Is that gonna work? What do ya think? Any idea?
Inject Sulfur into Air to Battle Global Warming
:roll:
boothee
Inject Sulfur into Air to Battle Global Warming
Inject Sulfur into Air to Battle Global Warming
1150mm, 254mm, Newtonion Reflector on EQ5 Mount with dual axis DK3 drive, QHY5 Camera, Canon 300D + Kit Lens, Yangon, Myanmar.
-
weixing
- Super Moderator
- Posts: 4708
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:22 am
- Favourite scope: Vixen R200SS & Celestron 6" F5 Achro Refractor
- Location: (Tampines) Earth of Solar System in Orion Arm of Milky Way Galaxy in Local Group Galaxies Cluster
Hi,
Hmm... thinking of changing the global weather when they can't even predict the local weather accurately...
May be earth will become Venus one day if they inject sulfur into the atmosphere, but at the same time failed to control the carbon dioxide emission...
Anyway, I think those scientists who suggested doing this should wake up his mind and solve the problem at it's root and stop thinking about doing things in the easy way. Who's know what'll happen... they may solve some problem temporary, but may also create some even bigger problems... What they think will work doesn't mean it'll work!!! Nature is just too complicated to predict using our current limited knowledge and technology...
Have a nice day.
Hmm... thinking of changing the global weather when they can't even predict the local weather accurately...
May be earth will become Venus one day if they inject sulfur into the atmosphere, but at the same time failed to control the carbon dioxide emission...
Anyway, I think those scientists who suggested doing this should wake up his mind and solve the problem at it's root and stop thinking about doing things in the easy way. Who's know what'll happen... they may solve some problem temporary, but may also create some even bigger problems... What they think will work doesn't mean it'll work!!! Nature is just too complicated to predict using our current limited knowledge and technology...
Have a nice day.
Yang Weixing
"The universe is composed mainly of hydrogen and ignorance."
"The universe is composed mainly of hydrogen and ignorance." 
come on, to me this is just another day dreaming. 
If you think again, he is trying to lower temperature by reducing sunlight. After a few years, the temperature will rise again due to same old green house effect but we got lesser sunlight, so do we need to top-up the sulphur??
"Crutzen suggests carrying sulfur into the atmosphere via balloons and using artillery guns to release it,"
ask yourself how big and how many ballons you need to carry that enough sulphur above 18km to make a different?
"Using artillery guns to release it"
track and shoot moving ballons 18km high, possible?? worth trying?
and how to make sure sulphur will not fall back to lower layer of atmosphere??
like what weixing said, this problem have to be solved from root and no easy way out. Think about the cost to clean up if the idea fail? Worse, is it possible to clean up?
If you think again, he is trying to lower temperature by reducing sunlight. After a few years, the temperature will rise again due to same old green house effect but we got lesser sunlight, so do we need to top-up the sulphur??
"Crutzen suggests carrying sulfur into the atmosphere via balloons and using artillery guns to release it,"
ask yourself how big and how many ballons you need to carry that enough sulphur above 18km to make a different?
"Using artillery guns to release it"
track and shoot moving ballons 18km high, possible?? worth trying?
and how to make sure sulphur will not fall back to lower layer of atmosphere??
like what weixing said, this problem have to be solved from root and no easy way out. Think about the cost to clean up if the idea fail? Worse, is it possible to clean up?
:?
If only it was really all about injecting sulphur particles into the Stratosphere to counter global warming, and by that I do mean the Elemental Sulphur. Although elemental sulphur is not toxic, many simple sulphur derivates are, such as sulphur dioxide (SO2) and hydrogen sulfide.
This is really the tip of the iceberg. If it's something as simple as just shooting non-toxic particles into the atmosphere to reflect more sunlight back to space and offset greenhouse gas warming, I bet any other elements would do just as fine. Indium is one good example, as it is non-toxic, relatively unreactive and has a longer half-life as compared to Sulphur, thereby making it a more stable element.
In this case, Sulphur has been singled out. And I just have that gut feeling that there is more than meets the eye. As a Nobel laureate, a scientist of his calibre wouldn't just pick out Sulphur for no rhyme or reason. But wait, here's the catch: Did Paul Crutzen mention anything about using 'Elemental Sulphur' in the first place? I don't think so.
Crutzen’s brief explanation on his suggested strategy of deliberately shooting sulphur into the atmosphere using balloons as a form of medium, where largely based on the analogy of the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, leads me to believe that the scientist is one of those who have been influenced by Jim Phelps' Chemtrails "Generation 2" ideas. Chemtrails “Generation 2” involves making clouds through jet planes using the idea of a volcanic detonation effect as from the Krakatoa's explosion of around 540 AD, and thereby regulating Earth's temperature as a consequence.
