Start A Petition

Can Smoke and Mirrors Ease Global Warming?

Environment  (tags: globalwarming, environment, climatechange, climate, humans, pollution )

- 3766 days ago -
Backers of extreme technologies to curb global warming advocate dumping iron dust into the seas or placing smoke and mirrors in the sky to dim the sun.


We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Clever Pseudonym (176)
Monday October 27, 2008, 4:08 am
Gigantic icecubes. We need giant ice cubes.
Maybe we should grab frozen comets from space and ease them down into the ocean, wait--on top of trash!!

Past Member (0)
Tuesday October 28, 2008, 1:48 pm
OK... so we figure out how to become climate engineers. Will that buy us more time or will it give people and Industry an excuse to do what they want?

Tia P (7)
Tuesday October 28, 2008, 3:14 pm
They want to combat warming by increasing algae growth in the ocean? That is insane - there is already too much algae BECAUSE of the excessively warm water!
Read this:
"Along the coast of Kenya, a deadly red tide of algae killed so many sharks, tuna and eels that fishermen had trouble pushing their boats through the water.

Volunteer divers and snorkelers removed hundreds of pounds of alien algae off Waikiki, where it covers the reef, blocks sunlight and threatens native plants and animals.

In the Mediterranean, fernlike algae blanket hundreds of miles of sea floor, replacing most other life forms and creating a marine desert.
Off the coast of Florida this spring, 27 manatees died as a result of exposure to "red tide," an algae blooms that turned the water red.

And last fall, Pfiesteria — the mysterious, potentially toxic microbe that once invaded Chesapeake Bay tributaries — was discovered in an Australian river.

Scientists fear that something odd is happening in the world's waters, specifically to one of the world's most ubiquitous organisms: algae. Giant masses of algae, called blooms, are bigger and more frequent. They're appearing in places they've never been and staying longer."

and this:
" A bloom of ocean algae that produces a toxic acid has sickened and killed hundreds of birds, sea lions and dolphins in California, environmentalists said.
Birds and animals have been washing up on shores from San Diego to San Francisco Bay.
40 birds have been taken to the International Bird Rescue Center in San Pedro with symptoms of domoic acid poisoning, which attacks the brain and can cause seizures.
Domoic acid is produced by microscopic algae. Birds and sea mammals ingest the acid by eating fish and shellfish who dine on the algae.

The algae population increases or “blooms'' every year as the ocean waters warm, but this year's bloom seems early, extensive and “very, very thick,'' said David Caron, who teaches in the biological sciences department at University of Southern California.
“In five years of study I have not seen a bloom this large at this particular time of year,'' Caron said. “It's having an extraordinary impact on pelicans and many other species.''

and this:
"Like a symptom of a hidden sickness, a vast plague of algae has spread over much of the Adriatic Sea, sullying some of Europe's finest beaches and killing marine life in this part of the Mediterranean.
On calm days, the algae produce brown and yellow layers of slime on the water until winds break them up into millions of jelly clumps that ride the waves and pile up ashore. At dawn, before the tourists arrive, workers rush to scoop up the gelatinous mass.

The algae are most prevalent near the mouths of large rivers and the urban sewage outlets. As the algae proliferate and decompose, they deprive the waters of oxygen and choke other water creatures to death.

"An increase in nutrients also may be caused by activities of humans, such as runoff from animal farms or fertilized croplands and lawns, or atmospheric deposition of sulfur and nitrogen compounds or oxides derived from the burning of fossil fuel. These nutrients lead to blooms in coastal waters to a greater extent than in the open ocean. However, some of these nutrients do find their way to the open ocean far from shore, and contribute to the formation of blooms in the open ocean."

CLEARLY, increasing the growth of algae in the ocean is NOT going to help! These clueless idiots trying to capitalize on the climate crisis without doing their homework need to get a real job - like sorting plastics at a recycling center.

Judy Cross (83)
Wednesday October 29, 2008, 10:17 am
I don't suppose that anyone noticed that the warming stopped in 1998 and the temperatures has been dropping since 2002 even though CO2 has continued to climb?


Then check out:Record Lows - 2008

Daniel Barker (35)
Wednesday October 29, 2008, 2:10 pm
Alga is good - in fact, even though plant produces protein and other nutrients. Grow alga for food.

Comment on mirrors: some decades ago a French physicist did exactly that with a photovoltaic cell. He kept reflecting more light on a solar cell to produce more current. He eventually obtained an amazing one thousand times rated output by reflecting massive amouts of light.

Judy, the Earth has been warming for millennia. The Norse and Viking records of glaciers show meltoff from thousands of years ago - even back then, people knew the world was warming up.

No one is pointing a gun at your head making you drive a truck, eat too much meat, have more than two children by choice, buy an oversized home, buy oversized appliances.

