if we tuned our global cell phone's infrastructure to the Schumann resonance we could probably cure the planet of global warming, but it would involve sacrificing our communications network.
*edit* it would do something positive on a big scale, anyway
*edit*
solar flares trigger a greater release of carbon from our oceans than humanity could produce if we tried, this dilutes our atmosphere making subsequent solar flares effect it exponentially more.
a significant increase in solar flares coincides with our industrial revolution , this correlation is simply co-incidental? causative?
also , a) i don't mean preserving air quality close to the ground isn't a good thing
and b) i was offered this opinion from an accredited researcher who referenced a study called Northern Temperature Oscillation by 'Hugh El Sasser'.
*edit*
this Schumann resonance comment is really embarrassing retrospectively , but I'm making up for it by being so far pretty spot on with my interpretation of chemtrails as high-sulphur content jet fuel; "Solar engineering, or injecting particles into the stratosphere to make
it more reflective, and carbon capture, or sucking CO2 right out of the
sky." from: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/01/the-white-house-wants-scientists-to-explore-geoengineering/
I will take a close look at this thread in the near future, thank you honestly for considering the posts I've made and explaining things to me.
Yes, I admitted to being more open to considering the possibility for aerosol testing just because I feel like the contrails I observe can be abnormal. Don't let that stop you from objectively considering the potential reality of this essay when it urgently recommends testing climate mitigation techniques, and in turn, the sort of techniques that have been considered, the date it was published, and the subsequent research done in the field of stratospheric aerosol spraying. Of course, keeping in mind the geo-political factors that would keep real life testing of this mitigation technique away from public view.
"This study describes an approach to cooling the planet, which goes back to the mid-1970s, when Budyko (1974) suggested that, if global warming
ever became a serious threat, we could counter it with airplane flights in the stratosphere, burning sulphur to make aerosols that would reflect sunlight away. The aerosols would increase the planetary albedo and cool the planet, ameliorating some (but as discussed below, not all) of the effects of increasing CO2 concentrations."
http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1882/4007.full.pdf (2008)
"Pre-activation (of aerosol ingredients) must be considered for the correct interpretation of experimental results on the heterogenous ice nucleation ability of glassy aerosol particles and may provide a mechanism of producing a population of extremely efficient ice nuclei in the upper troposphere." Is a quote from ;http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/8589/2012/acp-12-8589-2012.pdf Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe, Germany
The term glassy, I believe is used, to describe the particles ability to reflect light.
Sorely, can you suggest why they would be trying to form ice in clouds at the upper troposphere? What sort of development does this research lend itself to besides albedo enhancement?
"Progress in the understanding of the complicated earth climate system is generally slow." I believe my interpretation of this is accurate, I will try and explain; because stratospheric sulfur injections threaten the ozone layer, it is hard to tell if the damage done to the ozone will counteract any global cooling achieved, by letting more solar rays through to the surface of the earth. As the previous sentence reads; "The chances of unexpected climate effects should not be underrated, as clearly shown by the sudden and unpredicted development of the antarctic ozone hole"
^
"The aerosols also serve as surfaces for heterogeneous chemistry resulting in increased ozone depletion."
http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1882/4007
Don't get me wrong, TWCobra, we are talking about aircraft here. Consider the Aerosol Injection Scenarios proposed in this article;
http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1882/4007.full
"Two rather conservative injection scenarios are evaluated,(...) (i) insertion of a primary aerosol, such as fine sulphate particles, using an injector mounted aboard an aircraft platform cruising in the lower stratosphere and (ii) sulphur-enhanced fuel additives employed to emit aerosol precursors in a jet engine exhaust stream."
"Enhancing aircraft fuel with added sulphur compounds (H2S, Sn) could increase the particle mass in a jet wake."
"If we imagine enhanced jet fuel sulphur contents of 5 per cent by weight (10–100 times current amounts) for geoengineering purposes, then the annual consumption of approximately 50 Tg of such fuel during stratospheric flight (approx. half the amount used by current commercial aviation) could emit up to 2.5 Tg of sulphur that would eventually generate roughly 10 Tg of sulphate aerosol. (...) This number, uniformly dispersed over a 10-km thick layer from 15 to 25 km, yields an average concentration of approximately 1×103 cm−3 with a particle radius of roughly 0.06 μm; in other words, an ideal geoengineered solar shield."
TWCobra, these scientists are keen on the idea that it is possible to reverse climate change through enhancing the sulfur content of commercial airline fuel , combine that with an urgency for employing / determining the effectiveness of a GW mitigation strategy [1] , don't you think they would have put considerable pressure on politicians to approve such research, on an entirely moral or empirical platform?
Consider the words in this editorial;
"(...) For this reason it follows that the artificial release of sulfate aerosols is a commitment of at least several hundred years. A cessation of the intentional sulfate emission of 1–2 Mton/year will in a short period of time lead to a return to the unfavorable conditions and a renewed warming of the planet."
"I leave it to the reader to ponder over the feasibility to undertake a joint experiment to control the Earth's climate, which may have to last for the length of perhaps a millennium. And the fact that the efforts will be of little use unless we continue the aerosol emoission without interruptions. And, finally, as the experiment is conducted we will not be able to convincingly demonstrate that it actually works unless we have collected validation data for at least several decades towards the backround of natural climate variability."