h a l f b a k e r yCaution!
Contents may be not!
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Putting aside any debate about global warming, let's
focus on
what we could actually do about it. If we took broad
patches
of uninhabitable Earth and covered them with a
reflective
surface, such as metallic Mylar, it would presumably act
like
a giant mirror and reflect the Sun's energy
back out into
space, where it would dissipate harmlessly. It might not
seem
like it could produce much of an effect, but consider the
fact
that the increased albedo caused by jet contrails is
responsible for a significant, or at least measurable,
amount
of cooling. So even a slight increase in albedo should, in
theory, have some effect.
Albedo supplement
http://www.halfbake...Warming_3a_20Albedo
As 21Q observes, this concept is a popular one around here. It has a whole category. [bungston, Nov 05 2011]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
White surfaces are better than shiny metallic for this purpose, as they have a low emissivity in the visible and near infrared, but high emissivity in the low temperature thermal infrared; in other words, they reflect most of the radiation from the sun while also efficiently radiating heat at earth's temperatures. |
|
| |
Gotta love these ideas; it's like "There's poison in the air, so the solution is to breathe less". |
|
| |
That being said, I've thought about painting the driveway black (or re-asphalting it), then whitewashing it every spring with just enough such that it turns black again as winter sets in. |
|
| |
Large reflective surfaces on the face of the Earth would
merely reflect solar energy back onto the upper
atmosphere, not 'back out into space'. There is already a
very large, very reflective uninhabited area of the Earth
called Antarctica, and the last time I checked, there was a
great big hole in the ozone layer directly over it.
Coincidence? |
|
| |
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The
third time it's enemy action. |
|
| |
There are some very interesting crackpot theories involving
that postulation as applied to the ozone hole, actually. |
|
| |
//Coincidence?// No, but correlation does not mean causation in this case. The lack of ozone production to replace that destroyed and the low temperature both result from the lower levels of sunlight. |
|
| |
Reflective surfaces do send radiation back into space. Some of it is absorbed, granted, but the atmosphere is just as transparent on the way out as on the way in. |
|
| |
Use some chemical - say, a solution of titanium dioxide. |
|
| |
Have the government spray it out of airplanes over cities, where it can be most effective (lightens asphalt). |
|
| |
//Global warming is not necessarily a bad thing. You can't propose a
solution to a problem that is not universally accepted as a problem
without some debate pal.// |
|
| |
Of course I can—this is the Halfbakery. That said, I'm actually with you on
this—I'm not convinced global warming is a problem either, never mind
whether it's even happening or if it's anthropogenic in nature. I wasn't
trying to dismiss the views of global warming skeptics, but rather to
declare that I'm not necessarily in agreement with the "mainstream"
thinking. Besides, everyone here gets to advance a really crackpot idea
now and then, right? |
|
| |
I think the accepted ratio is about 1 in 3, yes. |
|
| |
actually you could press little flats on the road surface so that all the light reflected a particular direction |
|
| |
then of course you coordinate the city pavers so that all the little angled flats at ceratain parts of town converge to create artificial convection thermals pulling cool air up n around the town |
|
| |