THE PROBLEM

It should first be noted that there is a difference between climate and weather. Weather is the short-term state of the sun, wind, humidity and clouds at a given position on the earth. Weather includes a description of such short-term events as storms, and such events are not predictable. Climate is the overall average condition of the temperature, wind, humidity and cloud cover in a given zone on the earth. Climate includes a description of storm frequency and average rainfall, and it is predictable. In this paper, we will discuss primarily control of the average climate conditions. Weather control is discussed in AP2.13. 

The Climate Problem

The main issue here is the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane (greenhouse gasses) and their impact on the earth’s average temperature. The theory and the best data indicate that carbon dioxide and methane in the air pass the visible radiation down to the earth where it is absorbed and converted to infrared radiation. The infrared radiation is absorbed by and heats the greenhouse gasses in the air instead of escaping into space. This process controls the earth’s heat balance according to the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The average carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is increasing, so the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere increases. Thus this process is called global warming. It can cause serious problems. 

This theory of global warming is controversial. One thing that makes this theory controversial is that all fossil fuels generate carbon dioxide when burned, and the vast majority of our energy is obtained by burning fossil fuels, so it is very difficult (and expensive) to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that is emitted. In fact, it may not be possible to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and thus the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Thus there is a very strong motive to disbelieve this theory. 

A second problem adding to the controversy is that the earth has climate zones that move with average temperature, so the zone position changes as the average temperature increases. Thus at any earth position, the temperature may be increasing (due to global warming) or decreasing (due to zone position and storm movement). Critics ask which temperature should they believe. The answer, of course, is that it is the average of the temperatures in all climate zones that determines the average earth temperature. This average cannot be determined by a measurement in only one earth position and so it is controversial.

The third thing that makes this global warming controversial is the impact it may have on the earth’s livability.  It may not be possible to just wait for the argument to settle out, and the controversy to die, and then take action. We may have to decide on an action plan now. Consider the following sequence of negative events. If the earth is warming, several things will happen.

• The earth’s glaciers and ice caps will be reduced, and eventually disappear. Then less of the visible radiation on the earth will be reflected into space, and more will be captured. That will tend to increase the earth’s average temperature. Also, some of the oceans most productive food growing zones are under the ice caps, so a loss of ice will result in a loss in the ocean’s fish production. As glaciers and snow caps in the mountains disappear, a natural storage system for summer runoff water is reduced, and so the rivers tend to flood and dry up more often.
• The melted ice and the expansion due to the warming ocean will raise the mean sea level and low-lying land will be submerged. If so, some of the most important and valuable real estate in the world will be submerged, such as coastal zones in the the east, south and gulf coasts of the US, lowland Holland, Bangladesh, etc. The rising sea level makes hurricane damage due to surge worse as well. Also, important are the well-used aquifers near the edge of the oceans that will become salty and unusable. 
• The climate zones will move north in the northern hemisphere (and south in the southern hemisphere), and some old fertile agriculture zones will dry up and some new zones will be made waterlogged. Some believe that there will be a net loss of productive agricultural area. Others believe there will be a net gain. Certainly there will be a net loss in food production in many of the old fertile regions. For example, close to the equator the seasons (wet season and dry season) will become less pronounced and so agriculture will become less productive. It is not possible to farm productively if the farmer can’t tell when the rainy season begins. Also, semi arid zones such as California and the Middle East will become dryer and so less productive.
• The oceans will warm, spread and become less salty. This will kill many reefs in the ocean and cypress forests on the edge of the ocean where fish breed, with a resulting loss of fish production. This loss will be exacerbated by the over fishing that is common in the world today.
• All extremes in weather will increase in frequency and strength. Severe hurricanes (such as Katrina and Sandy) will increase in strength, and frequency even though the total number of hurricanes will probably be reduced. Tornados will increase in strength and frequency. Droughts will increase in strength and frequency. Hot spells will increase in strength and frequency.
• The aerosols in the earth’s atmosphere (fog, dust, ice and water particles, smoke, sulfur dioxide, etc) will change. An increase will increase the amount of visible radiation reflected by the atmosphere, and this could decrease the amount of radiation absorbed by the atmosphere and thus the earth’s temperature. Most experts expect an aerosol increase, and a resultant reduction in solar absorption and temperature as a partial (but incomplete) balance to the effect of carbon dioxide increase.
• Critically, the permafrost layer in the arctic is expected to melt. This will cause the vegetation frozen in this layer to decompose and emit methane and carbon dioxide that will raise the earth’s temperature even more than that caused by mankind’s carbon dioxide emission.
• Even more critical, the warming of the ocean in the arctic areas will melt the ice cap (north pole) and ice shelf (Antarctica), and this melting will reduce the strength of the ocean circulation. If the warming of the ocean is sufficient, the large-scale circulation in the ocean will shut down. Most ocean circulation patterns start in the ice shelves surrounding Antarctica, although some start in the north polar ice cap. In the winter in the southern hemisphere, the ice shelf expands around Antarctica by freezing the ocean surface. This freezing process makes surface ice and high salt concentration brine. The brine formed is denser than regular ocean water, so it sinks to the ocean floor and gradually collects in the abyssal depths and moves north. While moving, it mixes with less briny and warmer water on the ocean floor, becomes lighter and this mixture moves toward the equator. This deep water also picks up nutrients (phosphorus, potassium, iron and calcium) from hydrothermal vents along the edges of the tectonic plates where superheated water dissolves the molten rock welling up from the mantle. This deep water flows in streams channeled by undersea canyons until it is bumped toward the surface near the equator by undersea obstructions and its new buoyancy. This upwelling causes the less dense, sun-heated surface water near the equator to move toward Antarctica in warm surface currents. Note that a similar cycle happens between the north polar ice cap and the equator. Thus this cyclical flow has three effects on the earth all of which would shut down if the circulation shuts down.

