Mirrors.

[tp4tissue]

Global heating problem.

Even if we solved the energy problem TODAY, we still have a CO2 and Methane DEBT.  This stuff is already in the atmosphere, it will continue to drive heating for the next 100 years.

That is to say, while important, an energy transition ALONE, will not get us anywhere near the 2C paris target,

--- Beyond which, large scale ecosystem collapse would ensue. Famine, the biblical stuff.


The answer, According to Nano-physicist  Ye Tao, is  Mirrors.  Strategically deployed mirrors on ~20% of all agricultural land, or approximately 1-2% of the earth's surface,  will REFLECT enough sunlight, to cool the earth enough in the "short" duration of time that we have to PAY the   Warming-DEBT.


Dr. Ye Tao's analogy,   Global warming is like cancer we got from smoking (Fossil Fuels, Animal Agricultural Land Use),  Even if we quit smoking now, (Clean energy, Veggies),  it does not cure the cancer that we already have.  The only economically feasible way to operate on the heat-debt, is to invest in existing technology that has a high cooling to cost ratio, MIRRORS.

The Talk below goes into more details. Highest scientific credentials/ Pedigree.

Dr. Ye Tao:

- PHD Chemistry, MIT
- Completed PHD Physics research requirement (Before Pivot for climate change work), ETH Zurich
- Led Research @ Rowland Institute Harvard
- Multidisciplinary background in physics, chemistry, engineering and material science 

[Leslieann]

I'm sorry but this just sounds like a Warner Brothers/Acme Rockets/Wile.E. Coyote idea.

Note I have not listed to this whole thing but...

Mirrors as you know them are over-simplified, you're only thinking about the visible spectrum, worse, the better at reflecting they are the more light they absorb, this is actually an issue with lasers. Another issue is that the light is already in the atmosphere, reflecting it means going back through that same atmosphere and being absorbed a second time, yes you stopped it from heating the planet surface but still haven't accomplished as much as you think. You really want that mirror outside the atmosphere for best results. Another concern with that is is something Stephen Hawking was concerned with, and that is aliens, reflecting all this light is like a beacon alerting them to our presence. While they could be friendly, we have no way of knowing and we'd certainly have no way to defend ourselves against them if they weren't.

You also have all of the heat and energy required to make and transport them (especially to space), and believe it or not, materials could be an issue, whether space based or land based. I mean seriously, 1-2% of the earth's surface is huge. It's really not practical. You could make it a fraction of the size if it was space based and wouldn't even have to reflect, just block or reduce and that means it could be made of cloth or other light weight material and transported up in a single rocket.

[noisyturtle]

It's simple. We block out the sun.

[chyros]

Show Image

Global heating problem.

Even if we solved the energy problem TODAY, we still have a CO2 and Methane DEBT.  This stuff is already in the atmosphere, it will continue to drive heating for the next 100 years.

One of the things my own research group is working on is to make CO2 useful as a building block for starting materials that we need in society, to address this. It's called circular chemistry and is already being researched quite a bit. Carbon capture is another one.

[tp4tissue]

Show Image

Global heating problem.

Even if we solved the energy problem TODAY, we still have a CO2 and Methane DEBT.  This stuff is already in the atmosphere, it will continue to drive heating for the next 100 years.

One of the things my own research group is working on is to make CO2 useful as a building block for starting materials that we need in society, to address this. It's called circular chemistry and is already being researched quite a bit. Carbon capture is another one.

What are your optimistic projections Chyros ??



The main pushback on Direct Capture,  is that it's too slow and expensive.

We need 700-1400 Terawatts worth of cooling, to balance the budget.

We only generate ~18 Terawatts of energy net as mankind.

At best if we dedicate 2 Terawatts of our budget TO COOLING,  the investment to cooling has to be roughly 1000:1


Tp4 not Xpurt lvl yet.  Highly recommend you guys actually watch the video, it addresses many of the concerns posed thus far.

[fohat.digs]

Wile.E. Coyote idea.

the visible spectrum

Millions of square miles of mirrors would be a very large contract for somebody!