Chris Otahal (507)
Wednesday October 29, 2008, 9:08 pm
Why resort to such "experiments" such as these when the real solution is so simple - we just need to reduce the CO2 (and other greenhouse gasses) being produced? When we tinker with the planet - like adding the iron - we often have unintended results. And we do not need the "high tech" "solution" of mirriors. The solutions are actually available and quite simle - use more renewables, stop deforestation (and reforest cleared areas), become more energy efficient, etc... The solutions are already available to us - without unknown risks - we just need the political will to impliment them in my opinion...

(as to Judy's comments, it says a lot when one relies on youtube as a "scientific" resource LMAO - no wonder it is promoting a bogas view. But then what do you expect from a person that can't get the concept of WEATHER -short-term, one year events such as the 2008 records versus CLIMATE which is long-term TRENDS)

Bob F (10)
Wednesday October 29, 2008, 11:49 pm
Smoke and mirrors? Sounds like thoses magic shows I seen as a kid. Maybe the can put a giant top hat up there to. Thing how big the rabbit would be? Now we have global warming, and with the pass of a magic wand, presto, chango, global warming is gone. Smoke and mirrors, thats the ticket.

Judy Cross (83)
Friday October 31, 2008, 1:15 pm
Chris, trying to pretend that just because something is in video form makes it irrelevant or beneath notice is just a dodge. BTW the word is "bogus."

And the cooling continues , only now it is more pronounced. Just look at the graph from the University of Alabama at Huntville which records and analyses the NASA satellite data.

So who is really in denial here?

Chris Otahal (507)
Friday October 31, 2008, 3:15 pm
I amy not know how to spell well...but I do know science - and personal attacks regarding irrelevat tripe show your weak position :)

YOU are the one in denial - here again are FIVE INDEPENDENTLY derived data sets ALL showing warming since 1979 (despite the SHORT-TERM cool period of WEATHER over the last few months)- and this includes satelite data which you say are impecable. You have seen these data many times before, yet you refuse to recognise them since they don't fit your preconcived dogma ... When looking at a question as complicated as climate science one needs to look at ALL the information - not just cherry pick the bits that fit your preconcived stand:

Despite multiple lines of argument against your claim - you still say there is NO EVIDENCE WHAT So EVER of warming - that my dear, IS denial :)

Chris Otahal (507)
Friday October 31, 2008, 3:24 pm
BTW - the long-term warming trend (CLIMATE) goes much further back than to 1980 - but you convieniently ignore that fact when providing the graph above - why, because the warming trend is even more pronounced if the entire data set is included - so you not only cherry pick a single data set, but you also cherry pick the time frame ... called manipulating the data :)


Judy Cross (83)
Friday October 31, 2008, 9:36 pm
The satellite data only started in 1979

In the above graph, the global average surface temperature anomalies from 1979 to 2008 (September update of five different metrics) are displayed. Climatepatrol regularly updates the past 30-year trendline of “global warming” and provides you with the average slope of three surface station metrics (Nasa, Noaa, Hadley Centre) and two satellite metrics.

Then look at this graph

"The gist of the highlights of the annual update of the global carbon budget and trends of the Global Carbon Project reads: Anthropogenic CO2 emissions have been growing about four times faster since 2000 than during the previous decade. Natural CO2 sinks are growing, but more slowly than atmospheric CO2, which has been growing at 2 ppm per year since 2000. This is 33% faster than during the previous 20 years. All of these changes characterize a carbon cycle that is generating stronger climate forcing and sooner than expected."

and still temperatures are falling.

Chris Otahal (507)
Saturday November 1, 2008, 12:42 am
NOPE - the over all change in temprature since 1979 has INCREASED according to the FIVE INDEPENDENTLY derived data sets that I provided. Also look again at the data YOU provide:

All five of those data sets show WARMING since 1979 - hint, look at the table YOU provied, see those + signs - that means WARMING LMAO!!!!! Please at least look at YOUR OWN DATA LMAO!!!!!!! ALL of YOUR data sets show an INCREASE of 1.3 (rounding) to 1.7 degree INCREASES from 1979-2008 - so thank you for proving my point!!!!!!

Also, you are promoting the fake strawman argument that human caused climate change is ONLY true if it WARMS EVERY YEAR - which is a false premmis - there is always ups and downs because there are many factors that effect WEATHER (short term changes in temprature) - LOOK AT YOUR DATA - it shows fluctuations from year to year - but the trend is upward!!!!

Chris Otahal (507)
Saturday November 1, 2008, 12:59 am
correction - the data you provide shows an increase of 1.3 - 1.7 drgrees per century or .13-.17 degrees every 10 years ... and since we are looking at a 30 year period (which realy is a short period of time for making climate change determinations by the way) the actual increase is .39 - .51 degrees - but it is still an increase ...
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Environment

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.