbit of possibly a short period comet, so that it approaches Mars at an oblique angle that's even shallower than the MRO. This will be a polar circumventing orbit, in other words, it will cross the poles, what I imagine is a somewhat large(greater than 1km) short period comet, that aerobrakes through Mars atmosphere over the Northern Ice cap. This will have two effect, first, it will be quite fast, friction with the Martian atmosphere will heat up both the comet and the polar cap, vaporizing a large amount of the the CO2 dry ice, and the water-ice in the ice cap, almost immediately. The other effect is that many of the volatiles on and near the surface of the comet will also be vaporized, adding chemicals like ammonia, CO2, and Water Ice to the Martian atmosphere.

But it wouldn't end there, this is an orbital insertion, after all, and the comet will be adjusted enough where it was just barely below the escape velocity of Mars itself. So on its return approach, it will again enter the Martian atmosphere, probably a little further out, and will again swing back out in its oblique orbit. After several passes, if we can calculate it correctly, and make adjustments if possible, the comet will NOT ever enter a stable orbit, but rather plow through the atmosphere, losing mass and adding energy in the form of heat to the atmosphere. As the last orbit occurs, a large series of conventional bombs could then be set off that break apart the comet, increasing the surface areas of the remaining fragments, and most will vaporize in the thickening Martian atmosphere. If all goes well, Mars will have an atmosphere that reaches almost .5 atm if not more(depends on size of comet), and a large amount of global warming will then take place, releasing even more CO2 and other gasses. The planet will still be cold, any water ice will then fall back to the planet as frost, but humidity will be increased, greatly which will affect the albedo of the planet, and have to be counteracted.

One idea is to take a carbon-rich asteroid, insert it in a stable orbit around the planet, then basically pulverize it, and let the remaining "soot" rain down onto the planet. This method has two advantages, first, no humans are needed, no manned missions, none of that added expense or risk, the second advantage is that it can happen really rapidly, within a decade, liquid water may form on the surface, and the climate stabilize. Oddly enough, except for the mass driver, which I don't think is really needed, none of this requires "futuristic" technology, Ion drives, which are constant acceleration electrostatic drives, was tested successfully on Deep Space One, back in 1990s. Conventional explosives can be any explosive, really, that doesn't require a large amount of oxygen to detonate.

After this groundwork is completed, then radiation resistant algae as well as lichens and mosses can then be seeded around the planet, again through automated processes, and once the free Oxygen level is increased in the atmosphere, an Ozone layer will form in the upper atmosphere due to bombardment with cosmic radiation. This next step can be either quick(a decade or so) or slow(century or so), depending on whether we send so called Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide "factories" onto the surface of the planet, along with genetic engineering. When this process is completed, the planet will have many times the CO2 level on Earth, but below lethal levels, will have a large amount of Nitrogen(mostly from the Ammonia from the Comet, or Comets if needed), and Oxygen. By this time, complex life forms, like Humans, could survive on the planet, mostly unaided.

I call this "radical" terraforming, for a very good reason, it is radical, because it is quick, and in fact, it may take many years before the climate stabilizes after the terraforming. But, its also quick and cheap, relatively, Ion drives require very little reaction mass(mostly argon or another "neutral" gas), and while we are talking about manipulating the orbits of objects that weigh several thousand or million metric tonnes, we aren't giving them a hard push, but rather a gentle nudge, and can be controlled if we do it right. Mostly its a matter of finding the right candidate comets and asteroids, and a matter of timing. The expense actually is the beautiful part, probably no more than the cost of launching 2 Apollo missions, if that. Since we wouldn't need to launch humans at all, the program doesn't need to be much more expensive than that, and may be much cheaper due to technological advances.

I'm one of those types of space freaks that believes in doing things with the least amount of risk to life as possible, but in addition, taking risks that others would view as foolhardy. Not only to allow space exploration to countinue, but to stop limiting it to the "ohh, wow" factor, and think of practical uses for space exploration. For example, the biggest barrier to space exploration, and colonization, is the lack of immediate raw materials in orbit, we have to carry EVERYTHING with us up to orbit, and while a space elevator will cheapen the cost, its still on the expensive side, if affordable over time. One idea I have is this, capture an asteroid and put it in Earth orbit, easily accessible, and can be used as either an anchor for a space elevator, or as an orbital foundation for a base that could be built up there, with materials already present on the asteroid.

A good candidate is the asteroid 99942 Apophis, which, in 2024, will pass VERY close to Earth, and again will pass close to Earth in 2036. The chances of it impacting the Earth are low, however, its 300 meters in diameter, and we could, in let's say the next 10 years, send a probe with an ion drive on it to anchor to the asteroid, and slightly change its orbit, and possibly bleed off some of its velocity(right now about 30km/s), so that when it does get close to Earth, it is captured by it. Then we could use it as a base of operations to build a larger space station in a higher orbit, as a launching pad, of sorts, for the Mars missions I mentioned Earlier, and to build the first space colonies, in addition to other missions to other Asteroids to collect more raw materials.

A large amount of things can be done in space that can directly impact the lives of people on Earth, new energy sources, faster and better microchips for computers, orbital hydroponic farms, launching moon missions etc. "Importing" things to Earth will be significantly cheaper than "Exporting" things to space. This includes new jobs, specializations, opportunities, and economies can be fostered on this alone. Just the metal alone would be worth it, a single, 5 Kilometer wide Asteroid, that's composed of mostly Iron-Nickel, contains more of these metals than what humans have mined in ALL of human history. Think about that.

[krispos42]

70. That is a hell of a paper.

Did you read "Red Mars", perchance?

I am intrigued by the concept of repeated aerobraking of a comet to add both heat and vital gasses. It is an excellent idea, in my opinion, and not something I recall reading before.

I would submit that it is critical for us to make a space elevator before we can attempt such things, though. We can shoot as many ion drives or solar sails as we need if we extend the tether well past the geosynchronous orbit altitude of the earth.

I can also envision us launching tankfuls of carbon dioxide and water to Mars, as needed. Clean-coal technology makes recoverable carbon dioxide as a by-product of making either automotive fuel or heat energy for power generation, and there is no reason that large tanks of recovered CO₂ couldn't be sent to Mars on a daily basis. Sent on an aerobraking orbit with a parachute, it could add a little bit of heat and some refined metals to Mars for the colonist to later work with. The same concept could also be done with water, although we would not need a tank. We could send up tanks of water to the geosynchonous altitude, squirt the water into the vacuum so it freezes into spheres of ice in spase, wrap them in reflective Mylar, and drop them off the end of the tether. The ice globes would melt and distribute the water during reentry and impact. Beneficial bacteria, spores, lichen, and other organisms can be seeded in the water so that the puddle left by the impact would form a breeding ground for them.

