global warming - i think iv got a solution?

Question

hi, i was wondering, if global warming is real (and not like that glabal cooling that turned put to be rubbish) and the polar ice caps are melting why dont we just send a missle carrying liquid nitrogen (or some other fast freezing componant) into them?

and another thing - whats so wrong with gm food, say for instance that you madesuper size tomatos that had all the nutriants you needed and they could be growen anywhere, then surely that would stop starvation n the 3rd world right?

i know iv vent on a bit but i am bored

Answer 1

hip hip hooray we'll saved. lets party

Answer 2

sounds like a pretty clever idea, but that won't really help because it's not natural and it won't stop global warming, that is if we still polute the atmosphere so much. The polar ice-caps are melting, if you just drop a nitrogen missile in it, what about all the other stuff? And nitrogen's missiles come from a long process and it will just add harm to the enviroment because those affect global warming, you are taking away ice. And if it had been so easy then all those clever scienticts out there would've done it already.

Answer 3

The sort of solution you are proposing is called Geo-engineering. Do a google search for global warming and then search the results for Geo-engineering.

An actual proposed solution is for every building to have a white roof to reflect more heat back out to space.

Keep thinking, minds like yours will come up with novel solutions.

Answer 4

The polar ice caps are melting. The most dramatic melting has been observed in the Arctic, for the last 50 million years this has been a frozen wilderness but if it continues to melt at the current rate it will be gone in a little over 50 years. There is also substantial melting of the Greenland ice sheet and to a lesser extent, a net loss of ice from Antactica.

The annual mass of ice that melts...

Arctic - 600 billion tons (and rising fast)
Greenland - 220 billion tons (and rising)
Antarctica - 82 billion tons (and slowly rising)
TOTAL - 902 billion tons

The annual melting is equivalent to twice the volume of Lake Erie or 6 million gallons per second.

Replacing this volume of water would be a mammoth task, one possible solution is to pump sea water from the Arctic and Antarctic periphery under high pressure to the interior. The pressure would prevent the water freezing in the pipes and the extreme cold of the interior would freeze the water on contact. To construct a system with the relevant pumping capability would require the largest engineering project in history.

------------------

Climatology is my forte not genetic engineering but I do know that we already have the technology to grow 'supersize' produce and crops more suited to the conditions in the 'third world'. The problem is that thay can't afford to buy them. We have the solutions, just like we have the medicines to cure many diseases, but unless they can pay for them then we don't supply them.

Answer 5

The only solution...

1) Reduce greenhouse emissions to near elimination in 30-50 years (burying it, filtering it, developing and using alternate CO2 free methods to supply energy, etc.).

2) Block a percentage of the sun's energy

3) Prepare for rising sea levels by improving infastructure

4) Continue to improve and implement green clean technology in all future development

5) Use fusion HHO (amazing, trust me... search Denny Klein) technology world-wide and immediately

6) Develop and implement CO2 filteration and ground storage

7) Develop and implement massive networks involving sea water filteration systems

8) Develop and implement additional means to block sun's radiation from coming in

9) Replace all Nuclear reactors with Fusion power plants, build them all over the world. It's already a reality but to be at the point for which it will start coming into play will take another 30-60 years depending on how hard we try.

A nearly free and absolutely clean energy source, fusion from water, will in most of our life times, become the world's main source of energy. One bathtub full of water will be able supply a middle-class family for a year. Compare that to the tons and tons of carbon we put into the air every year now (example, one gallon of gas converts easily to roughly 20 pounds of Carbon Dioxide but it takes 200,000 pounds of vegetation millions of years under pressure to make a gallon of gas)

World human fossil CO2 emissions emit in a single day what the equal to all the vegetation and organic matter in the world if it was for example all burnt. And to think there are people that can be convinced our CO2 emissions is not a problem, lol - terrible.