Heat is mostly a function of the infrared, and it seems that it is the best and most expensive mirrors that reflect infrared most reliably.

[Leslieann]

It's simple. We block out the sun.

You only need to reduce it or block out a small percentage, not the whole thing.
This guy was talking 1% reflecting back, reducing 1% of daylight from space would be far easier as the further you get from earth the smaller the shield needs to be. Also it wouldn't even need to be 1% if you stop it from even hitting the atmosphere to begin with. 100sq. miles (random number) of mylar/canvas/random cloth seems far, far easier to produce, store and deploy than 1mil. sq miles of mirrors.

And I'm not advocating doing it, I'm just saying it's far less silly than this guys idea of mirrors.

Heat is mostly a function of the infrared, and it seems that it is the best and most expensive mirrors that reflect infrared most reliably.

I hadn't even bothered to dig that far as the the idea is just preposterous.

Also, what do you do with all those mirrors when the project finishes? That's gonna be a lot of 7 years bad luck!

[chyros]

Show Image

Global heating problem.

Even if we solved the energy problem TODAY, we still have a CO2 and Methane DEBT.  This stuff is already in the atmosphere, it will continue to drive heating for the next 100 years.

One of the things my own research group is working on is to make CO2 useful as a building block for starting materials that we need in society, to address this. It's called circular chemistry and is already being researched quite a bit. Carbon capture is another one.

What are your optimistic projections Chyros ??



The main pushback on Direct Capture,  is that it's too slow and expensive.

We need 700-1400 Terawatts worth of cooling, to balance the budget.

We only generate ~18 Terawatts of energy net as mankind.

At best if we dedicate 2 Terawatts of our budget TO COOLING,  the investment to cooling has to be roughly 1000:1


Tp4 not Xpurt lvl yet.  Highly recommend you guys actually watch the video, it addresses many of the concerns posed thus far.

The fact that this is still at an academic stage means it's not close to completion. Most people forget that we are dependent on fossil fuels for a lot more than just our cars though; plastics and many other chemical compounds and building blocks are derived from petroleum and coal, including things like agricultural pesticides (carbaryl for example is wholly coal-derived). It is industrially funded and people are serious about it, though. One of my friends works in a chemical company that produces "green" pesticides.

I'd say the most important immediate benefit right now is that it's in the zeitgeist. Usually, that means the rest follows suit eventually.

[fohat.digs]

plastics and many other chemical compounds and building blocks are derived from petroleum and coal

I am convinced that future generations will be astonished that we squandered such a valuable resource as oil by burning it.

[tp4tissue]

Heat is mostly a function of the infrared, and it seems that it is the best and most expensive mirrors that reflect infrared most reliably.

The deflection of light energy via mirrors is approximately 70-80 % away from the surface and out through the atmosphere.

The problem with atmospheric level scatter particles dampening is that, in the chance it succeeds, it will dampen all Solar PV power output (1-2% net loss), and Solar thermal solutions (~10-15% loss),  The net consequence of which would be locking humanity into fossil fuels as the most efficient power solution.

[tp4tissue]

The trickiness of Decarbonization.

The science seems to indicate that, yes we have to decarbonize, but at the present moment, the aerosol particulates from the likes of coal power/ oil (ship boat), is MASKING approximately 1 Degree C of warming.

Which means, if we magically overnighted to renewables , we would be instantly around 2C to 2.5 C climate warming.   -Remember, the carbon that's warming the planet to 2C and beyond, HAS ALREADY been emitted.

--We're already into massive overdraw/debt/interest rate

This magical scenario of complete decarbonization has problems because it would make a large portion of the planet un-inhabitable, triggering most of the worst projections for climate stress.


Decarbonization has to happen, but we can't actually get rid of the smog "just yet",  we have to utilize whatever "smog budget" we have left to produce  COOLING.

Livable environment doesn't actually care if we increase the carbon in the atmosphere slightly, as long as the net result is cooler temperatures.

A probable way to do this seems to be large mirror arrays, because of its cooling efficiency.