I noticed you menioned Apophis. Did you happed to read the latest issue of Popular Mechanics?

[Solon]

99. Nope, haven't read Popular Mechanics, though I did read Red Mars...

I knew about the asteroid, forgot its name(google is your friend), it was mentioned in the science forum here a month or so ago, I advocated we try to capture it then too. That would serve two purposes, a possible base for either a space station, or a counterweight for a space elevator, and also, it would be good practice in how these objects behave to human intervention, very useful data for when one is found to be on a collision course, wouldn't you agree?

Also, I can't say the aerobraking idea using a comet is all my idea, I got inspiration from another book "Hammer of God" by Authur C. Clarke. In that book, a bean shaped asteroid was found to be on a collision course to Earth, I forget the details, its been a while since I read it, but, I think a few years before impact, a crew was sent up to deflect it, problem was, not knowing the composition of the asteroid, they screwed up and were successful at the same time. What happened was that they split the asteroid in half, one half of the asteroid was deflected completely, however, the other half, after the calculations, was found to be on a collision course for Earth. Panic, of course, ensues on the planet, it was too late to send up another crew.

When it was within weeks out from impact, they were able to reassess their calculations, and found out it was going to miss, barely. This is what happened, the asteroid passed within I think it was around 3 kilometers of the Earth's surface, so it didn't impact, instead it passed right over and aerobraked in the atmosphere above the South Pole, Antarctica melted in less than an hour, and the asteroid then left the atmosphere and continued on its way, never slowed down enough to enter orbit. Millions of people died in the resulting flood.

Also, I agree with you, to a certain extent, that a space elevator is needed before human colonization can start. The thing is that the terraforming itself, the initial part I laid out could be launched from rockets of about Saturn V size, maybe a little smaller. Like I said, these would be robotic probes, and if we are able to time it right, then we could start the aerobraking of a comet or comets by about 2024 or so, at the same time, we could capture Aprophis to use as a construction platform for a space elevator. By then, carbon or diamond lattice nanotubes may be economical, and could then be used to construct such a space elevator.

I figure that by the time Mars is warm enough and has a thick enough atmosphere to support simple microbial life on its surface, the space elevator would be completed. By then I figured a few hundred people would be living above the surface of Earth, probably in a space station either at Geosynchronous orbit that is "on" the space elevator, or living at the counterweight, about halfway to the Moon in distance from the surface of the Earth. I imagine smallish(about 500 to 600 m) diameter toruses that straddle the space elevator, but never touch it, a large space is left in the middle for the heavy lift elevator to come up for supplies and the stations themselves spin for artificial gravity.

I figured the Space Elevator is going to be "up only" so to speak, to go back down to Earth, there will be reusable atmospheric space craft, much like airliners of today, except they will be able to withstand reentry, and different from the Space Shuttle in that they would be capable of powered flight once they enter the atmosphere. They can be either constructed on Earth, and sent up the space elevator, or constructed in orbit, and sent down when supplies would be needed.

My biggest thing is to make sure being in space is more or less, self sufficient. While I agree that sending CO2 up into space is an excellent idea, especially if we can "scrub" the atmosphere of it, Water, I don't think so. Initially, yes, it would be used, mostly for shielding from the Van Allen belts. But in the long term, Earth cannot afford to send up millions of liters of water, we already are on the cusp of a fresh water shortage now. Instead, I propose that, after the space elevator is built, we take your idea about transporting water into space and adapt it. Send a large probe up to a short period comet, it will drape a mylar shield over the entire surface of the comet, then nudge it so that its captured in Earth's orbit. Such a comet should provide more than enough water along with rocket fuels and gasses, to make the initial and later space stations and colonies self sufficient.

Once we have sufficient materials, people, and technology in orbit, refining of asteroid and cometary material can happen on an industrial scale. Large space colonies, toruses, bernal spheres, O'Neill cylinders, etc. could all be built. We could have large scale hydroponic farms, orbiting space stations dedicated to crops, that have higher CO2 levels than is safe for human life, many will be really warm, and extremely humid, as needed for the crops within them. Some will have soil that was mined from rocky material mixed with nitrates from Earth, mostly shit from either humans or agriculture. Actually, that would probably be the largest, in mass, of exports from Earth, shit. :)

Such agricultural colonies in orbit actually have a great many advantages to those on Earth, for the entire environment for the crops in question can be optimized for those particular crops. Some plants may grow better on a 36 hour day/night cycle, other grow better in a higher CO2 atmosphere. Many don't even need a full G to grow properly, so we could build HUGE(10 km or larger) stations using traditional technology and materials for these crops. Not to mention that these stations could be fully automated, only needing human intervention if something breaks.

Actually, if things can be believed on Earth, we are losing topsoil at an astounding rate, and, while right now, worldwide famine seems far off, all you need is a "Dust Bowl 2" and millions, perhaps billions, will die. I figured with orbital farms, we could definitely improve our chances of survival on the planet. We could then build other space elevators, in Africa or South America, or some islands or floating platforms, later on, and increase the traffic to interplanetary space exponentially. Large scale colonization may begin by then, maybe around 2070 or so, hell, I'd still be alive by then, if probably in either a wheelchair or crutches(depends on technological advances).

Being optimistic here, and a little far out, but I'm hoping that by 2070 or so, that my subjective age won't be much older than now, or I'll have an artificial body, either would work. :) With things like direct nerve cell interfacing, stem cell research etc. all this seems possible all of the sudden. Hell, they my find the elusive aging gene(or genes), and be able to turn them off.

I'm pretty optimistic about some of these developments, overall, simply because, lately, NASA, ESA, etc. seem to hit slam dunks a LOT in the past 10 years or so. An example is the NEAR-Shoemaker probe, it was designed to orbit Eros, a decent sized asteroid, and take close up pictures of it. It succeeded, and NASA decided, what the hell, and landed it on the surface. The insane part is that it was never designed to do this, and yet succeeded beyond all the wildest expectations. Imagine what we could do with a probe actually designed to do this. Japan also succeeded in landing an probe named Falcon, hayabusa in Japanese, on an Near Earth asteroid and collected some samples from the surface; unfortunately, the probe is having trouble returning to Earth, they had to delay the return trip by about 3 years, should be back with samples by early next year.