1.      It distributes equatorial solar energy from the equator to the poles.

2.      It provides the fundamental nutrients needed for life on the sea and indirectly on the land. This upwelling of nutritious bottom water causes plankton blooms that support life in the ocean and indirectly on the land as well.

3.      It sends oxygenated surface water down to the abyssal depths to prevent sulfur-loving bacteria from producing an excess of poisonous hydrogen sulfide that would be dangerous to life on the surface.

Greenhouse gas warming is not the only process that determines earth average temperature. Two competing processes determine the earth’s temperature-those that absorb visible radiation and convert it to infrared radiation which is then absorbed in the atmosphere by greenhouse gasses as mentioned above, and those that reflect visible radiation. Thus the concentration of greenhouse gasses is key to the heat absorption process and glaciers, icecaps and aerosols are key to the reflection process. So, to warm, increase greenhouse gasses; to cool, increase glaciers, icecaps and aerosols. 

Greenhouse gas concentration is determined by an equilibrium reaction between emitters and absorbers of the gasses. Primary emitters are volcanoes (carbon dioxide), grazing animals (methane), decaying vegetation (methane and carbon dioxide) and man (carbon dioxide and methane).  There are many processes that absorb carbon dioxide and aid in the formation of this equilibrium. The most important are forest growth and plankton growth with resultant wood formation and carbonate rock (limestone) formation on the ocean floor. The ocean itself also is a key absorber of carbon dioxide. Recently, mankind started to put carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere by mining and burning fossil fuel, thus unbalancing the equilibrium and warming started.  Now warming will increase until forests and oceans absorb the excess carbon dioxide. It is also true that the warming caused by man will cause more warming caused by nature. This process may become self-sustaining and “run away” as follows. Man causes warming and the glaciers and permafrost melt as a result. If mankind stops providing greenhouse gasses, the glacier loss still reduces reflection, and the permafrost melting exposes dead vegetation to decay, which generates carbon dioxide and methane, so warming continues to increase.  In addition, this self-sustaining runaway would inject fresh glacier melt water and heat up the ocean especially in the arctic, which would then slow the ocean circulation that distributes heat and nutrients around the oceans. Then plankton production would be reduced and carbon dioxide sequestration in limestone from plankton would be reduced, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased. Also hydrogen sulfide production from deep-water sulfur loving bacteria would be increased. Since land temperature is heavily dependent on ocean temperature, this shutdown would impact the temperature of the land. Thus man’s contribution is only a trigger, and the warming process would continue until the forest and ocean absorb the new carbon dioxide as fast as it is emitted and a new equilibrium is formed at a much higher carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide and temperature level. Clearly the old equilibrium process has been overwhelmed, because the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere is growing rapidly. Part of this increase is due to mankind cutting the forests, but the greenhouse gasses from fossil fuels are thought to be the most important contributor now, with the secondary self sustaining emissions just beginning. 

