What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
136 Comments
- KMye, on 01/05/2009, -0/+52What could possibly go wrong?
- SillyRabbits, on 01/05/2009, -7/+34Yeah, and we'll just ignore the 25 million tons of salt that falls to the ground where each gigaton of sea water is vaporized (sea water is about 2.5% salt by weight). It's stories like these that make we wonder if the environmental websites even understand basic science.
- replaysMike, on 01/06/2009, -1/+26You could just drop a gigantic ice cube in the ocean - it's scientifically proven.
- niccha, on 01/05/2009, -4/+25A complete global refrigeration system for "a few billion dollars." Talk about bang for your buck. No automaker bailouts required.
- keeganspeck, on 01/06/2009, -1/+18I have no idea what to think about these massive geo-engineering schemes. First iron-seeding of oceans, now this... I think it's an insanely cool idea, to be pretty much terraforming a planet, but the 'cool' thing isn't always the most safe thing to do to the entire Earth.
Edit: Pun. Hah. - bixby1, on 01/05/2009, -4/+20"The earth has a giant air conditioning problem."
dugg. - inactive, on 01/06/2009, -1/+15We could propel the planet Earth farther away from the sun.
- nicejai, on 01/06/2009, -0/+13I don't think this guy understands what a closed system is, and the difference between temperature and heat. Spraying water into the air will cool its temperature, but all that does is transfer heat from the air (which has a low heat capacity) to the water. The problem with global warming is not that temperature is too high, it's that we can't get rid of it in the closed system that is the earth. It's kinda like, spraying a sauna with more water to lower the temperature; it may lower the temperature of the room for the first few minutes, but because heat enters the room faster than it's being let out (which is the actual problem behind global warming) you've got heat *and* humidity to deal with... when the effective solution is to just open the door to let some excess heat out.
The solution to global warming lies with dealing with excess heat (energy), not the temperature.
And, it doesn't take much to calculate the energy requirements of pumping water into the air. Lifting one cubic meter of water (1000kg) 60m into the air requires 600,000 Joules of energy if done perfectly reversible (which is pretty much impossible). If you lift that much over 10 seconds you need 60kW power source. You do this everywhere and now we're releasing MJ of energy into the closed system of the earth! Any engineer worth their salt will quickly realize that this guy thinks you can cool your room by putting an air conditioner *completely inside your room* (and not half-sticking outside as it should).
Then you'd have to worry about piping, maintenance, and environmental damage (hey, all that salt has to precipitate somewhere once all that seawater evaporates). All this trouble to achieve what, lower the temperature by 0.5 celsius?... which doesn't even address the problem of excess heat (energy)? Heck, throwing up mirrors in the desert would do more for global warming because it'd actually reflect the sun's heat *back out into space* at the rate of 1kW/square-meter (approx. the sun's energy distribution over the earth)... which addresses the problem (of heat) and not just the symptom (of temperature).
Anyway, there's a good reason why the article refers to this guy as an inventor because he's exactly that. He's a dreamer without the mathematical background and engineering skills to realize that his good intentions will do more harm than good. - ryan83189, on 01/06/2009, -0/+12We could all move the glass rod of our thermometers down the metal rule about 1 or 2 degrees. If we all do this global warming will cease to exist.
- FaithclubDotNet, on 01/06/2009, -2/+12Water vapor is a worse greenhouse gas than CO2.
- nogwater, on 01/06/2009, -1/+10I remember seeing a similar plan a while ago. In that plan, the windmills/sprayers were far enough off shore for the salt to fall back into the ocean, at least, that was the theory.
- JiveRabbit, on 01/06/2009, -0/+8its ok, there will be a little sign underwater warning fish to stay away.
- vsaint, on 01/06/2009, -0/+8Skinner: ahh, but as it turns out the lizards were a godsend since they've eaten all the pigeons.
Lisa: Isn't that a little short sighted, what happens when we're up to our ears with lizards?
Skinner: Ah, well we shall simply release wave after wave of Chinese needles snakes.
Lisa: then what about the snakes?
Skinner: We simply import gorillas who will eat all the snakes.
Lisa: Well what happens when we're up to our ears in gorilla's!
Skinner: Ah that's the beauty of the thing, come winter the gorillas will freeze to death. - Blitzenn, on 01/06/2009, -1/+9Doesn't the earth already do this all by itself?
- urgeigh, on 01/06/2009, -7/+15Buried for so many reasons I don't even know where to start.
- asgardshill, on 01/06/2009, -1/+8All that heat's gotta go somewhere and all those pumps generate their own heat and create their own carbon footprint. There's no foolin' the First Law of Thermodynamics.
- threon, on 01/06/2009, -2/+9Spread the salt around the Bonneville Salt Flats. Nobody will notice.
- 2of8, on 01/06/2009, -1/+8Do try.
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7People DO know that water vapor is a greenhouse gas, right?
- NodOfficer, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7We'll just drop bigger ice cubes in the ocean!
- 2of8, on 01/06/2009, -0/+6It'll rain fish, awesome.