My basic philosophy is this, we have the technology NOW to do a lot of this "science fiction" stuff, the only thing we lack is practical experience, but, as is always said, practice makes perfect. In addition, such ideas as I have, and many others have, will greatly accelerate our technological know-how and can greatly improve the lives of people, both on and off Planet Earth. Earth is still, by and large, a closed system, our civilizations, while staying on the planet, will eventually collapse from simple entropy. Most of our Energy Sources are short term items only(oil, coal), and alternatives are either less energy dense, or simply impractical on large scales. To give an interesting example, Solar energy is impractical for large scale uses, however, orbital solar panels, kilometers long and wide, in Geosynchronous orbit, can provide enough power for CONTINENTS. I already mentioned food, we could also, in micrograv environments, be able to manufacture extremely small electronics, nano-technology, and many other things as well.

We could move most of our heavy, and dirty, industrial processes to off-world sites, we could stop disrupting the ecosystems of Earth because of large scale manufacturing and energy production. This is great for the environment, and for the health of humans on the planet. Transportation could be simplified, you have an industrial site in high Earth orbit, let's say for refining Iron, Copper, Nickel, or hell, even Gold and Silver(yes, all of these are found on asteroids). Have an atmospheric-capable cargo spaceship that, with a few thruster bursts, breaks from orbit and comes down to any airport on the planet. Hell, we already have the infrastructure on the planet for this. Lots of ideas, lots of possibilities, all we need is the will to do them.

[krispos42]

114. More thoughts

Also, I can't say the aerobraking idea using a comet is all my idea, I got inspiration from another book "Hammer of God" by Authur C. Clarke.

Yes, I read that book. It was more about life in the future, IMO, than about the impeding collision. It wasn't bad, but I liked "Lucifer's Hammer" by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle better.

About the space elevator, though. We don't need a counterweight, necessarily. By just making the tether long enough, you can have the center of gravity of the tether at GEO. And at the far end of the very long tether you would have this incredible rotational velocity to take advantage of for really fast space travel and some fiery aerobraking on Mars!

But only the space station at GEO would not need to be attached to the tether to be stable. All habitats and other structures above or below GEO would need to be attached to the tether. Things below the tether would fall towards earth, and things above would be flung out into space. However, this does give the advantage that you can build a platform at any point between the surface and GEO to get any gravity you want. The surface would give you normal gravity, GEO would give you zero gravity, so you can just pick the right altitude in between for the gravity you want. Perhaps the old folk's home could be at 0.25g, for example. And if you moved past GEO, you would get 'gravity', but pulling you outward, so that your head is pointed towards Earth.

I did the math one day. I can email it to you if you want, but the basic idea is that only the part of the tether at GEO is in a stable orbit. Everything below is moving too slow to orbit freely, and everything above it moving too fast to be trapped by earth's gravity. Remember, you need to be moving at Mach 25 to orbit a hundred miles up, but it is far less at GEO, about Mach 10 if I did my calculations right. And the surface of the earth only moves at about Mach 1.3. Basically, the bottom of the tether 'hangs' from the top part, and vice versa. Actually, the tether needs to be thickest at GEO and can taper down to a point at both ends.

The nice thing about this is that if you want to go down, you just step off the tether and start falling. You would have to either calculate for Coreolis force or else keep a pully attached to the tether so you stay nearby, but it's just as easy as falling off of a log.

In the book "Article 23" by William Forschen (I'm misspelling his name horribly), there is a scene where adventurers don reentry spacesuits with parachutes and jump off of the tether from an altitude of several hundred miles. You fall, moving faster and faster, then you hit the atmosphere and slow down while your heat shield burns up, then pop the parachute and land safely.

We could then build other space elevators, in Africa or South America, or some islands or floating platforms, later on, and increase the traffic to interplanetary space exponentially.

Interestingly enough, I read an article about a year ago or so about how the space elevator's tether does not have to be on the equator. Apparently is it quite all right to have it above or below. The tether will just curve towards the equator as it moves out into space, so when you're going up from, say, Chicago, you'll move south as you climb, eventually getting above the equator a few thousand miles up. It could well be that every country could have their own elevator, spreading out like spokes of a wheel.

While I agree that sending CO2 up into space is an excellent idea, especially if we can "scrub" the atmosphere of it, Water, I don't think so.

Well, I envisioned using mineral-and-organism-rich seawater. Perhaps in an attemps to keep ocean levels from rising. Keep the freshwater for ourselves, but the seawater will evaporate on Mars and form rain, hopefully watering the entire planet. Plus, if enough of it can fill craters and form a salty sea, we'd have a place to raise tuna and flounder and such for the inevitable McDonalds and Subway franschises that will appear on the planet. :-)

The reflective Mylar film I thought would just reflect sunlight so the chunks of ice would not melt in transit, but you got me thinking about something we could use.

What if we encircled a comet in a black, heat-absorbing airtight fabric shell? The fabric shell would have it's own gryoscopes, manuvering thrusters, a navigation system and a nozzle. The shell would absorb sunlight, causing the comet to start to boil. The pressure builds up inside of the fabric shell while the shell's computer turns the nozzle in the right direction, then opens the gas flow. The releasing gasses would form a modest rocket engine, shoving the shell against the comet and altering its course. As the comet boiled away, the slight thrust would continue, possibly for decades. Now we're moving the comet without needing ion engines or rocket fuel!

It would be like making a dry ice bottle rocket with a 2-liter soda bottle and some dry ice chips. Just drill a hole in the cap to form the nozzle, and woosh!!!

I also read of an interesting way to make space habitats. What you do is find an asteroid of suitable size and burn a hole through it with a fusion-bomb-pumped laser. Next, surround the asteroid with several square kilometeters of worth of mirrors and direct all that concentrated sunlight on the asteroid. Once it starts to get near the melting point, put some spin on it. Spin it on the same axis that the hole was burned through as you continue heating the asteroid. Once it gets hot enough, the spinning asteroit will start to stretch like taffy, forming a flying-saucer-shaped hollow asteroid many times its original size. Tilt the mirrors away, let it cool off, finish the inside, put giant windows on the holes that the laser burned, and pressurize. Spin the asteroid as required to make enough gravity, and live on the inside. Use the mirrors to reflect enough light in to grow crops, and you're self-sufficent. You can mine the crust of the habitat for metals as needed.