If indeed Crutzen’s approach of global cooling is influenced by Phelps, he would have used DMS, or Dimethylsulphide (CH3SCH3), which is a sulphur compound similar to that found abundantly in sulphur-based volcanic systems.
There’s a reason why DMS should even be considered in the first place, given its sulphurous nature. DMS is involved in cloud formation due largely to its volatility and its insolubility in water. As DMS forms DMSO due to –OH oxidation, then DMSO is now able to form clouds since it is a very hygroscopic gas. In fact, it also forms part of a larger cycle known as 'The Sulphur Cycle' and plays a crucial role in Earth’s temperature regulation.
But the process doesn’t just end there. Should DMS go through a chemical change in the atmosphere, it will result in sulphur dioxide (SO2) production that will later become dissolved in the water droplets to form weak sulphuric acid. Such sulphuric clouds as observed from space appear brighter than natural clouds, thus indicating that these clouds are reflecting more solar radiation than natural clouds do. Known as cloud brightening, this reduces the amount of solar energy entering Earth, and thereby contributing to a cooling of the planet. When at significant levels, SO2 can also counter the greenhouse gas (CO2) which is a primary factor behind global warming, thus producing the opposite effect of global cooling.
Then there is the bigger headache. While SO2 does help in bringing down Earth’s temperature, it also forms sulphuric acid where during precipitation, brings destruction to both flora and fauna as a component of acid rain. Other derivatives of SO2 will also result in more toxic gases such as sulphur trioxide (SO3).
If elemental sulphur is to be used instead, it may pose another problem although it may be non-toxic. Sulphur is insoluble in water, and exploiting it in its pure form may be futile, as most will eventually get washed into oceans and lay buried deep in oceanic sediments during precipitation. Planktons then utilize the sulphur, where it is converted back to the DMS form, only to result in more SO2 later on. By then, we may be trapped in a more vicious cycle of excessive SO2 production.
OK, so maybe it’s wiser instead to shoot these sulphur particles higher up in the atmosphere to reduce its content during a rainfall? While the lowest atmospheric layer, or Troposphere (“Region of Mixing”), is where Earth’s weather takes place and involves a large number of chemical reactions, there is very little air movement between the Troposphere and the Stratosphere. This is due to a boundary between the two layers called the Tropopause. 99% of atmospheric water vapour is also found in the Troposphere, which means that there is very little water existing in the upper layers, like Stratosphere. And therefore, this means that stratospheric clouds form only if it is so cold that the tiny amount of water present can condense to form ice crystals. Also, this means that sulphur particles, when they enter the Stratosphere, will remain there for a long time- about 2 years.
At such high altitudes, one type of cloud worth targeting is the Polar Stratospheric Clouds (PSCs). In particular, a specific PSC type known as Type Ib PSC might just be the ideal choice, as Type Ib cloud droplets additionally contain sulphuric acid and are present in the form of supercooled ternary solution. DMS could therefore be used to ‘seed’ these clouds to promote cloud formation which will reflect solar radiation later on. The fact that the smaller containing particulate Type Ib PSCs will not sediment out of the stratosphere makes the sulphur ballooning approach even more appealing.
If Crutzen’s approach is carried out under tightly-controlled conditions with minute amounts of sulphur aimed directly only at expanding the mass of PSCs, then I am for his strategy. Otherwise, I do not see any advantage in ‘bringing out Fat Man when all that is needed is just a grenade’.
While Crutzen’s sulphur volume usage is still unclear at the moment, safer alternatives like the use of Indium, or even more environmentally-friendly cloud seeding agents like carbon black, could be used instead in the battle against Global warming. And of course, cutting down on burning fossil fuels and other conventional forms of pollutants should not be ruled out either.
Cheers,
- ALPiNe
.- .-.. .--. .. -. .
If only it was really all about injecting sulphur particles into the Stratosphere to counter global warming, and by that I do mean the Elemental Sulphur. Although elemental sulphur is not toxic, many simple sulphur derivates are, such as sulphur dioxide (SO2) and hydrogen sulfide.
This is really the tip of the iceberg. If it's something as simple as just shooting non-toxic particles into the atmosphere to reflect more sunlight back to space and offset greenhouse gas warming, I bet any other elements would do just as fine. Indium is one good example, as it is non-toxic, relatively unreactive and has a longer half-life as compared to Sulphur, thereby making it a more stable element.
