"Sunshade" to fight climate change costed at $5 bln a year, page 1

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times

Topic started on 5-9-2012 @ 02:15 PM by ModernAcademia

"Sunshade" to fight climate change costed at $5 bln a year

in.reuters.com

Planes or airships could carry sun-dimming materials high into the atmosphere for an affordable price tag of below $5 billion a year as a way to slow climate change, a study indicated on Friday.

The strategy, called "solar radiation management", broadly imitates a volcanic eruption

The authors did not examine whether such "geo-engineering" of the planet was a good idea. Other studies show it might have unwanted side effects, such as changing rainfall patterns

(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 9/5/2012 by tothetenthpower because: --Mod Edit--Please use Exact Title for BAN submissions

edit on 9/5/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 02:15 PM by ModernAcademia

Extra Extra Read All About It!!!

MSN is starting pro chemtrail articles?
Now come on and tell me chemtrails don't exists, it's just contrails.

Chemtrails is the vaccine for the earth.
A solution with little or no testing and advocates not concerned with Quality Assurance.

I suspect that though they say it's inexpensive it will end up being a lucrative market.

Watch Obama appoint an Atmosphere Czar next year or something.

Now they are defining geo-engineering as:

"The deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system, in order to moderate global warming." In other words, hack the planet.

spectrum.ieee.org...

But the cost is interesting where they call it inexpensive.
I wouldn't necessarily call it inexpensive.

putting one million metric tons of aerosols between 20 and 30 km into the air would require a mere $1 to $3 billion per year.

spectrum.ieee.org...

There's going to be ALOT of money in volcanic chemtrails soon.

Look out for new markets and chemtrail lobbyists.

in.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 02:24 PM by phroziac

Im fairly sure theyre already doing this, theyre just going to disclose it now and act like theyre just now starting to do this.

Why the hell would anyone think its a good idea? Theres more to it. Is biden the ceo of the company doing it? Next thing you know we will be seeing big jumbo jets landing with "HALLIBURTON" painted on the side.

or is it nanotechnology theyre dumping on us? maybe a screen to project bluebeam onto?

As far as the cost, it would cost me 1000 dollars an hour to rent a learjet according to an ad i keep seeing on ats. Ever seen a learjet in person? pretty much just a flying limousine. And whats it cost to hire pilots that wont blow the whistle?

edit on 5-9-2012 by phroziac because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 02:25 PM by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by phroziac
or is it nanotechnology theyre dumping on us? maybe a screen to project bluebeam onto?

Both
bluebeam coming soon and nanotechnology will be ingested

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 02:28 PM by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by phroziac
Im fairly sure theyre already doing this

I'm 100% certain they are not. Not least because the effects would be apparent (to those who know what to look for).

But I'm quite pleased to see that the authors of this study do not suggest it's a good idea.

The authors caution that reducing incident sunlight does nothing at all to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, nor the resulting increase in the acid content of the oceans. They note that other research has shown that the effects of solar radiation management are not uniform, and would cause different temperature and precipitation changes in different countries.

~ ~ ~

The researchers make it clear that they have not sought to address the science of aerosols in the stratosphere, nor issues of risk, effectiveness or governance that will add to the costs of solar radiation management geoengineering.

www.sciencedaily.com...

And that's even without the inevitable acid rain it'd cause

edit on 5-9-2012 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 02:31 PM by phroziac

Originally posted by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by phroziac
Im fairly sure theyre already doing this

I'm 100% certain they are not. Not least because the effects would be apparent (to those who know what to look for).

But I'm quite pleased to see that the authors of this study specifically say it's not a good idea. And that's even without the inevitable acid rain it'd cause.

Wouldnt someone notice the effects of dumping corexit in the gulf of mexico? Or the 80 nuclear reactor meltdowns in the mojave desert?

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 03:03 PM by senselessness

The chemtrail conspiracy is a hoax.

However, the idea of spraying substances into the air via aircraft to block the sun has been discussed many times (and proponents of the chemtrail conspiracy erroneously use that to convince themselves the conspiracy is true) as being one of many possible way to combat global warming. The general belief of most is that the idea is not feasible, and would cost way too much money for too little effect.

Bill Gates funded a project that might be more effective:

blogs.discovermagazine.com...

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 03:24 PM by tsurfer2000h

reply to post by phroziac

Im fairly sure theyre already doing this, theyre just going to disclose it now and act like theyre just now starting to do this.

I am pretty sure they aren't.

To understand different components of the Earth’s systems, Schmidt agrees that a few experiments are necessary. “I’m not generally against small-scale field experiments if they help us understand processes in nature,” says Schmidt. “But they should obviously be benign, and we should be very careful.” However, small-scale field tests are also limited, Schmidt believes, with climate simulations possibly being the only way to fully grasp the long-term and large-scale climate effects of geoengineering.

www.wired.com...

Simulations and models are far from actually doing it.

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 03:28 PM by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by senselessness
The chemtrail conspiracy is a hoax

I don't know if it's a hoax or not but I can tell you one thing
When I was a kid I loved looking at contrails, as do most kids. You can almost say kids studied them.

And when I was a kid contrails did NOT last anywhere near as long as thicker ones last today.
I see tic tac toes in the sky sometimes, there were never any tic tac toes in the sky when I was a kid

explain that!
You may be correct, I absolutely have not done my research into chemtrails, but please refute me.

Thankx

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 03:54 PM by tsurfer2000h

reply to post by ModernAcademia

And when I was a kid contrails did NOT last anywhere near as long as thicker ones last today. I see tic tac toes in the sky sometimes, there were never any tic tac toes in the sky when I was a kid

explain that!