[Solon]

138. That is an interesting way to build a space habitat...

My only major problem with it is that it may not be practical. The biggest engineering problem is that most asteroid are a mixture of metals and silicates, along with oxides, in rare situations. So, you may be able to melt the thing to slag, but it wouldn't be consistent throughout, and spinning the thing for artificial gravity will most likely just tear it apart, especially if you want a 1 g environment.

Space colonies will, especially at first, be limited in size, no more than a few kilometers in diameter, mostly because those are the structural limits of CURRENT materials, such as high tensile strength steel and aluminum . Such sizes can only be attained if the materials in question are highly refined during construction. The asteroid would have to be mined, and orbital smelters placed in orbit, either around the asteroid, or in the same orbit as the asteroid around Earth.

These orbital smelters will then refine the raw material, and sort it according to it properties, Nickel, Iron, Chromium will be used to make steel, silicates will be set aside for later, other metals will be set aside for use in whatever structural needs can be met. There may be materials like ammonia, water, and dry ice, in addition to other gasses that are frozen, especially under the surface of asteroids. These could be placed in large orbital tanks, to be used later for the atmosphere of the habitat and for fertilizer.

Silicates, "rocky" materials that would be left over after the refining could then be divided into two groups, one as raw material for topsoil manufacturing, what's left, that isn't suitable, could then be used as radiation shielding for the habitat. Note, this shielding wouldn't have to be STRUCTURALLY strong, because it wouldn't need to spin with the habitat itself. It could "sheath" the habitat without really touching it, just provide shielding.

Also, I know a Space Elevator works that way, that's the reason why I mentioned the GEO wouldn't be attached, but orbiting "around" it, so to speak. More or less as an offloading station for materials for the Earth-Moon system only. The angular velocity and momentum at the end of the tether would be so fast that you could send people straight out of the solar system, if you time the release right. It would be perfect for sending all sorts of crap and people to other planets.

[NickB79]

125. Could a small nuke at the core pulverize it in the first pass?

My thoughts have been similar to yours for some time, as I too would love to see Mars terraformed someday. My idea, though, was that you will have years to wait while the comets approach Mars, aerobrake, loop out into space, reenter Mars orbit, re-aerobrake, etc. In order to speed up the process, I always thought a small nuclear warhead placed close to the core of the comet could shatter the comet as it came into Mars orbit. This would mimic what happened with Levy-Shoemaker as it approached Jupiter, leaving smaller pieces of comet to burn up in the atmosphere on the first pass. So long as no really large pieces remain, there shouldn't be much danger of planetary impact (you don't want to throw up massive dust clouds and cool the planet instead). It would scatter a bit of radiation around the planet, but no more than what humans were exposed to during the 1950's and 60's with above-ground nuclear tests here on Earth.

[Solon]

130. My only problem is the uncontrolled nature of the explosion...

If you blast apart a comet, you lose all control over the remaining pieces, and since we are talking about ice here, most of its mass is gone too. A "small" nuclear warhead would blast it in such a way, that any remaining pieces big enough to be seen will either be blasted AWAY from Mars, and lost in interplanetary space, and the rest will either fall to the planet, or whiz by without even touching the atmosphere. There is no guarantee that any "center of mass" will stay on the same trajectory as before the nuclear blast.

Also, comparing that to Shoemaker-Levy isn't really a good comparison. Shoemaker-Levy was broken apart through tidal forces with Jupiter's extremely strong gravitational field, hence, the remaining pieces couldn't change their trajectory. Another note, the longest time period is actually getting the comet into a aerobraking orbit in the first place. This could take decades, if not longer, or it could take as little as 5 years, depending on where the candidate comet and Mars are located at the time, and where its most practical for them to meet. However, once the aerobraking occures, it will happen quite quickly, it can't be helped really, each oblique orbit of the comet will be timed in days, not months or years, so the total time between orbital insertion, and the breakup of the comet by conventional explosives would be on the order of weeks.

That's part of the reason why I mention conventional explosions, with a plural, I'm thinking of controlled demolition, similar to how we take down buildings to make room for construction. Just enough energy released to break apart the comet, but not to blast it apart in one bang.

[Stuckinthebush]

38. I thought it had NO magnetic field

It has a dead core. Without a molten core, there is no magnetic field. With no magnetic field, it would be very difficult to live because the sun's radioactive winds would not be deflected.

OK...that's all I have from my vague memories of a Discovery Channel program!

[Solon]

101. Actually, Mar's core is about 1480 kilometers in diameter...

and it is a liquid, if more like oozing Magma than our fast Iron/Nickel core on Earth. Mar's core is composed of Iron and about 15-17% Sulfur, so it much less dense than Earth's core, hence, no Magnetosphere. Its still has a general magnetic field, just too weak to reach the surface of the planet.

ON EDIT: Corrected my estimate of the core's diameter.

[kurth]

11. What's wrong with coal-burning smokestacks?

and vast newly formed deserts spewing dust into the air...

We don't need no machine or missile to shoot tonnes of particles into the atmosphere. We just need to BURN more STUFF.

[Judi Lynn]

20. Voila! There ya go. Let's add all the leaves we rake up in autumn! Burn those suckers. n/t

[lapfog_1]

13. There was a movie made about this quite some time ago

Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.

Love that young Barbara Eden!

[Cobalt-60]

14. I was very disappointed to discover that

There were no hot blondes in 6 inch heels and tight skirts on USN subs.

[lapfog_1]

23. You must have forgot to add "polar research sub with maverick

admiral on board" to your billet assignment request.

[Ezlivin]

36. There was one on my boat

And the crew were very helpful: They stood at the bottom of the ladder as she came aboard.

:)

Actually, my wife (a hot blonde at the time), visited my boat and was given a complete tour, bow to stern. This included the engine room and a tour through the reactor tunnel. The aft-types were pissed; their wives couldn't do that. But my wife was an E-5 stationed at CINCPACFLT and had a security clearance higher than most of the people on my boat. The duty officer knew this and showed her everything (even though she didn't have the need to know).

[DBoon]

15. the red pill or the blue pill?

will that be our next choice?

[PSPS]

16. Gee, this sounds like the immortalized idea from C. Montgomery Burns!

[Barrett808]

25. Since the beginning of time man has yearned to destroy the sun

SMITHERS

Well, Sir, you've certainly vanquished all your enemies: the
Elementary School, the local tavern, the old age home...you
must be very proud.