Now, it should be noted that there is a natural circulation of carbon dioxide in nature. Plankton absorbs carbon dioxide from the ocean and incorporates it into their shells. When they die, the shells fall to the ocean floor and make a layer of limestone. The ocean floor then moves to the sub duction zone where it is heated and the carbon dioxide comes out and up to the surface of the land through volcanic emissions. This circulation makes life possible. If it weren’t for circulation, prior life would have used up the carbon dioxide originally in the atmosphere and there would be none left for current life. The best way to halt this warming process is to augment this carbon dioxide sequestration process and store the carbon dioxide in the bottom of the ocean where it can do no harm. In fact, if runaway warming gets a firm foothold, this may be the only way to stop warming. 

There is an opportunity to provide a “carbon sink” for carbon dioxide and methane by gathering, concentrating, solidifying (freezing), wrapping, sealing and sinking these gasses in the ocean to the ocean floor where they will remain sealed under pressure until they are subducted millions of years in the future. If this “sink” were controllable and strong enough, it would be possible to actually control the greenhouse gas concentration and thus the earth temperature and ocean salinity. In essence, we would be controlling the natural carbon dioxide circulation to achieve the optimum average earth temperature for earth plants and animals and for us. The potential for controlling climate has been noticed before, but there has never been a practical means of removing enough carbon dioxide and methane from the air to control the climate. However, such a procedure is now possible as will be discussed below. 

THE EVIDENCE

The evidence shows the following trends.

• Some areas show a warming trend and some show cooling. A computer model is required to interpret the data because climate zones are shifting as well as warming. Generally, however, warming trends seem to dominate as shown by the series of record highs in temperature seen around the earth recently.
• The glaciers and ice caps are melting.
• The melted ice does appear to be raising the mean sea level; although this measurement is more controversial. The mean sea level appears different at different earth positions due to the effect of storms, currents, tides and the shape of the ocean bottom, so a computer model is needed to interpret the data. The aquifers near the ocean are becoming saltier, also.
• The climate zones are moving north in the northern hemisphere (and south in the southern hemisphere). This results in desertification in some productive agricultural areas and water logging in others. In the zones close to the equator, there has also been a loss of the normal rainy season-dry season cycle in some areas near the equator. Instead, the weather is dry for a long time, and then extremely wet with resulting floods. This makes it hard to use normal agriculture techniques in the areas affected.
• The oceans are warming and spreading, resulting in the death of some reefs and cypress forests.
• Hurricanes appear to be increasing in strength-consider Katrina and Sandy.
• Aerosols in the earth’s atmosphere are changing, but they are hard to measure. New, more accurate satellite borne measuring devices are just coming on line.
• The permafrost is melting and decaying, especially in northern Canada and Siberia.
• The ocean circulation is weakening, but has not shut down. Remember that this is extremely important since circulation determines the weather patterns on the land adjacent to the ocean. In addition, circulation determines the distribution of heat and nutrients in the ocean.
• Fish production is falling off in many areas of the earth. This is partly due to over fishing, but it is also due to the changes in the ocean conditions that may be caused by climate change. The production of fish appears to be replaced by the production of jellyfish in some areas.
• Several computer programs that integrate these measurements exist and they are being tested. They show a climate-warming trend, but the earth does not appear to have reached runaway. The accuracy of these programs is not yet completely confirmed with data, but this accuracy is improving.

Thus, the current data on earth climate indicators are consistent with Global Warming. 

IS ACTION REQUIRED ?

Many still do not believe in climate warming. A counter theory has been proposed. This theory says that the warming trend that we observe is due to changes in solar radiation level and earth rotation axis wobble. Since there is nothing we can do about these causes, these critics propose that we do nothing that would upset the world economy, and wait to see what happens. This procedure could be very dangerous, as we shall see.

Suppose nothing is done, but global warming theory is correct. Then the following long-term bad effects are likely.

