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.
One idea for fighting global warming is to increase the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere, scattering incoming solar energy away from the Earth's surface. But scientists theorize that this solar geoengineering could have a side effect of whitening the sky during the day. New research from Carnegie's Ben Kravitz and Ken Caldeira indicates that blocking 2% of the sun's light would make the sky three-to-five times brighter, as well as whiter. Their work is published June 1st in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.
Using advanced models, Kravitz and Caldeira—along with Douglas MacMartin from the California Institute of Technology—examined changes to sky color and brightness from using sulfate-based aerosols in this way. They found that, depending on the size of the particles, the sky would whiten during the day and sunsets would have afterglows.
Their models predict that the sky would still be blue, but it would be a lighter shade than what most people are used to looking at now. The research team's work shows that skies everywhere could look like those over urban areas in a world with this type of geoengineering taking place. In urban areas, the sky often looks hazy and white.
"I hope that we never get to the point where people feel the need to spray aerosols in the sky to offset rampant global warming," Caldeira said. "This is one study where I am not eager to have our predictions proven right by a global stratospheric aerosol layer in the real world."
Diffuse sky spectra in our simulations of geoengineering with stratospheric aerosols are similar to those of average conditions in urban areas today.
One idea for fighting global warming is to increase the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere, scattering incoming solar energy away from the Earth's surface. But scientists theorize that this solar geoengineering could have a side effect of whitening the sky during the day.
Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by Maxmars
.....due, all too often, to people's merely reading 'lightly' (or, "scanning" them, in passing), then "inferring" what is not present, in the article!
Blue skies would fade to hazy white if geoengineers inject light-scattering aerosols into the upper atmosphere to offset global warming. Critics have already warned that this might happen, but now the effect has been quantified.
Releasing sulphate aerosols high in the atmosphere should in theory reduce global temperatures by reflecting a small percentage of the incoming sunlight away from the Earth. However, the extra particles would also scatter more of the remaining light into the atmosphere. This would reduce by 20 per cent the amount of sunlight that takes a direct route to the ground, and it would increase levels of softer, diffuse scattered light, says Ben Kravitz of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, Califonia.
.....
Important uncertainties remain, including what size aerosols would be used for geoengineering and how their sizes might change over time as particles stick together. But Craig Bohren, a meteorologist and expert in atmospheric scattering at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, who was not involved in the research, says "it's difficult to argue against the claim that increasing the concentration of particles in the atmosphere will change the colour and brightness of the sky".
Originally posted by dplum517
Patents to release aerosols that are over a decade old should be included in the theories of what's really going on.
Are you guys going to sit here and say that not one single field test has been done to see real time and real life results?
To me .... all this article points out is the fact that "chemtrail" deniers who were so adamant a year or two ago that nothing like this could or will exist .... seem to be changing their minds.
Me and others have provided plenty of so called "evidence."
Of course "evidence" is welcomed and encouraged on this board
Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
lol @ you
Your response is pathetic.
Me and others have provided plenty of so called "evidence."
Of course "evidence" is welcomed and encouraged on this board ....
but make no mistake ....
This website is a discussion board for conspiracy theories. Not my problem you can't comprehend that.