OT: I know how to solve global warming

[Renegade 13]

It's a simple idea, but would be hell to implement...though probably easier than what will have to be done to reverse climate change conventionally. What's this idea, you ask?

Kinda like an SEIV sphereworld (see, I managed to make it so it isn't totally OT! ). Build a massive metallic framework around the entire world, out in space a couple hundred kilometers. Around this framework contruct a thin structure about 511,185,932 square kilometers in area, constructed to completely envelop the Earth. That way, you could block out sunlight in whatever amount* you want, reducing overall global temperatures without worrying as much about carbon emissions.

*A major problem would be to find a way to have this structure selectively eliminate the sunlight when you want. I suppose a system sorta like slats on a window blind might work.

Please feel free to show me the massive flaws in my logic.

[Wade]

It sounds good to me. Though I'd rather most, if not all, efforts be put towards curing aging; the most deadly of issues.

[Jack Simth]

Slight problems:

1) Sunlight is what causes global warming. It's also what feeds plants. Cut down on the sunlight, and there's issues with little things like O2 production.

2) Space is kinda hostile. Millions of very small meteors hit the Earth regularly. Most simply burn up in the atmosphere. This thing would have to be outside the atmosphere - it would be liable to get cut to ribbons.

[Will]

More 'slight' problems:

3) Good God, do you realize how much time, energy, and money it would take to build such a thing? Even beyond the huge engineering problems of preventing the thing from falling apart from constant meteor and space-junk impacts, we still have barely progressed beyond Apollo-era space technology. And some would say we have regressed to pre-Apollo technology, by swamping everything in more complexity. And you're proposing to create something that massive?

4) As a corollary, the time, energy, and money that would need to be poured into such an endeavor would have a much bigger impact if put into, say, infrastructure to reduce current emissions of carbon dioxide, and/or methods of recapturing carbon, research into sustainable energy like fusion, and growing enough food to feed every person on Earth.

Also, I have to say that Jack's first objection isn't that big a deal if this is something that only partially blocks the sun's energy, either by turning "on and off", or by only blocking out a percentage. In either case, plants get the energy during daylight hours and store it in ATP, and then constantly use that stored ATP to convert carbon dioxide and water into sugars and oxygen, whether there is light or not. Reduce incoming energy enough to lower the global average temperature by a few degrees centigrade will not have a significant impact on the total energy the plants recieve to keep the rest of us breathin'.

[Atrocities]

Recently they have discovered that the tempreture of the water below the polar ice caps is heating up, not because of anything we humans have done, but because of underwater vulcan activity. This is a contributing factor to why the polar ice caps are now melting along with all of the man made crap. Also it is generally speculated that this is just the natural progression of mother nature and is a natural event as the planet ages. That is to say that the older the planet gets, the hotter it will become. While this theory is not widely viewed as acceptable, more and more evidence is mounting in favor of it.

Mother Earth is a living breathing thing and mommy anit happy with us.

[Renegade 13]

Jack Simth said:
1) Sunlight is what causes global warming. It's also what feeds plants. Cut down on the sunlight, and there's issues with little things like O2 production.

As Will mentioned above, this can be averted by having a system that is only blocking sunlight part of the time; I was thinking blocking say half an hour of sunlight per day around the world. On a side note, I bet that that half hour of darkness would be absolutely pitch black. Probably couldn't see an inch in front of your face without other lights!

Jack Smith said:
2) Space is kinda hostile. Millions of very small meteors hit the Earth regularly. Most simply burn up in the atmosphere. This thing would have to be outside the atmosphere - it would be liable to get cut to ribbons.

Now this I hadn't thought of, and it'd be a little tough to get around. Though now that I think about it, how does the ISS avoid micrometeorite punctures? Sure, you can map those in Earth orbit, but what about those that come in from elsewhere? Not sure of a solution to this one.

Will said:
3) Good God, do you realize how much time, energy, and money it would take to build such a thing? Even beyond the huge engineering problems of preventing the thing from falling apart from constant meteor and space-junk impacts, we still have barely progressed beyond Apollo-era space technology. And some would say we have regressed to pre-Apollo technology, by swamping everything in more complexity. And you're proposing to create something that massive?

Well, I'm not saying it would be easy or cheap! Though it may be cheaper than all that will be necessary to prevent further climate change and to effect a reversal, I'm not sure. There would definitely be absolutely massive engineering challenges, but I don't think it would entail anything fundamentally beyond our technology level.

Will said:
4) As a corollary, the time, energy, and money that would need to be poured into such an endeavor would have a much bigger impact if put into, say, infrastructure to reduce current emissions of carbon dioxide, and/or methods of recapturing carbon, research into sustainable energy like fusion, and growing enough food to feed every person on Earth.

I'm not sure if the money would be better spent funding other methods of halting and reversing climate change (which I'm not sure is even possible), since the shield would essentially do the same thing that all the environmental efforts are aimed at.

[TerranC]

Renegade 13 said:
Build a massive metallic framework around the entire world, out in space a couple hundred kilometers. Around this framework contruct a thin structure about 511,185,932 square kilometers in area, constructed to completely envelop the Earth.

A better use for your lattice, instead of using it to cover the world and turn it into a one big snowball, would be to convert it into a series of solar power satellites; that way, you would be able to furnish the entire globe with nearly limitless power, and solve the root problem of both global warming and global dimming, that is the use of hydrocarbons to generate energy for the economies of the world.

[Gozra]

According to everything I can get my hands on and reading about Global warming:
The most likely cause is the Sun heating us up. The amount of green house gas that humans contribute in miniscule.
Carbon Dioxide is less that 3 percent of all green house gases and our contribution to that 3 percent is really small way less than 10 percent as I recall.
As far as the vulcanism in the artic I have not heard that one BUT The Greenlandic Ice cap has begun melting in the last 100 years and the trend is accelerating.
This in turn is causing the salinity of the water to become lower. Which in turn is causing less of the gulf stream to reach England and Europe lowering the temperature of the water up there which in turn can cause winters to be colder and longer. Since 1965 the amount of warm water moving north has been reduced by 30%
Some Scientist postulate that this could be a trigger into another ice Age.
The Space sun shade is a neat idea and it can be implemented fairly cheaply but I really think that our efforts should be concentrated in three areas.
1 Clean up our planet and research technologies that help recycle and cleanup our planet
2 Cheap energy
3 Get off this planet and have self-sufficient colonies other than this earth.
4 Promote a society that we are all in this together and we all own earth and everything we do affects everyone else.

If we don't then there will never be a human space empire

[StarShadow]

Actually, the Sphereworld is (or least seems to be) based on the concept of a Dyson Sphere. The 'metal shell' encompasses at least one planet and the sun. The idea is that all of the sun's energy will be trapped by the 'shell' and be availible for use by the planet(s).

[Phoenix-D]

Gozra: the sun hasn't increased its output noticably. And while the amount of CO2 we've added is small in proportion to the entire atmosphere, that doesn't mean it doesn't have an effect. All we've done is strengthen the already existing greenhouse effect by a few degrees- a very small part of the overall effect, more or less in proportion to the amount of gas we've added.

Problem is that few degrees can have fairly major implications.

And yeah, global warming probably will lead to a mini ice age for Europe. Climate's weird like that.

AT: from everything I've read the planet should get *colder* internally as it gets older, eventually ceasing tectonic activity altogether (though by the time that happens the human race will likely be long extinct).