We can do something - our race can do something about this. And I want to be a part of that. (see youtube/blphnx)

Answer 6

global warning as the public believe it is a farce co2 is not a green house gas co2 actually occurs 800 years after the warming and this released from the sea bovine methane or any methane gas will trap heat on the earth more to the point the sun is in an active period at the moment as it has done for billions of years a simple explanation of this is the sun is in its summer period the earth was at its warmest time during the neolithic and lasted for 3000 years polar bears survived man and all species we know today survived this unfortunately our magnetic poles are about to switch north will become south and vice versa unfortunately the knock on effect is we will lose the magnetic shield as the poles slip and solar radiation will flood the earth at levels not seen for over a 150,000 years and probably not since the Jurassic period. we have a planetary alignment they has all the planets in alignment pulling the sun in our direction high solar activity low magnetic field world government's only giving grants to scientists to prove global warming is a man made event even though temperature records prove during our most industrial periods post WWII and the industrial revolution 1900 the earth got cooler. now i am bored going on if you want to know more email me and i will get in touch

Answer 7

Thank you for the "solution", but no thanks.

OK, you all got a kick out of nitrogen rockets, but you give Trevor a pass?

"Replacing this volume of water would be a mammoth task, one possible solution is to pump sea water from the Arctic and Antarctic periphery under high pressure to the interior. The pressure would prevent the water freezing in the pipes and the extreme cold of the interior would freeze the water on contact. To construct a system with the relevant pumping capability would require the largest engineering project in history.


Please, please, please, NO!!!

Let's suspend reality and say that construction and operation of the "largest engineering project in history" has zero environmental impact - NO contribution to local or global temps. Sea temp is a little under 1 degree, but pumping it, pressurizing it, and friction of running it through miles of pipe is going to increase the temperature a few degrees. The interior is extremely cold, the lowest temperature is -89. The freezing point of Antarctic brine is a little less than -2 degrees. Considering the enthalpy of fusion, it will take approximately 900 billion tons of interior ice (at that ideal low temp of -89) to bring 900 billion tons of sea water to freezing.

Net result is 1.8 TRILLION tons of ice sitting at the center of Antarctica just below the freezing point (plus a liquid and highly concentrated salt lake that will continue to grow until it drills down through the ice and makes it's way to the coast.) This ice mass will be highly susceptible to sublimation and melting from sunlight and essentially useless in the ability to freeze additional amounts of seawater. That is, because of the higher initial temperature and lower freezing point of the seawater, any amount of seawater added to this mass will result in NET MELTING of ice.

So, because this IS the most colossal engineering feat EVER, we will want to continue this project. Right? End result: We lose the cooling effect of 1.8 trillion tons of Antarctic ice annually.

I shudder to think of the negative impact this will have on global climate patterns - the Earth's atmospheric "heat pump".

Is this the new tactic, threatening to suicide bomb the Earth unless we individually pursue the conservation of resources and energy? Hey, I'm doing what I can, just don't hurt the women and children!

Answer 8

Basic physics: to cool enough nitrogen into liquid form, you'd have to remove the heat from it. Where's that heat go? It stays here on earth. Like an air conditioner that blows the heat out of your house after it removes it from the air inside, the heat sucked out of the nitrogen to make it cold would have to go somewhere. We can't blow it off the planet, so it would stay with us. It would eventually reach the ice and you'd be back where you started. So you wouldn't gain anything.

Answer 9

Even if we do get flooded which is highly unlikely as it would shut the Gulf Steam down and then the ice would start freezing again. But never mind, even if the loony brigade are right for once, you could just fit huge tyres onto your 4x4 and drive around all over the place on top of the water.

Answer 10

What ya gonna do about the warming affect that is coming from the core of the earth. We would have to blame the oil companies and countries that are doing the most oil/water drilling . You know they are removing the cooling affects of these two components which in turn cause the heat from the core to get closer to the surface.

Answer 11

Do you realize how much energy it will take to generate enough liquid nitrogen to have an impact? The net effect would be an INCREASE in temperature! Take a physics class, for crying out loud!