BURNS

No, not while my greatest
nemesis still provides our customers with free light, heat and
energy. I call this enemy...the sun.
{throws a switch; a control panel appears at his desk}
{another button slides the floor off a model of Springfield}
Since the beginning of time man has yearned to destroy the
sun. I will do the next best thing...block it out!
{another button raises a shield over the model town}

http://www.snpp.com/episodes/2F16.html

[Stand and Fight]

77. My very FIRST thought when I saw this in the lobby...

:rofl: Burns is taking over!

[eppur_se_muova]

80. One of the greatest throwaway lines ever!

Burns blurts it out like it was a standard villanious cliché, and before you can parse the sentence a second time (since you can't believe you got it right the first time), the action has moved on. Actually, didn't Smithers try to interject? Something like this...

Burns: Since the beginning of time, Man has yearned to destroy the Sun!

Smithers: Umm...actually, Sir ...

{Burns continues}

[Barrett808]

122. Smithers: Good God! n/t

[Coventina]

66. Oh rats! You beat me to it!!

*excellent*

[jdadd]

17. Soilent Green....

Will probably take care of world hunger....

[Vidar]

18. The Federation of Planets (Star Trek) could pull this off. Unfortunately,

we are the Ferengi.

[Azathoth]

29. The Ferengi could manage it too

It just depends on how much profit there is in it...

[FVZA_Colonel]

156. Actually, if you examine the Ferengi stance on a (admittedly) few issues,

they are arguably more advanced then us in those respects.

[Wilms]

21. Oh, goody!

I'll bet that means we can keep on driving our SUV's and replicating like cancer cells.

Fill up the tank!

[LeftyMom]

22. Gee thanks. I was trying to repress the plot of Highlander 2.

:banghead:

[The2ndWheel]

30. From NASA and Stanford?

So even the smart people are out of ideas then?

[Bassic]

33. That sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

I guess if it ever gets to the point where we have no choice, it'll be worth a shot, but I sure as hell hope this is not being considered as and alternative to whatch what we, and big corporations, release into the atmosphere.

[The Animator]

34. Allow me to draw a parallel between this plan, and a diet pill.

Sure even if a diet pill actually works, it still fails to address the reason you were fat in the first place.. because you eat too much and don't excercise enough. So even if the pill fixes your wieght problem for now... unless you change your lifestyle in the meantime, you'll end up right back where you started. Of course all this is cosmetic as well, just because the pill made you thin, it doesn't necissarily hold true that it's lowered your colesterol as well.

[Skinner]

35. Mark my words:

The morons who currently insist that global warming is a myth perpetrated by the liberal media and "Godless science" are going to gain an uncharacteristicaly high level of faith in science when they hear about this idea.

(And, for the record, I think this idea is a recipe for disaster. Even if it works, the I suspect the unintended consequences could be awful.)

[Blue_Tires]

100. well said n/t

[mikeytherat]

37. Once again, Futurama is ahead of the curve

Here's a frame grab from the Futurama episode "Crimes of the Hot":



It's a huge disc to blot out the sun and reduce global warming. And it fails. Miserably.

mikey_the_rat

[wallwriter]

39. As long as I can still drive my SUV! nt

[AliceWonderland]

40. Well, a chill just went down my spine.

That's the most disturbing playing-god idea I've heard in a long time. And there are many contenders in the field. As a poster put it, "hey, what could possibly go wrong?"

*speechless*

[pitohui]

41. well what else do you people suggest?

global warming is real, it is happening now, most of the plant and animal species will die, and some say that human civilization itself will be gone in a century or two

at some point, when you got nothing left to lose, you don't just sit on your hands, you got nothing left to lose

we can't fuck it up worse than 90 percent of the plant and animal species will be extinct and humanity will be reduced to those notorious "breeder pairs" around the poles!

[mom cat]

42. Radical conservation for starters. Also policy changes to reduce

carbon output drastically.
I have my winter heat at 45 degrees and have given up on air conditioners. If you think that is uncomfortable, try runaway heating or a new ice age.
Check this site to get more info on carbon reduction:
http://sierraclub.org/sierra/diet/

I have finally got my carbon output to 5 lbs a day, the amount the earth can absorb.

[phusion]

43. Gee, what a radical idea!

:)

[mom cat]

85. Yes it is radical. Radical means "the root of". This is getting to the root

of the problem ... the lifestyle choices of 6 billion people. I am only one, but it is only pure logic that unless we adjust our choices to reality, then reality will clobber us. Yes, it will also take collective action, but that does not absolve us of individual responsibility.

[phusion]

86. I was agreeing with you, Mom Cat...

:)

:toast:

[mom cat]

90. Thanks for the correction and for the support.

My kittens deserve to have a planet.

[pitohui]

56. what good will that do? honestly?

if you think you are going to stop 1 billion chinese and 1 billion south asians from moving into the 20th century and buying a car by having your heat at 45 degrees, then i don't know whether to laugh or cry

this is not something for tiny individual actions that might have some tiny impact in a 1000 years, the species such as the 70 mountain frog species reported extinct today in the other thread are gone forever, they won't be waiting around for sweet reason to somehow talk everyone into going around without a/c or heat

people worldwide will be buying automobiles and they will even be heating/cooling their homes and i don't see how we can reasonably stop them

[mom cat]

83. The question is what are You willing to do? There are 6 billion

individuals on this planet. If those of us who know what is going on do not change oue consumption habits, then it truly is hopeless.

[pitohui]

92. i'm not giving up my one and only life first, that's for sure

i'm low income, i have a smaller footprint that most if not all around me

but no i'm not giving up my life to make a gesture when i don't see any political will to do what is needed

to throw away my life for nothing doesn't accomplish anything

i am certainly not going to live at 45 degrees F and i don't think anyone can ask it of me

[mom cat]

129. You do not have too. It is just my solution. I am afraid that if we wait

for the Govt to act, it will be too late.
Actually, 45 is not too bad once you get used to it, but find your own answer.

[Megahurtz]

96. And SO.......

do you really trust someone shooting tons of particles of whatever-the-fuck into our atmosphere?

What the hell are these particles going to be made of?
We have enough toxic shit in the atmosphere as it is.

[drm604]

44. Something like this could at some point be necessary as a last resort,

but I would prefer some sort of orbiting mask or filter that blocks out the necessary amount of light. That way, if it caused unexpected problems it could be removed or adjusted.

A cloud of dust would seem to be irretrievable. There'd be no way to undo it if it turned out that the cure was worse than the disease.

On Edit: I should add that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and that the real answer is of course to prevent the problem in the first place.

[Dr Batsen D Belfry]

117. A cloud of dust would seem to be irretrievable?

A cloud of dust would seem to be irretrievable. There'd be no way to undo it if it turned out that the cure was worse than the disease.

