h a l f b a k e r yBite me.
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,
|
|
|
|
[q2] - welcome to the HB. Sp - satellite. An appropriately ambitious idea. No reason you could not put solar panels on there big boys to generate some energy while you are at it. |
|
|
You won't need to blow them up - orbital decay would lead to them burning up in the atmosphere long before that. |
|
|
However, I think this is much more likely to be used as a weapon of war or terraforming - think of the impact of dramatically lowering temperatures. |
|
|
It would be a pretty rubish weapon. It would take ages to kill anyone and the UN would probably slap sanctions all over anyone who tried it. |
|
|
It doesn't have to kill anyone to be a weapon. Reducing the sunlight falling on the earth, or particular parts of it, would have an immediate economic impact - witness the mini ice ages wrought by various volcanic eruptions. |
|
|
I'm dreaming of a white Christmas. And Valentine's Day... and Memorial Day... and Independence Day... and Labor Day... |
|
|
[Burns] - you would have to use the energy up there, where it was generated. None of this rubbish beaming it down or whatever. Ideas: superpowered radiostation (possible augmenting and retransmitting a signal sent up from the ground?), or cyclotron generating valuable elements. |
|
|
Damn dyslexia, anyway I dunno about generating valuable elements, I mean even if they could turn lead into gold the transportation costs alone might (sorry would) offset any profits, though there's more expensive things out there than gold I know. How ever if they were designed like the blinds in a conservatory you could retract them a bit if it got too cold. I suppose you might need an awful lot of satellites though. The weapon idea has kinda been done I think, if i recall russia has(or maybe wanted to launch) a huge mirror that could be used to light up a large area so they could see what they were bombing better or whatever. |
|
|
Have you considered forwarding your idea to the Association of Earth-Based CFC Manufacturers? |
|
|
//the ozone has recovered a bit more//
Is that possible? I thought the holes were there permanently. |
|
|
Actually, in my innocence and ignorance, [Bling], I've always wondered why you can't collect the ozone from car exhaust engines everyone complains about, stick it in a tank in a plane or a rocket or something, and launch it up over the poles to be released. I'm sure there are quite good reasons, I just don't know them. |
|
|
Ozone at the Earth's surface is very reactive and never makes it very far upward. |
|
|
The layer naturally replenishes itself supposedly, but it takes a very long time. Unfortunately longer than it takes for us to destroy it. |
|
|
How science knows these things (a. we're destroying it, and b. it replenishes itself) has never been satisfactorily explained to me. I remain dubious on both counts. |
|
|
[waugsqueke] - as far as destroying it goes, the equation's pretty straightforward to state, and to test. I forget exactly, but it's something like:
CFC + O3 + sunlight => CFC + 02 |
|
|
[darksasami], the reason you can't do that is because it's too expensive. Nevermind the expense of treating people with skin cancer, and the cost in lost productivity - logic does not rule on this planet. |
|
|
If you've got a few hundred million dollars you don't need, though, I'm sure you're more than welcome to try your idea. |
|
| |