In this case, Sulphur has been singled out. And I just have that gut feeling that there is more than meets the eye. As a Nobel laureate, a scientist of his calibre wouldn't just pick out Sulphur for no rhyme or reason. But wait, here's the catch: Did Paul Crutzen mention anything about using 'Elemental Sulphur' in the first place? I don't think so.
Crutzen’s brief explanation on his suggested strategy of deliberately shooting sulphur into the atmosphere using balloons as a form of medium, where largely based on the analogy of the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, leads me to believe that the scientist is one of those who have been influenced by Jim Phelps' Chemtrails "Generation 2" ideas. Chemtrails “Generation 2” involves making clouds through jet planes using the idea of a volcanic detonation effect as from the Krakatoa's explosion of around 540 AD, and thereby regulating Earth's temperature as a consequence.
If indeed Crutzen’s approach of global cooling is influenced by Phelps, he would have used DMS, or Dimethylsulphide (CH3SCH3), which is a sulphur compound similar to that found abundantly in sulphur-based volcanic systems.
There’s a reason why DMS should even be considered in the first place, given its sulphurous nature. DMS is involved in cloud formation due largely to its volatility and its insolubility in water. As DMS forms DMSO due to –OH oxidation, then DMSO is now able to form clouds since it is a very hygroscopic gas. In fact, it also forms part of a larger cycle known as 'The Sulphur Cycle' and plays a crucial role in Earth’s temperature regulation.
But the process doesn’t just end there. Should DMS go through a chemical change in the atmosphere, it will result in sulphur dioxide (SO2) production that will later become dissolved in the water droplets to form weak sulphuric acid. Such sulphuric clouds as observed from space appear brighter than natural clouds, thus indicating that these clouds are reflecting more solar radiation than natural clouds do. Known as cloud brightening, this reduces the amount of solar energy entering Earth, and thereby contributing to a cooling of the planet. When at significant levels, SO2 can also counter the greenhouse gas (CO2) which is a primary factor behind global warming, thus producing the opposite effect of global cooling.
Then there is the bigger headache. While SO2 does help in bringing down Earth’s temperature, it also forms sulphuric acid where during precipitation, brings destruction to both flora and fauna as a component of acid rain. Other derivatives of SO2 will also result in more toxic gases such as sulphur trioxide (SO3).
If elemental sulphur is to be used instead, it may pose another problem although it may be non-toxic. Sulphur is insoluble in water, and exploiting it in its pure form may be futile, as most will eventually get washed into oceans and lay buried deep in oceanic sediments during precipitation. Planktons then utilize the sulphur, where it is converted back to the DMS form, only to result in more SO2 later on. By then, we may be trapped in a more vicious cycle of excessive SO2 production.
OK, so maybe it’s wiser instead to shoot these sulphur particles higher up in the atmosphere to reduce its content during a rainfall? While the lowest atmospheric layer, or Troposphere (“Region of Mixing”), is where Earth’s weather takes place and involves a large number of chemical reactions, there is very little air movement between the Troposphere and the Stratosphere. This is due to a boundary between the two layers called the Tropopause. 99% of atmospheric water vapour is also found in the Troposphere, which means that there is very little water existing in the upper layers, like Stratosphere. And therefore, this means that stratospheric clouds form only if it is so cold that the tiny amount of water present can condense to form ice crystals. Also, this means that sulphur particles, when they enter the Stratosphere, will remain there for a long time- about 2 years.
At such high altitudes, one type of cloud worth targeting is the Polar Stratospheric Clouds (PSCs). In particular, a specific PSC type known as Type Ib PSC might just be the ideal choice, as Type Ib cloud droplets additionally contain sulphuric acid and are present in the form of supercooled ternary solution. DMS could therefore be used to ‘seed’ these clouds to promote cloud formation which will reflect solar radiation later on. The fact that the smaller containing particulate Type Ib PSCs will not sediment out of the stratosphere makes the sulphur ballooning approach even more appealing.
If Crutzen’s approach is carried out under tightly-controlled conditions with minute amounts of sulphur aimed directly only at expanding the mass of PSCs, then I am for his strategy. Otherwise, I do not see any advantage in ‘bringing out Fat Man when all that is needed is just a grenade’.
While Crutzen’s sulphur volume usage is still unclear at the moment, safer alternatives like the use of Indium, or even more environmentally-friendly cloud seeding agents like carbon black, could be used instead in the battle against Global warming. And of course, cutting down on burning fossil fuels and other conventional forms of pollutants should not be ruled out either.
Cheers,
- ALPiNe
.- .-.. .--. .. -. .