Halliburton/Carlyle Group would simply buy Oreck and Dysson and supersize them. Dust-B-Gone

DBDB

[yellowcanine]

51. Oh it is always possible to "fuck it up worse". We should not jump into

anything like this.

[TankLV]

104. Do. NOTHING.

Your plan is foolish at best - and considering the record of our tinkering with the planet, will SURELY result in our destruction!

That is the most frightening idea I ever heard spewed.

What utter foolishness.

Next you'll be telling us that a space weapons shield is possible and a good idea...

[Bill McBlueState]

140. it's easy to call someone else's idea foolish

Like the poster said, what else do you suggest?

[The Backlash Cometh]

45. Oh...fuck.

The sons of bitches can't even find an alternative energy source, but they're going to blot out the sun. Oh...fuck.

[ulysses]

131. don't you have to love that?

We could put serious money and effort into alternative fuels research, or we could just block the fucking sun for a while.

Advanced species my ass.

[Bill McBlueState]

141. Why do you think it's either/or? n/t

[ulysses]

145. we haven't done the research yet.

Why would I imagine that we'd do both?

[mopinko]

47. swords into plowshares. artificial volcanoes

folks, this is not that crazy. we have lots of climate data on the effect of volcanic eruptions on climate. it is not something out of the blue. it would be modeled on known natural occurrences.
i think it would work, it could be calculated correctly from known data, and could even use something like calcium carbonate powder, which could help reverse the acidity of the oceans that is occurring from the increase in CO2.
we had a couple of discussions about this is energy/environment forum. the science is sound.
and the cost that has been discussed, imho, could be greatly reduced by taking warheads off missiles, and using them for this instead. swords into plowshares. something we will need a lot of.

stop being so cynical. something has to be done before the permafrost goes. conservation and energy innovations will not be enough. this is not sci-fi. this is survival.

[myrna minx]

48. This is bordering on cartoonish super-villainy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Shot_Mr._Burns%3F

[yellowcanine]

50. When will we learn the Law of Unintended Consequences? Yeah this might work but

WHAT ELSE WILL IT FUCK UP? Sorry. Had to say it.

[Bill McBlueState]

142. Well, this is why the headline says

"NASA looks at plan." By "look at," they mean precisely that the consequences of the plan are being considered.

[longship]

52. Astronomers are going to *love* this.

They're gonna be screaming their heads off about this.

[stubtoe]

53. Scary. Sounds too much like an artificial nuclear winter to me.

:scared:

[mcscajun]

54. Oh, yeah. JUST what we omnipotent humans ought to be doing.

:sarcasm: Screwing around with the planet on a massive scale. Haven't we done enough damage on a smaller scale, time and time again, by tinkering to "improve" one thing or "correct" another? Our history of interference is not a good one. We dam rivers and spend fortunes on the resultant flood control that's needed, import predator species of flora and fauna that tip the balance against native species, create new environments that keep formerly migratory species in place (see Canada Geese and office parks); you name it, if humanity can fuck up nature, we do it.

Sure, we're ready to take on The Sun. Sure we are.

OMFG.

[progressoid]

57. Would that be an SPF 40?

[SnowGoose]

58. While I'm not as against the idea as most in this thread...

it is worth noting that the high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are causing warming that has very obvious impacts on the human species by changing coastlines, weather patterns, permafrost equilibrium. So, yes, *maybe* we could help to counter some of that warming by blocking a small portion of the light reaching the planet. *Maybe* we could even do it in a very deliberate, measured way that wouldn't absolutely eff something else up worse.

But here's the rub. The CO2 is being absorbed by the oceans, where it interacts with water molecules to form carbonic acid (the same thing happens in your blood, by the way ~ you may have heard the term "acidosis"). A sunshade does ZILCH to help with this. Hell, slightly cooler temperatures may actually increase the acidification of the oceans (IIRC, gasses are more soluble in cooler water).

The oceans are the absolute foundation of life on this planet. Unless we reduce the levels of CO2 we're putting into the atmosphere, we will eventually come to the point of fundamental disruption of the oceans' ecosystems. We can move inland, we can abandon coastal cities and low lands, change our crops to ones more tolerant of current conditions, develop cures for the tropical diseases that have already begun creeping toward the poles, we can blot out part of the sun's light.

Maybe we could survive all that as a species.

But if kill the oceans?

We're dead.

As an aside, a vast project like that would never be undertaken without first making a major effort to increase our understanding of climate and ecological systems. Even if the system were never deployed (and I doubt it ever will), the preliminary research that would be funded as a part of the proof of concept would be hugely valuable.

Just a couple of points to consider.

[w4rma]

61. Good points. (nt)

[hatrack]

75. The Ph of the entire Pacific Ocean has fallen 0.026 in about a decade

Which is not just incredibly fast but huge in scale.

[AngryAmish]

59. Since the dawn of time man has dreamt of blocking out the sun...

<>

[dbt]

62. Whillikers! Those Chemtrails don't sound so kooky now, do they?

"a machine or missile shoots tonnes of particles into the atmosphere." Sorta like the way those jets have been doing since circa 1999, no? Perhaps they were just a

Pilot Program?

:evilgrin:
dbt
Remember New Orleans

[Megahurtz]

97. I don't understand why ANYONE would think Chemtrails are Kooky.

They are very real.

[LeighAnn]

135. Chemtrail pic I took

This was last month outside my home

That sky was pure blue and cloud-free an hour previous.

[Bill McBlueState]

143. no, they still sound kooky n/t

[jus_the_facts]

157. Weather Modification Research and Technology Transfer Authorization Act of 2005 ...kooky?!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2453232

Weather Modification Research and Technology Transfer Authorization Act of 2005 - Establishes in the Department of Commerce the Weather Modification Advisory and Research Board to promote and fund research and development (R&D), studies, and investigations with respect to: (1) improved forecast and decision-making technologies for weather modification operations, including tailored computer workstations and software and new observation systems with remote sensors; and (2) assessments and evaluations of the efficacy of weather modification, both purposeful (including cloud-seeding operations) and inadvertent (including downwind effects and anthropogenic effects).

This Act shall take effect on October 1, 2005.



.....TRANSFER AUTHORIZATION...it had already been taking place...but they needed to transfer authorization....from whom?!