• The glaciers are part of the earth’s fresh water storage system that man uses extensively. If they disappear, the rivers will tend to flood in the winter and spring and dry up in the summer, which is bad for man.
• The ice shelves in the Arctic and Antarctic are excellent fish food producers and if they disappear, this food source for fish may disappear along with the fish they feed.
• If the mean sea level rises to its maximum, some of the most important and valuable seacoast real estate in the world will be submerged, and coastal aquifers will become salty.
• If climate zones move north (and south), significant amounts of productive agricultural land will be lost. Other agricultural land may be gained, but it will take time and money to develop it, and many existing people will be left without food.
• If the oceans warm to the maximum, a large portion of the earth’s reefs will die, and many coastal cypress forests will be damaged. This will damage the associated fish breeding grounds. These problems will cause the reduction of an important food source for man and other animals.
• The permafrost will continue to melt and emit carbon dioxide and methane.
• The ocean circulation will continue to weaken, and carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide increase as a result.

The above effects have, for the most part, a limited bad impact on the earth’s livability. However, two impacts of this cascade of events, the loss of reflective ice and the melting and decay of the permafrost, may cause runaway warming. This would eventually result in serious ocean circulation reduction and perhaps shutdown. Then the ocean would cease to produce shellfish and fish, and eventually the hydrogen sulfide production by sulfur loving bacteria would increase and be sufficient to impact the ability of the earth to support oxygen-loving life-including us. This reduction may cause weather change and species loss, although the final impact is not clear. Inaction would lock in all the other bad effects and open us to many more serious future problems. If runaway is possible and something can be done, action now is absolutely imperative. 

THE SOLUTION

A practical and economically positive solution may be possible for both climate and weather control without damaging the global economic system. Consider the following solutions. 

Climate Control

This solution consists of an energy generating system that can reduce carbon dioxide emission and sequester the remainder. Specifically:

O Reduction of fossil fuel use, which would consist of substituting for fossil fuel power plants:

–         Ocean based wind and wave generators and solar cells to provide both base load energy and portable fuels. (See AP1.2 ENERGY SCARCITY AND NEW OPTIONS)

–         Deep thermal well power plants where economical.

–         Nuclear power plants where economical and safe

–         Electrical cars with solar cells to extend range.

–         Alcohol and oil from waste wood, algae and kelp for portable power plant operations such as aircraft, trains, cars and trucks.

O Sequestering the carbon dioxide, which would consist of putting the carbon dioxide in:

–         Deep oceans by freezing the carbon dioxide, packaging it and sinking it to the deep ocean floor (see ap2-Jan-this site). Consider the following facts. The specific gravity of solid carbon dioxide (dry ice) is 1.55. If dry ice is frozen and packaged, it will sink to the bottom of ocean, where the low temperature and high pressure will maintain it in a sealed liquid state if packaged correctly. This is equivalent to increasing the sequestration of carbon dioxide in limestone by plankton.

–         Deep rock formations by use of deep thermal wells.

–         Deep oceans by increasing the growth of plankton by fertilizing the surface of the ocean with soluble iron and other nutrients.

–         Surface rock formations by reacting carbon dioxide with available metal oxides, which then produces stable carbonates. This is being developed in Newcastle, Australia

–         Oil and coalfields where carbon dioxide is injected directly into underground  oil fields and unminable coal seams. 

It should be noted that only by using ocean based wind and wave generators to provide energy and freeze and sink the carbon dioxide in the deep ocean is enough capability availability to solve this problem economically. The other methods are being tried, but they appear to be less economical, and they have limited capacity due to scarcity of the formations needed for storage. 

Deep Ocean Sequestration

The deep ocean storage by freezing, packaging, sealing and sinking the carbon dioxide appears most promising. The first step in this sequestration is to capture and purify the gas. This can be done by absorption in cold sodium or potassium carbonate solutions. On heating, the resulting bicarbonate liberates carbon dioxide and reverts to carbonate, and the cycle can be repeated. Because of the low concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, this may be a rate limiting process, however. Another way to capture the carbon dioxide is to use resin capture and release as is done in the Global Research Technologies device, which is currently becoming available. More research is required to determine which is the best technique. 

