Solution to global warming

Let's run some numbers on this idea . . .
The solar constant is ~1367 Watts per Meter squared
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Constant
Global Warming is now about 3 watts per meter squared,
which is 0.2% of the solar constant.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/simodel/
(Global Warming will quadruple in a century or two.)
The cross sectional area of the Earth is 125,000,000 km^2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Constant
The area of sunshade in orbit needed to remove the current
global warming is, therefore roughly .002 * 125,000,000 km
squared or 300000 km squared.

I will have to believe your figures (as I do not have any others) but
global warming being 3W per meter squared is very high. If this is the
case we have a real problem and I will make sure my next property is on
high ground.

A solar shield 550km by 550km is possible. Imagine spinning disks of
mylar which should need no major structure and would be very light. The
problem would probably be damage by comets etc. We need something which
will puncture but not rip.
A smaller shield would help with reducing the problem if not a cure and
would possibly kick global warming out of itsfeedback loop.

Anyone have a better solution ?

wrote:

Anyone have a better solution ?

I think it should be remembered that there are occaisions when we will
want MORE solar energy. Tambora erupted in 1815 and 1816 was called the
year without a summer. If any miror is built it should be so
constructed that it could move its position and focuss energy on Earth.

- Ian Parker

wrote:

:A solar shield 550km by 550km is possible. Imagine spinning disks of
:mylar which should need no major structure and would be very light. The
roblem would probably be damage by comets etc. We need something which
:will puncture but not rip.
:A smaller shield would help with reducing the problem if not a cure and
:would possibly kick global warming out of itsfeedback loop.
:
:Anyone have a better solution ?

Anyone have a way to keep something this light in place against
fluctuating solar activity? This thing is essentially a big lightsail
with no appreciable load. You can try to put it in a position where
it is balanced with solar flux and the solar wind at any give time,
but variations in solar activity are probably going to keep that from
working with something this light.

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw

In article ,
Fred J. McCall wrote:
Anyone have a way to keep something this light in place against
fluctuating solar activity? This thing is essentially a big lightsail
with no appreciable load. You can try to put it in a position where
it is balanced with solar flux and the solar wind at any give time...

Solar sails don't use the solar wind, which carries orders of magnitude
less momentum than the sunlight. Which is good, because the solar wind is
gusty and erratic, while the sunlight is very stable and constant; in
particular, no, it doesn't vary much with solar activity. You'd need the
ability to trim out slow small changes -- if nothing else, the surface
material of your sail will probably change reflectivity slightly in its
early days -- but there's no sudden variation.

The question of "where to put it" has been studied. It's a bit harder
than it looks -- there are more constraints than you might think -- but it
*is* solvable. (See, e.g., the McInnes paper in the Sept/Oct 2002 JBIS.)
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

My solution to that would be to experiment before hand with a small
prototype with a solar powered plasma engine that can be turned on when
needed. It is not exactly critical that position is held accurately so
we can drift in and out with the solar fluctuations.
To counteract the main solar wind, as I think you already understand we
simply place the shield closer to the sun where all the forces balance
out.
Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

:A solar shield 550km by 550km is possible. Imagine spinning disks of
:mylar which should need no major structure and would be very light. The
roblem would probably be damage by comets etc. We need something which
:will puncture but not rip.
:A smaller shield would help with reducing the problem if not a cure and
:would possibly kick global warming out of itsfeedback loop.
:
:Anyone have a better solution ?

Anyone have a way to keep something this light in place against
fluctuating solar activity? This thing is essentially a big lightsail
with no appreciable load. You can try to put it in a position where
it is balanced with solar flux and the solar wind at any give time,
but variations in solar activity are probably going to keep that from
working with something this light.

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw

wrote:
Let's run some numbers on this idea . . .
The solar constant is ~1367 Watts per Meter squared
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Constant
Global Warming is now about 3 watts per meter squared,
which is 0.2% of the solar constant.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/simodel/
(Global Warming will quadruple in a century or two.)
The cross sectional area of the Earth is 125,000,000 km^2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Constant
The area of sunshade in orbit needed to remove the current
global warming is, therefore roughly .002 * 125,000,000 km
squared or 300000 km squared.

I will have to believe your figures (as I do not have any others) but
global warming being 3W per meter squared is very high. If this is the
case we have a real problem and I will make sure my next property is on
high ground.