[MadHound]

63. This is a dumb fucking idea, therefore, sad to say, it will probably be tried

Man, in his finite wisdom concerning the various ecological systems will say hey, let's turn down the thermostat by blocking out the sun:idea:
And in such finally tuned set of systems as the Earth's they don't think there wouldn't be some unforseen consequence? :crazy:

Why not simply start drasticlycutting emissions across the board, and trust that Nature will heal, after all, it isn't like we don't have plenty of evidence of Nature's ability to heal itself:shrug: Oh, yeah, that would take collective will and cost money. Neither of which our leaders want to apply:eyes:

[Coventina]

64. Is NASA headed by Mr. Burns now?

:shrug:

[Jersey Ginny]

65. Interesting idea

I'm clearly in the minority here, but if I am to respect scientific views on evolution and scientific views on global warming, then why should I dismiss this idea out-of-hand? Of course we need to reduce CO2, but even if the US and other industrialized countries do a better job of this, you've still got China and India who are increasing their CO2 levels at rates that are quite alarming. I'm trying to do my part by getting solar panels installed. I fear my efforts and others like me won't be enough. I'm glad that creative ideas are being researched.

[Xithras]

67. Hey, I posted this idea here months ago! NASA owes me royalties!

I like my plan better though. Grab a large asteroid and wrestle it into the L1 LaGrange point. Once there, begin grinding the rock to dust. The expanding dust cloud, situated perfectly between the Earth and the sun, will absorb a small percentage of the solar energy coming our way.

It's a highly controllable scenario too. Planet getting too cold? Stop grinding and allow the solar wind to dissipate the cloud over a month or two. Getting too hot? Step up the grinding and increase solar absorption.

The biggest problem with this idea isn't scientific, it's political. What happens when the oil producing middle eastern nations demand that blockage be increased to lower the temperatures in their deserts, forcing us to choose between them and Norway? What happens when Russia demands that we increase the solar throughput so they can settle Siberia? When a large hurricane slams into the US and kills 50 people, will their lawyers sue the government for not cooling the oceans enough to stop it? When the government of Arizona demands that the government increase rainfall in their state to counteract man-made shortages, will they do so...even if it means freezing Canada solid?

The science of this doesn't scare me, and in a sane and rational world I'd be all for it. In our world, this is simply a pandoras box of problems. Keep the box closed.

[mcg]

68. "Space sunshade might be feasible in global warming emergency"

http://www.physorg.com/news81795874.html

"Angel, a University of Arizona Regents' Professor and one of the world's foremost minds in modern optics, directs the Steward Observatory Mirror Laboratory and the Center for Astronomical Adaptive Optics. He has won top honors for his many extraordinary conceptual ideas that have become practical engineering solutions for astronomy.

For the past year, Angel has been looking at ways to cool the Earth in an emergency. He's been studying the practicality of deploying a space sunshade in a global warming crisis, a crisis where it becomes clear that Earth is unmistakably headed for disastrous climate change within a decade or two.

Angel presented the idea at the National Academy of Sciences in April and won a NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts grant for further research in July. His collaborators on the grant are David Miller of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Nick Woolf of UA's Steward Observatory, and NASA Ames Research Center Director S. Pete Worden.

Angel is now publishing a first detailed, scholarly paper, "Feasibility of cooling the Earth with a cloud of small spacecraft near L1," in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The plan would be to launch a constellation of trillions of small free-flying spacecraft a million miles above Earth into an orbit aligned with the sun, called the L-1 orbit. ... "

Angel does not propose this as a first choice of dealing with the problem.

[NoodleyAppendage]

69. Typical human response. Occham's Razor need not apply to pollution issue.

Oh, I see...it's a far better option to blot out the Sun, than to eventually rid ourselves of carbon-based fuels.

Jesus, we don't deserve to perpetuate as a species.

J

[Odin2005]

71. This is a great idea.

The people whining about "Playing God" are being very narrow minded, humans have been "playing God" since the dawn of time, I'm sick of the "we shouldn't play God" arguments from the luddites.

[superconnected]

72. In otherwords, the global warming thing is a lot worse than they

told us.

[pitohui]

93. superconnected has it right

i can't believe this poster and i are the only two in this thread who can cut to the chase

desperate measures for desperate times, we are getting to the end of the rope here ya'll

[mopinko]

137. i'm with ya

modeled on volcanic eruptions, something we know plenty about. if the permafrost goes, which it is starting to do, we are toast. what's a little dust cloud compared to that? wake up people.

[hedgehog]

74. Bush is determined to bring the Apocalypse upon us

one way or anther!

Seriously, is this from the same group that was proposing to use nuclear explosions to create a sea level canal to replace the Panama canal back in the 60's? Talk about hubris!

[hatrack]

76. Oh, and by the way, what rocket system would put this thing into high Earth orbit?

Hint: if you say "the Space Shuttle", you're wrong.

:eyes:

[eppur_se_muova]

78. Big Technology got us into this mess, Big Technology can get us out!

:eyes: Oooooooohkay .....

What could *possibly* go wrong ?

[Odin2005]

149. Our mess is because of ignorance, greed and shortsightedness, not technology.

You luddites can go fuck yourselves, your whining isn't helping anything. Oh, and if you hate technology so much why are you using a comouter and not roughing it out in the woods? :eyes:

[Chulanowa]

79. Unless we pay them...

ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

[lumberjack_jeff]

82. "nuclear winter" - but on purpose. n/t

[rateyes]

84. I keep hearing that warning on television about

an erection lasting for more than 4 hours! CONSULT YOUR PHYSICIAN!

Who the hell do we call when we all end up as human popsicles?

[GeorgeGist]

87. Ah....

the old sweep it under the carpet technique. What could possibly go wrong?

[stubertmcfly]

88. Isn't this...

...what got Mr. Burns shot?

[chascaz]

91. The ANIMATRIX (available on DVD) explains the consequences...

of such an idiotic idea.

IF we are to "terra-form" the Earth, i think that re-irrigating the desert regions of the planet (that were once lush forests and jungles), using large scale de-salination plants and aquaducts, especially in the desert regions of Africa, along with large scale "fresh air" Factories, much like gigantic Ionic Breeze air cleaners, would be a better way to go. Re-forming and replenishing our wetlands, and all the many other ecologically ruined areas of the planet would also be a great benefit.

