It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Controversial geoengineering field test cancelled

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Source:

From what little research I have been able to do, it appears the idea was to mimic a volcanic dispersal of particulate matter at a relatively high altitude. Having noticed after certain recent eruptions, that global temperatures were affected, this science team wanted to try it out for themselves....


THE balloon will not go up. A controversial geoengineering field test has been cancelled after the lead scientist learned of a patent on the technology held by several of his collaborators.

The Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project, run by researchers at three UK universities, is investigating cooling the planet by releasing aerosol particles into the stratosphere. The field test would have tested the feasibility of the delivery system – a hose lofted by a balloon – by pumping out water spray at an altitude of 1 kilometre.


The SPICE leader found that the 'test' they were going to attempt made use of the intellectual property of some engineers who designed the vibration mechanisms to create the spray they intended to disperse. Those engineers happened to be on the SPICE team.... self-serving much? It is what the culture refers to as "conflict of interest."

The patent-holding team members subsequently offered the following response:


At issue was a patent on the technology, filed in 2009 by independent consultant engineer Peter Davidson. Watson only learned of the patent late last year.

Hugh Hunt at the University of Cambridge, who is also named on the patent, says it was not filed to make a profit motive, but to enable the engineers to retain control of their ideas. "We wouldn't want ExxonMobil or Shell to have control," he says.


Imagine the wealth which could be derived from this venture after the team announces it's 'successful' field testing and a new "incubator" born corporation begins to seek revenue for the development?


The Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, which is funding the project, told New Scientist that no result from the SPICE project will be patented: "The SPICE team is committed to putting all the results arising from the SPICE project into the public domain, without delay and according to normal academic practice."


So... profit from climate change isn't their objective... as far as they know... right? Right.


The source article rather plainly calls this an "embarrassment" for the SPICE team... I can't imagine why.




edit on 23-5-2012 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 23 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


You do realize you have essentially challenged the chem-trail community to come debase your thread, right?

Side note, chem-trail is now showing up as an option for autocorrect, lol, i'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

anyways, this is the type of tech I'd expect them to be using for geoengineering, still in it's infancy. Yet, according to those who will be here shortly, every plane on earth is somehow spraying particulate (from the engines apparently?) in a similar manner and has been for decades.

funny how the patent system works sometimes though.



So... profit from climate change isn't their objective... as far as they know... right? Right.


Not everyone is driven by profit, and the fact that they patented it, or tried to, to keep it from falling into Big Oils hands, shows me that at least some of the people involved are actually scientists.

But like anything, it will be bought up by "them".

Think about this, studies suggest that burning fossil fuels creates a greenhouse effect raising temperatures. So you've got lets say Shell oil, a huge oil company that is, arguably, polluting the crap out of earth and releasing untold amounts of emissions into the atmosphere.

Then they develop technology to reduce the immediate effects.

It doesn't cure pollution, it doesn't help us move past fossil fuels.

It's a security blanket.

It's the same as when you "recycle" your cans and bottles. Do you watch where they go when you leave that bin out by the curb? Because most of that gets tossed into the same garbage truck as your unsorted trash. But you feel better about it and think less of it.

Even the stuff that does get recycled, that's hardly a clean process. fossil fuels are burned to recycle the material, and toxic chemical byproducts are left behind. Just ask India how that's working for them.

I appreciate scientists looking at ways to reduce our current problems, but they are only addressing symptoms, not the causes.
edit on 23-5-2012 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 

Nice to see this get some more attention again Maxmars.


I can't find any details much but one problem (unrelated to patents) I can foresee is water. If they can use seawater then it won't be a problem but if they need large amounts of H2O then it will be a major hurdle. The UK suffers with a drought yearly and hose-pipe bans seem to be the norm. The water network in the UK appears to be unmaintained and leaky.

I think spraying large amounts of seawater vapour into the atmosphere may cause more problems (plant life) than it may address but I am far from being a biologist or geographically educated person.

They won't be able to justify wasting large amounts of drinking water on this when the public is being told to conserve water every year.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Maxmars
 


I can't find any details much but one problem (unrelated to patents) I can foresee is water. If they can use seawater then it won't be a problem but if they need large amounts of H2O then it will be a major hurdle. The UK suffers with a drought yearly and hose-pipe bans seem to be the norm. The water network in the UK appears to be unmaintained and leaky.

I think spraying large amounts of seawater vapour into the atmosphere may cause more problems (plant life) than it may address but I am far from being a biologist or geographically educated person.

They won't be able to justify wasting large amounts of drinking water on this when the public is being told to conserve water every year.


The water spraying is only for the the initial test, as it would have pretty much zero effect on the climate (being a drop in the ocean, with the gigatons of water already in the atmosphere). The proposed project would spray something else, like sulfur dioxide. They are basically trying to mimic what nature does with volcanoes.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 

Sorry, I meant after the initial testing, I should have been clearer. After the test is successful, they will want to roll this out on a global scale I guess. If so, how will deserts and other landmasses react to having artificially high levels of relative humidity? I realise that nature does this too, but a global spraying system would have an impact somewhere methinks.

As for sulphur dioxide, that causes acid rain, also not the best choice of materials to use imho.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 


After the initial testing, they will not use water.

They are not just rushing into this ignoring environment effects. That's a huge part of all the tests they plan to do.

Remember they are simulating a natural process (volcanoes), just in a controlled manner. They are not doing something that has never happened before on Earth. Volcanoes happen quite frequently. Mt Pinatubo being a good example of something with a net cooling effect from all the sulfur it injected into the atmosphere.

en.wikipedia.org...

The powerful eruption of such an enormous volume of lava and ash injected significant quantities of aerosols and dust into the stratosphere. Sulfur dioxide oxidized in the atmosphere to produce a haze of sulfuric acid droplets, which gradually spread throughout the stratosphere over the year following the eruption. The injection of aerosols into the stratosphere is thought to have been the largest since the eruption of Krakatoa in 1883, with a total mass of SO2 of about 17,000,000 t (19,000,000 short tons) being injected—the largest volume ever recorded by modern instruments (see chart and figure).
This very large stratospheric injection resulted in a reduction in the normal amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface by roughly 10% (see figure). This led to a decrease in northern hemisphere average temperatures of 0.5–0.6 °C (0.9–1.1 °F) and a global fall of about 0.4 °C (0.7 °F).[7][24] At the same time, the temperature in the stratosphere rose to several degrees higher than normal, due to absorption of radiation by the aerosol. The stratospheric cloud from the eruption persisted in the atmosphere for three years after the eruption.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 

Sorry but I just don't buy "manual climate intervention program" by scientists. Yes volcanoes happen but knowing humans penchant for errors, we would screw it up.
I appreciate the info posting by you but am familiar with the subject a little.

edit on 23/5/12 by LightSpeedDriver because: Typo



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
Would this be the same canceled test mentioned here??

Perhaps it is different/worthy of attention because it isn't me starting the thread??



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Would this be the same canceled test mentioned here??

Perhaps it is different/worthy of attention because it isn't me starting the thread??


Sorry my friend... I didn't search using any of your title words.... so I missed it...

No offense intended.




top topics



 
3

log in

join