A solar shield 550km by 550km is possible. Imagine spinning disks of
mylar which should need no major structure and would be very light. The
problem would probably be damage by comets etc. We need something which
will puncture but not rip.
A smaller shield would help with reducing the problem if not a cure and
would possibly kick global warming out of itsfeedback loop.

Anyone have a better solution ?




Simply use high explosives (HE) to explode aluminum foil strips (CHAFF)
in orbit. Yes, the same chaff that is used to confuse oncoming radar
guided missiles.

How to get rid of it if the Sun starts behaving itself? Put vacuum
cleaners in orbit to collect the chaff. Such cleaners could make
millions of Earth orbits at various altitudes gradually cleaning up the
Sun reflecting chaff.

If global waming continues then the expense of using chaff in orbit
would be fully justified because the expense of losing all the world's
beaches, air conditioning, and building underground homes would be
greater.


tomcat

On 26 Oct 2006 09:56:12 -0700, in a place far, far away, "tomcat"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

A solar shield 550km by 550km is possible. Imagine spinning disks of
mylar which should need no major structure and would be very light. The
problem would probably be damage by comets etc. We need something which
will puncture but not rip.
A smaller shield would help with reducing the problem if not a cure and
would possibly kick global warming out of itsfeedback loop.

Anyone have a better solution ?




Simply use high explosives (HE) to explode aluminum foil strips (CHAFF)
in orbit. Yes, the same chaff that is used to confuse oncoming radar
guided missiles.

How to get rid of it if the Sun starts behaving itself? Put vacuum
cleaners in orbit to collect the chaff. Such cleaners could make
millions of Earth orbits at various altitudes gradually cleaning up the
Sun reflecting chaff.

"Vacuum cleaners"? I suppose, in some literal sense, but it would
describe what they're cleaning, rather than how they are cleaning it.
One more example of "tomcat"'s ignorance of physics and space.

Rand Simberg wrote:
On 26 Oct 2006 09:56:12 -0700, in a place far, far away, "tomcat"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

A solar shield 550km by 550km is possible. Imagine spinning disks of
mylar which should need no major structure and would be very light. The
problem would probably be damage by comets etc. We need something which
will puncture but not rip.
A smaller shield would help with reducing the problem if not a cure and
would possibly kick global warming out of itsfeedback loop.

Anyone have a better solution ?




Simply use high explosives (HE) to explode aluminum foil strips (CHAFF)
in orbit. Yes, the same chaff that is used to confuse oncoming radar
guided missiles.

How to get rid of it if the Sun starts behaving itself? Put vacuum
cleaners in orbit to collect the chaff. Such cleaners could make
millions of Earth orbits at various altitudes gradually cleaning up the
Sun reflecting chaff.

"Vacuum cleaners"? I suppose, in some literal sense, but it would
describe what they're cleaning, rather than how they are cleaning it.
One more example of "tomcat"'s ignorance of physics and space.




"Vacuum cleaners" as in 'cleaning the vacuum' and not in 'using vacuum
to clean'. Outer Space is mostly a 'vacuum'. You knew that didn't you
Rand?


tomcat

On 26 Oct 2006 17:02:22 -0700, in a place far, far away, "tomcat"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

How to get rid of it if the Sun starts behaving itself? Put vacuum
cleaners in orbit to collect the chaff. Such cleaners could make
millions of Earth orbits at various altitudes gradually cleaning up the
Sun reflecting chaff.

"Vacuum cleaners"? I suppose, in some literal sense, but it would
describe what they're cleaning, rather than how they are cleaning it.
One more example of "tomcat"'s ignorance of physics and space.

"Vacuum cleaners" as in 'cleaning the vacuum' and not in 'using vacuum
to clean'. Outer Space is mostly a 'vacuum'. You knew that didn't you
Rand?

Of course I knew that. If I had made such a proposal, I would have
put quotes around the word "vacuum" to indicate to others that I knew
that, so that they would assume (as would be natural) that the
reference is to the "vacuum cleaners" that clean floors on earth, via
vacuum...

But then, on this matter, as others, you're clueless.

tomcat wrote:

"Vacuum cleaners" as in 'cleaning the vacuum' and not in 'using
vacuum to clean'. Outer Space is mostly a 'vacuum'. You knew
that didn't you Rand?

I'm pretty sure Rand does. I have my doubts about you.

Jim Davis