It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The ability of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to create a global dimming effect has made them a possible candidate for use in geoengineering projects to limit the effect and impact of climate change due to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Delivery of precursor sulfide gases such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or sulfur dioxide (SO2) by artillery, aircraft and balloons has been proposed.
Tom Wigley calculated the impact of injecting sulfate particles, or aerosols, every one to four years into the stratosphere in amounts equal to those lofted by the volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, but did not address the many technical and political challenges involved in potential geoengineering efforts. If found to be economically, environmentally and technologically viable, such injections could provide a "grace period" of up to 20 years before major cutbacks in greenhouse gas emissions would be required, he concludes.
Direct delivery of precursors is proposed by Paul Crutzen. This would typically be achieved using sulfide gases such as dimethyl sulfide, sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbonyl sulfide, or hydrogen sulfide (H2S). These compounds would be delivered using artillery, aircraft (such as the high-flying F15C) or balloons, and result in the formation of compounds with the sulfate anion SO42-.
According to estimates by the Council on Foreign Relations, "one kilogram of well placed sulfur in the stratosphere would roughly offset the warming effect of several hundred thousand kilograms of carbon dioxide."
Possible side effects
Geoengineering in general is a controversial technique, and carries problems and risks, such as weaponisation. However, certain problems are specific to, or more pronounced with this particular technique.
Drought, particularly monsoon failure in Asia and Africa is a major risk.
Ozone depletion is a potential side effect of sulfur aerosols; and these concerns have been supported by modelling.
Tarnishing of the sky: Aerosols will noticeably affect the appearance of the sky, resulting in a potential "whitening" effect, and altered sunsets.
Tropopause warming and the humidification of the stratosphere.
Effect on clouds: Cloud formation may be affected, notably cirrus clouds and polar stratospheric clouds.
Effect on ecosystems: The diffusion of sunlight may affect plant growth.
Effect on solar energy: Incident sunlight will be lower, which may affect solar power systems both directly and disproportionately, especially in the case that such systems rely on direct radiation.
Deposition effects: Although predicted to be insignificant, there is nevertheless a risk of direct environmental damage from falling particles.
Uneven effects: Aerosols are reflective, making them more effective during the day. Greenhouse gases block outbound radiation at all times of day.
Further, the delivery methods may cause significant problems, notably climate change and possible ozone depletion in the case of aircraft, and litter in the case of untethered balloons.
Originally posted by stardust1955
I am including something that happened yesterday, here in Oregon. They sprayed so bad here that we had a chembow. A giant rainbow ring around the sun
No you did not. You saw a halo. There are many types for many reasons, but they are all known to exist and have existed since there was a sky. Here's a link that covers all the possible arcs you saw; there is also an app to download and create your own halo, so you can reconstruct what you saw and learn why you saw it. Atmospheric Optics I have it set to open to the halo page; the site explain everything you see in the sky and why. It should be required study for everyone making similar claims. If you saw colors in the clouds, those have been described and explained, too. Irridescence in Clouds
we had a chembow
Yes, it has been described as a way to do geoengineering. But it is only one small part of a much bigger program, and one of the things that is considered to be the most problematic. Most of the geoengineering research I've done considers it to be the last thing to try after other options have failed. It's really too bad that the "chemtrail" community has decided to throw the word "geoengineering" into the mixed completely interchangeably with "chemtrails". That is wrong. The use of planes, which if you notice would be flying in the stratosphere which is higher than planes fly now, is not part of the plans outside of that one small part. Even the cloudseeding proposed does not use planes, it uses boats.
"Statospheric sulfate aerosols"
reply to post by stardust1955
I know exactly who is going to come and jump all over this. It is time for "THEM" to wake up or stop getting paid to debunk intelligent humans that know what we are talking about!!
STRONTIUM BARIUM NIOBATE absorbs radiation but it can also be used to project 3-D hologram images in the sky.
Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by stardust1955
I'm not the one saying water in the form of ice miles away is making you have a headache.
I am not paid, nor any kind of agent. Saying I am is a lie. That makes you a liar.
I have studied for years and have not found anything that could not be debunked by understanding the science involved. Obviously you have researched rumor, innuendo, and nonsense instead of facts and science. When you figure out how to make something a few microns across fall from 35K+ feet within a matter of minutes, get back to me.
Until then, I'll stick with knowing gravity and wind cannot be controlled.
I researched to know what I saw, you researched "chemtrails" and believe what you were told.
Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by chrismicha77
Why do you think global warming is a hoax?
Do you not believe the numbers?