Help Oxford University model the climate 22 February 06

To participate you need broadband. Rules me out! The BBC4 (TV) mini-season on climate change does go some way to responding to my request for a Time Team – The Future series.

But those who seek it out are increasingly surrounded, if not inundated, by information on GW/CC. Problem is – where’s the action?

The recent news from Greenland prompted one commentator to suggest we need to be making plans to relocate London. In the meantime the government continues to plan for new homes in the Thames Gateway. This is absolutely stark raving bonkers.

Douglas Coker

we’ve been running on dial-up for a week and the PC is running fine. On Monday Newsnight said 55,000 people had taken part already, so that’s five times faster than a super-computer.

It is my job (I think) to throw bold ideas out there even if they sound absurd.

Please understand that although theses ideas may be difficult to implement or may not solve the problem adequately enough, they still do not violate the laws of physics. This means they may offer a partial remedy to what appears to be an intractable problem. Just like the problems presented to us from climate scientists, solution ideas from engineers should always be taken seriously.

One aspect of glacier melt is the earth beneath the glacier (and along the sides) is not cold enough. The vertical drop is also important as gravity accelerates the flow as Mark’s famous glacier photo “was” a glacier that had a large vertical drop.

One way to slow the flow is to refrigerate the ground contacting the glacier. The pressure from the glacier plus the higher temperatures combines to move the glacier faster to the sea. The water between the glacier and the ground surface lubricate it reducing the friction holding the glacier back.

Drilling underground pipes (where possible) to allow a refrigerant to freeze the glacier from the ground up may make the base of the glacier more secure. The chilling effect on the base would migrate to the surface as well as a reverse thermal gradient would be established countering the thermal gradient from the surface which is currently melting the base.

If this seems too difficult, then please remember that we are experts at drilling to reach oil very deep underground even with many meters of ocean above where we drill!

Now, the heat transferred from the glacier system to the underground pipe network must be dumped somewhere and that place is the deep ocean.

The deep ocean has tremendous heat capacity to hold enough heat to buy us time to fix the main problems of increased atmospheric carbon which is melting the ice. I calculated long ago it would take 6 centuries to increase the temperature of the total ocean 1 C with the earth’s heat-imbalance of 0.85 W/ m2.

If a project such as this could delay the main ice melt from occurring long enough for us to reduce atmospheric carbon and/or reflect the extra solar radiation from the earth, then this idea in combination with others in a comprehensive “master plan” for the planet may actually save it!

In some locations, dark ground could be covered with reflective material and especially any dark ground surrounding a glacier system. This can help cool temperatures by reflecting additional solar energy. Over time, a thermal gradient is established where the earth on the sides of the glacier system is colder and this slows the ice river.

If this idea seems impossible, then remember Ski resorts are using this same approach to hold the snow for skiers. Interesting how a small commercial enterprise can save its snow in this way but the idea of saving the bulk of Greenland ice would not be considered so let’s move London (and New York, and all other major coastal cities….. etc) instead!

Douglas, I would rather consider bold ideas and actions rather than relocate London. If London has to be relocated, then I can assume we have many more problems elsewhere which make these bold preventative ideas worthy of further study and consideration at this time since the ice has not yet melted.

The ideas I mention do not violate the laws of physics but rather embraces them. They may not be feasible for other reasons but if the cost of rising seas and relocating London is higher than underground pipes under a glacier, then I wonder the logic of not thinking along these lines I have presented here.

You chaps have a Chunnel designed to move automobiles which help encourage the need to relocate London. If a Chunnel can be made, then why would we not consider bold action to save the planet and slow the ice melt. Slowing the ice melt helps stop the problem with ocean currents that retain tropical heat making intense hurricanes destroying the USA.

It is my job to demonstrate to all that we have many more ideas and options for consideration which are only limited by physical laws but never by our imagination.

I have faith that WE can do it!!! But only “IF” we have the WILL to do it. Although human behavior has many detriments, the same ingenuity that created the problems we face is also quite capable of helping us solve these same problems and to do the impossible.

I am a stubborn person who will never surrender the possibility that we should do our very best to succeed. All the efforts of past generations that helped us get to this point and the promise for all the future generations may depend on what WE do in the next 2 decades!

With that said, we have an awesome responsibility to “NOT” fail our ancestors and our children! In that light, we can never give up hope and succumb to the idea of helplessness. Even if the worst happens, I want our generation to say that we at least put up a good fight. I think we have to experience more pain before the world wakes up to realize survival is at stake here.

I do agree with you that building in areas where flooding is likely is a bad idea. I still want us to think (among ourselves at least) more boldly on preventative actions versus appeasement. Many chaps died saving London in WW2. Maybe we need that same attitude today with respect to GW/CC. We owe that much to ourselves!

Best Wishes, Dan

PS

If this idea where implemented and became successful, then snow would accumulate on the Greenland sheet from increased GW/CC precipitation. As the elevation of the top surfaced increases, then it reduces in temperature.

I suggest this thought because the ice melt in the northern ice cap is happening faster because most of the ice is at sea level as compared to the ice at higher elevations in Antarctica.

The high elevation of the ice cap in Antarctica (which buries mountains) is why it is colder and not melting as fast as the northern ice.

Cathy, Why then does the BBC list of Faqs state emphatically that participants need broadband. The prospect of a computer crash makes my blood run cold. I’ve experienced such and the whole world just stops. I’m not a techie.

Douglas Coker

I’ve been alerted by the latest newsletter from Chris Rose here www.campaignstrategy.org/newsletters/campaignstrategy_newsletter_22.doc via an Observer article he refers to that I missed here www.guardian.co.uk/airlines/story/0,,1697212,00.html to the Flight Pledge Union here www.flightpledge.org.uk/

Sign up for no more flying and be a pioneer (marketing speak) or if you prefer, in the vanguard (old leftie speak) establishing a new trend!

Douglas Coker