Peace - :)

[Bill McBlueState]

144. So the Animatrix is some kind of refereed journal now?

If it's not, why would we consider it an authority on the topic? :rofl:

[Megahurtz]

94. Oh Sure, don't take care of the Fucking Problem

just stick a Band Aid on it.:crazy:

I for one will be really pissed off if they attempt anything like this.:mad:

[Earth_First]

95. In related news: GM to boost SUV production by 210%

News of a new climate control initiative aimed at reducing global warming has created a paradigm shift at GM corporate headquarters. The Google has learned that GM intends to roll out a $513 million dollar advertising campaign in the new year, likely to coincide with the marketing drive that surrounds the NFL Super bowl blitz. The campaign, directed at consumers looking to wards purchasing more fuel efficient foreign-made products. "We were completely left behind in the last paradigm shift towards alternative energy development in the marketplace. It was proven that GM was producing a product that the consumers were no longer intersted in. Our goal is to be well ahead of the climate control initiative by NASA and Stanford in welcoming back the SUV consumer." said research and marketing executive Rich Mofro.

[stepnw1f]

98. What an Overly Simplistic and Moronic Idea

Shooting tonnes of particles of what (we don't know) into our already fucked up atmosphere without knowing it's effects? Yuh... let's experiment on a global scale and just see what happens.

[The2ndWheel]

124. Seems more like an increasingly complex idea

Anything with tonnes of something being shot into the atmosphere on a global scale is not simplistic.

[Neoma]

102. Fucking idiots.

How about making huge liquid oxygen ice cubes instead? :yoiks:

[cassiepriam]

105. Halliburton will get all sun rights, then charge us for sunlight.

Then they move on to oxygen rights.

[soothsayer]

113. I think the Irish used to tax sunlight (number of windows in your

hovel)

[GoddessOfGuinness]

108. Oh yeah! An ice age will save the Amazon!

:eyes:

[aaronbees]

110. Ya know, humans are gonna get their comeuppance

someday, and it's not going to be pretty. That's my first thought on hearing this news. I'd say it's unbelievable, but in this day and age this news is just not.

[BrokenBeyondRepair]

111. meh.. we had a good run

[SKKY]

112. Holy mother of fuck. This is absolutely frightening.

[NuttyFluffers]

115. i live in a fantasyland where the Simpsons and Futurama is prescient...

let me synopsize what this all sounds like to me:

"i got an idea! instead of stopping the process of digging ourselves deeper into the hole, let's keep digging! but we'll also put a big stick o' dynamite on the side of the hole, so it'll blow up and start filling up the hole! that way when it caves in we'll have filled up the hole, got out of the hole, and could keep digging again! it'll work i tell ya!"

"you forget that we're still in the hole and have no escape if something goes wrong..."

i wonder if vegas will start taking bets on self destruction of our species... nuclear, global warming, careless bio-engineering, and now consideration on blotting out the sun. i swear, this past 6 years has put such a strain on my humor meter. to laugh or cry, to laugh or cry, that is the question.

[theHandpuppet]

116. Mandatory population control and free vasectomies would be a lot cheaper

But hey, rather than have homo sapiens face the responsibility and consequences of our own out-of-control growth, why not just block out the sun??

:eyes:

[Coventina]

118. It's every mouthbreather's right to spawn as much as they please

Don't you know that?!?!?!

[The Stranger]

119. Instead of correcting our mistakes, we amplify them exponentially.

Holy mindfuck. Get me the fuck out of here.

[Javaman]

120. Here is my take on this colossally stupid idea...

I wrote the following a few weeks ago on just this topic...

And I will play devils advocate to your devils advocate...
Posted by Javaman in Environment/Energy
Tue Nov 07th 2006, 04:54 PM

Suppose we do deploy this hugely expensive band-aid. And suppose it works wonderfully.

But also suppose that, oh say, 20 years from now, it develops a problem and since the earth's population was living on borrowed time, suddenly has to deal with global warming quite suddenly instead over several years to actually fix the problem?

The global shade is perfectly ridiculous idea. The amount of money that it would take to develop, deploy and maintain such a thing could be used instead to develop solar and other alternative technologies to ween us off fossil fuels. Instead of blocking a source of free energy, we should be doing our best to exploit it.

The solar shade is a band-aid on a broken arm. Once it's up there, do you honestly believe people will suddenly act responsible???? Heck no, proof is in the sales of SUV's. When the price of gas went up, people were screaming for fuel efficient alternative powered cars. Since the price of gas has dropped, no more demand and the SUV's are once again selling at a brisk pace.

People(in general)don't learn. People don't care. People don't want to do the hard work anymore. People just want their plastic fun box to watch. People will die because of their stupidity.

Until death comes knocking on their doors, people will continue to eat twinkies.

[NotGivingUp]

121. well, gee, we haven't been able to figure out how to use

alternative renewable energy to avoid the problem in the first place...and we couldn't possibly tell the polluting corporations to stop polluting, but hey, we can control the sun to stop the global warming. utterly ridiculous. oh, and like this will not affect the balance of any of the other eco-systems, right?

[sofa king]

123. Any terraformers out there?

I suspect that one idea discussed was the placement of a solar shade at the L1 point between Earth and the sun. A similar idea has also been proposed to help cool down Venus as part of a terraforming operation.

Other ideas for terraforming Venus, such as reflective balloons, could be interesting. How 'bout a nice chromed floating ring-city above Antarctica? That might be a small payback for the flying car I was promised but didn't get when the 21st Century came along.

[NickB79]

126. Wouldn't the rocket engines used to do this release a lot of CO2?

Just a thought, but how many payloads would we be talking about here?

[sakabatou]

127. .

[noonwitch]

128. Excellent

Monty Burns (or Matt Groenig) had the idea first!

[pinniped]

136. These space cadets could fire up stationary rockets and push Earth....

into an orbit further from the sun.:think:

However, I realize this is not feasible, seeing how Earth is at the center of the universe. All the planets and the sun would simply follow Earth no matter where it went.:silly:

[XemaSab]

146. Shittiest. Idea. Ever.

n/t

[BoneDaddy]

151. Oh Great

My confidence in the stupidity of our leaders just grew even more.

[heliarc]

152. Wait a second...

I thought that Global warming wasn't a problem.

[MasonJar]

153. If the sea ice can be restored I'm for it; otherwise many creatures

like the polar bear are doomed. Meanwhile Americans can stop using 25% of the world's resources.

[Lasthorseman]

154. Ah, but of course

HAARP
www.govtrack.us the bill is S 517
Lastly go forth and Googleth Thy Keyword Chemtrails. Perhaps global warming is indeed a manufactured "event".

[Gloria]

155. Far too controversial to attempt to restore the planet by stopping the

crapping all over it by BIG OIL.....Oh, god no!