- connieLingus, on 01/06/2009, -3/+9don't refrigerators (actually cooling condensers) work by taking moisture *out* of the air??
perhaps this method may work, but not really a "refrigerator"...more like a humidifier. - screensnot, on 01/06/2009, -0/+6And Mythbusters will have to investigate whether it's possible for a scuba diver to get sucked up and end up in the middle of the desert.
- graeh, on 01/06/2009, -0/+6ONCE AND FOR ALL.
- rotundo, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6How exactly to we spray gigatons of water into the atmosphere without using a huge amount of energy? And where is this energy going to come from? It's hard to imagine a net win if we have to burn a zillion tons of coal to power the sprayer.
- Alias1431, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6WTF? Last time I checked, if you take heat from one thing, it moves to another. Not to mention the huge increase in carbon emissions to power these glorified sprinkler systems.
- diggydougie, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6Actually refrigerators work by pumping heat from one place to another. The moisture removal is merely a side effect of passing the hot moist air over the cold coils. The other way to transfer heat is through evaporation (look no further than your armpit for an example).
- Countess666, on 01/06/2009, -5/+10this idea is actually the safest of all the idea's proposed that I've read, if it works that is. water vapor doesn't stay in the atmosphere for very long, and if there is to much of it, it starts to rain.
if it doesn't work or as adverse effect you can just pull the plug and it will be completely undone in a matter of months. - rikhavoc, on 01/06/2009, -2/+7Or ... just learn to live responsibly and treat the planet with respect.
For free. - 2of8, on 01/06/2009, -0/+5Much like the streams of water could be turned off rapidly. And it's much easier to flip a switch on a pump, rather than unfold a giant space mirror.
- 2of8, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6Yeah, dig him down without explaining why. Damn those rational statements!
And yes, it's safer, especially compared to other seeding methods (of sulfur, for example)
Keep in mind, though, carbon dioxide is not the only emission from burning fossil fuels. - Paulorific, on 01/06/2009, -2/+7What CO2 problem? As far as I know the only CO2 problem is the temperature.
- kalvinb, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6It's a giant humidifier.
- buckrogers1965, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4No, there is a class of evaporative coolers popularly nick named "Swamp Coolers" that work with evaporation. They typically are used in low humidity areas, like deserts.
- duffman5, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4The atmosphere is not a closed system, since heat can escape into outer space. Moving the heated water to a higher altitude would assist the heat transfer out of the ocean and into space.
Having said that, the effect of this would not be at all significant if the seawater is only going up 200 feet as the article says, so I have to agree with what nicejai was saying. - pitdog, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4don't ***** with nature
- compressedaudio, on 01/05/2009, -6/+10Still doesn't solve the co2 problem though.
It's like the air freshener masking that bad one in the toilet. - Blitzenn, on 01/06/2009, -1/+5wow, wouldn't it be cheaper to just ship the crap to a place that is already cold? Do we really want someone this wacky screwing around with our planet like that? I hope the answer is NO.
- ChileanGoD, on 01/06/2009, -1/+5Or we could make it form a giant lens and destroy people we don't like... euhh... nevermind.
- korvan504521, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4I think he meant everybody on Digg.
And we all know there are no women here. - maz2331, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4Uh, Canada and Europe covered with glaciers 2 km thick...
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4I'm guessing this device has the potential to fix a problem, and fuel another. What happens to the pollution this machine creates, if any?
- Acqua206, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3I learned this crap a while back, lemme see if I can recall correctly.
There is this thing called the latent heat of vaporization, where it takes energy to perform a phase change from liquid to gas without a change in temperature. Wet your arm and blow across it, it will feel cold because the phase change from liquid to gas requires energy, energy that your body's heat is providing. So this preposterous idea will in fact, lower the temperature as all the water droplets covert to water vapor.
What I don't know is if when a vapor condenses, whether that latent heat of vaporization is released as heat or wut. - FasterGun, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/05/08 ...
CO2 released in the atmosphere get absorbed by the oceans, and it ***** things up. Dramatically changing our oceans is a pretty big CO2 problem. - Prefection, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3Global cooling is VERY bad, and our current cycle of global warming may be very short lived. Read up on how salinity differentials drive oceanic currents. There have been measurable differences in salinity levels throughout the oceans as the polar caps and glaciers melt. If sufficient melt-water is added to the oceans there could very well be a breaking point where the currents stop flowing, and the worlds most powerful heat pump would stop operating. That would be VERY bad.
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3from windmills
- 2ndEdition, on 01/06/2009, -6/+9everybody! grab your penises. and piss up into the sky. let's solve global warming together!
- warpdesign, on 01/06/2009, -3/+6What about negative impact to sea life if you displace a gigaton of sea water? Just wondering.
- hanger69er, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3Out of all the comments posted - some very much beyond my scientific comprehesnsion and understanding - the one I agree with most is the comment pitbull made (although I don't necessarily care for the language he/she used) and to me, makes the most sense.
If this "refrigeration" is possible, if it is feasible and even if we could do this - should we? Should we really tamper with the Earth's climate - more? We could not possibly know what the ramifications might be. The end results could be worse than what we already theorize. Shouldn't we just let Mother Nature takes its' course? - jerrasis, on 01/06/2009, -2/+5***** you.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 140 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is