The next step is to freeze the carbon dioxide. The energy required to freeze it starting at 60 deg F is 160 KWH/ton. The carbon dioxide generated by man is ~2.4 million lb/sec, so 690 million KW is required to freeze this carbon dioxide. Now 200 million SEMAN can operate on the oceans of the world and make a profit (see below), so each would need to provide 3.5 KW of power to sequester all the carbon dioxide generated by man. The remaining energy generated can be used to make liquid fuels to replace the fossil fuels currently in use. 

The final step is to package the frozen carbon dioxide (dry ice) to keep it from leaking into the ocean. Three layers of plastic packaging capable of cold flow which would be leak proof when sealed, is the simplest to apply and appears to be the most economical method to prepare the carbon dioxide for sinking into the ocean. Once at the bottom of the ocean, the carbon dioxide would be sealed in plastic at high pressure, and so it would convert to a liquid, and would not convert back to its original gaseous form. This sealed package must be tested for integrity, however, by dropping the packaged dry ice in the ocean to see if it will go all the way to the ocean floor and remain sealed. 

This new option will soon be available. Aquater2050 LLC is working on a program to place ocean based wind turbines, wave generators and solar cells on the high-energy areas (wind speed >15kn) of the oceans.  Such vessels would generate 100 to 400KW in electrical energy. One of the better places to find high-energy winds is in the ENSO-trade wind zone discussed above for weather control. Calculations indicate that roughly 200 million vessels that harvest energy can operate profitably in this and other high-energy areas of the world. In addition; the world has a current need for jobs. Thus it is expected that these vessels will be built and sent to sea rapidly as soon as the prototype is finished and tested. Such vessels are relatively inexpensive ($100,000 for materials, and an equal amount for labor-about the price of a house). It seems reasonable that SEMAN will be built until it is no longer profitable to build them and put them on the sea (when the high energy zones of the oceans are filled). So we may expect that enough vessels will be built (about 200 million) and launched to accomplish this sequestering goal. Operating efficiency is also good. The harvesting apparatus for all three energy types can be operated on one platform or vessel (called a SEMAN) to save capital expense, and each vessel will grow it’s own food and purify its own water. Thus a large number of SEMAN will be available for climate and weather control and the cost of operation will be small. 

Using these vessels, full-scale climate control experiments could be done by SEMAN owners if the test equipment were provided to them, since the owner would already be in the correct area (trade wind zones) and be generating the necessary energy. The SEMAN also automatically provides food for operation for long periods at sea, and most of the equipment needed is normal equipment.

OPERATION CAPABILITY

There does not seem to be any major problem with providing the necessary carbon dioxide sequestration capability for climate control. The oceans have enough area in high-energy zones (wind velocity >15KN) to allow for 200 million SEMAN, and they can provide enough sequestration capability at the bottom of the ocean for the earth’s needs. Here we are not fighting nature; we are merely using nature’s own carbon cycle by packaging carbon dioxide in plastic and sending it to the bottom of the ocean to increase the ocean’s sequestration capability.

There is potentially a major timing problem with the climate control method given above, however. Both the ocean based wind and wave generators and the deep thermal wells are being developed by small companies that, under normal development procedures, would not be expected to have a large impact for 30 years, and would not be expected to start reversing the warming trend for 40 to 50 years. The ice caps and the permafrost layers are expected to melt in 15 to 25 years. Thus we may be in a state of runaway global warming before the solution can come on line. An acceleration of the development program may be necessary to overcome this difficulty. 

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, there is a critical need for climate control, and it appears to be possible. The solution is to control the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which will then control climate. The key to success is to avoid fighting nature. One must aim at regulating the carbon dioxide level to avoid global warming and the destructive extremes in temperature, wind speed, sea level and wave height that are too common now.

 It appears to be feasible to control the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by sequestering it in the deep rocks on land and in the abyssal depths of the ocean. The key to the success of the deep-ocean sequestration process is the SEMAN, an ocean going vessel that gathers energy from wind, waves and sun, and uses this energy to freeze carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and freeze, package, seal and sink it in the ocean where it is stable. Controlling the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere controls the average temperature of the atmosphere and thus the climate.

 

Notes

1. The design work for the SEMAN is done. The physical prototype of the SEMAN is nearly complete-see “SEMAN prototype”, this site, and bottom of the home page.
2. To donate to help complete this prototype, click “Add To Cart” on the home page.