Since I don't know your age and no need to actually know it,but the explanation is fairly simple.

First when you were a kid there was less air traffic as compared to today.

As for the tic tac toe pattern, Planes do travel N/S and E/W.

Can you see where a tic tac toe pattern can form from the above pic?

Lastly, again not knowing your age I will again say there was less air traffic when you were a kid.

See it is not hard to explain.

And a little more on the grid patterns or as you call it tic tac toe pattern...

Claim: Grid patterns of contrails in the sky are evidence of a systematic spraying operation.

Fact: The National Airspace System of the United States is orientated in an east-west and
north-south grid with aircraft flying at designated 2000 foot increments of elevation. Contrails
formed by aircraft may appear to form a grid as the winds disperse the contrails. More contrails
are seen in recent years due to the growth in the civil aviation market. The FAA is responsible
for the NAS and Air Force aircraft operate under the same rules and procedures as civilian
aircraft when using the NAS.

www.af.mil...

edit on 5-9-2012 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 04:18 PM by ModernAcademia

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

You haven't explained it at all though, so you can't say it's not hard to explain

I said a contrail left by ONE PLANE did not last nearly as long as one contrail left by today's planes.
I am talking about one contrail trail left by ONE plane.

And tic tac toes I am talking about maybe 2-4 planes leaving cross contrails, just 2-4 planes.
There was always 2-4 planes in the past as there is today
I am seeing the same frequency in planes as I saw while a kid
i'm in my mid 30s.

And the only way contrails could create tic tac toes is 2-4 planes left contrails that lasted wayyy too longgg

think about it before you reply

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 04:59 PM by Unity_99

I love global warming and the earth has had many cycles of this. These guys are NUTS and they can keep their poisons away or I recommend action: 1. law suits and 2. if that doesnt work and the judges are sell outs, espionage. PERIOD. They don't get to freaking poison us all and so, point 1, and then point 2 if necessary. Self protection is a right.

edit on 5-9-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 05:00 PM by tsurfer2000h

reply to post by ModernAcademia

You haven't explained it at all though, so you can't say it's not hard to explain

Well I tried to dumb it down and actually make it easier to understand why you see more than when you were a kid, but maybe this will help.... (and no I am not calling you dumb)

YouTube Link

Or you can always try here...

contrailscience.com...

And tic tac toes I am talking about maybe 2-4 planes leaving cross contrails, just 2-4 planes.

I am pretty sure the info I posted in a prior post explained the reason why you see a tic tac toe pattern, but I can re post it if you need to read it again.

And the only way contrails could create tic tac toes is 2-4 planes left contrails that lasted wayyy too longgg

Why does it have to be only 2-4 planes and not more than that?

As for contrails lasting way to long,how long is to long?

think about it before you reply

That is some sound advice, try it because it does work...

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 05:03 PM by tsurfer2000h

reply to post by Unity_99

These guys are NUTS and they can keep their poisons away or I recommend action

Can you elaborate more on these poisons they are using?

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 05:30 PM by EarthCitizen07

So is the sun getting bigger and hotter and thus we need to spray chemicals in the atmosphere for protection OR are rogue governments trying to deliberately poison us?

I heard our solar system is entering a rough patch of the milky way galaxy and this is what is causing the sun to swell, cause solar flares, etc. Some people are predicting electro-magnetic anomalies this winters which could cause our electric grid to go down indefinitely.

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 07:54 PM by sputniksteve

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
So is the sun getting bigger and hotter and thus we need to spray chemicals in the atmosphere for protection OR are rogue governments trying to deliberately poison us?

I heard our solar system is entering a rough patch of the milky way galaxy and this is what is causing the sun to swell, cause solar flares, etc. Some people are predicting electro-magnetic anomalies this winters which could cause our electric grid to go down indefinitely.

Seems most likely due to a host of natural and human causes. Seems most fun to assume government is trying to kill us. I personally dont think they would be that coy.

reply posted on 5-9-2012 @ 08:18 PM by luxordelphi

reply to post by ModernAcademia

The geoengineering cavalier monkhood feels that this is ok:

"Sunshade" to fight climate change costed at $5 bln a year

Transporting a million tonnes of particles to at least 18 km (11 miles) above the Earth every year to form a sunshade is "both feasible and affordable", U.S. scientists concluded in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

A million tons a year. Into the stratosphere. No consideration for the already escalating volcanic activity. No consideration for eventual fallout. No consideration for the gigantic holes in current atmospheric understanding. No consideration for celestial cycles and the fact that the earth is a living planet, not dead, like the moon, with interactions that are not only not understood but not known.

Location (latitude) of release also matters. Stratospheric injections at the equator will affect the globe but will likely not fall out on the equator. Recent anomalous sulphur amounts in the atmosphere point to a work in progress and not the under consideration status currently being touted.

Volcanic ash unlikely to cool planet

A lot of people are not thrilled.

Concerned Scientists Vs. 'Superfreakonomics' Author

reply posted on 6-9-2012 @ 08:59 AM by ModernAcademia

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

You didn't answer any of my questions

reply posted on 6-9-2012 @ 11:51 AM by Raist

reply to post by Unity_99

I was pretty much trying to relay that message in this thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Earth has had many global warming's and global cooling's. It seems that mass extinctions go along with those. We cannot prevent the inevitable; we cannot stop nature from doing what it wants to do.

If the Earth wants us gone or most other species gone then we are doomed. Never fear though the Earth will spring back and keep doing its thing. It may just be looking for a change in things.

Raist

reply posted on 6-9-2012 @ 12:14 PM by AndyMayhew