Diatomaceous Earth patent

[Ken Caldeira]

James Cascio has kindly pointed out that a patent has been issued for the use of silica particles for stratospheric sunshade geoengineering. (see attached).

The patent was filed on 30 Sep 2009, with a provisional patent filed on 30 Sep 2008. I note that this idea of using silica particles was discussed on this group at least as early as 1 May 2007:  https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#search/googlegroups+silica/11243cfe473291d8

and I have email from Greg Benford from that period specifically referring to "diatomaceous earth".

One would assume that any rational court would find that this patent describes things that are obvious to those skilled in the relevant arts. (I suppose the question then is whether an expectation of encountering a "rational court" is itself rational.)


________________
Ken Caldeira

Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
+1 650 704 7212 kcal...@carnegie.stanford.edu
http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab  @kencaldeira

See our YouTube:
  Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in international trade
  Past land use decisions and the mitigation potential of reforestation
  Near Zero videos

[John Gorman]

As I read this document it is a patent application. No patent has been granted and there is a period of evaluation during which it is easy to challenge. If it is ever granted then it could be a real nuisance.

 

I filed a UK provisional patent 27th October 2006 referring specifically to silica..

My first article in any press was a regional weekly newspaper on1st DEc 2006

I had article in the magazine of the Ski Club of Great Britain specifically mentioning silica in January 2007 in my website://  www.naturaljointmobility.info/pressarticles.htm

 

All of that was before I had ever heard of the word geoengineering or this group. Only later did I find out about Greg Benford's work -and other similar work.Prior to that I thought my work was original as possibly Mr Neff thinks!

 

Can someone in a US university with a patent department investigate and put a challenge in before its too late. I will provide details of the above three bits of evidence.

 

john gorman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

[Ken Caldeira]

Sorry about that. Thanks for the correction. It is merely a patent application, not a patent.

[John Gorman]

Dont appologise. It isimportant to have picked this up at this stage. There will be a patent examiner allocated to search for "prior art" but the word geoengineering does not apper in  the patent and the examoner may not have heard of it either.

 

Patent systems are notoriously chauvinistic in every country so the challenge should come from a US person or university.

 

Greg Benford. Your work on diatamaceous earth was way prior to this . Any chance your uni patent dept could do this?

 

John gorman

----- Original Message -----

From: Jamais Cascio

To: kcal...@gmail.com

Cc: Jamais Cascio ; John Gorman ; geoengineering

Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 11:41 PM

Subject: Re: [geo] Diatomaceous Earth patent

My mistake -- I directed Dr C to the entry. Apologies.

-Jamais Cascio

[Gregory Benford]

I doubt this patent will get approved, since there is plenty of prior art.

Indeed, at the behest of a private interest, I was party to a patent application in 2009 which used diatamaceous earth among other aerosols and specifically referred to controlling Arctic cooling with it. The full patent never got filed but there is also my paper on Saving the Arctic which specifically mentions diatamaceous earth.

I doubt many of the geoengineering can be patented because so mjuch has been done and published on the main methods. In any case DARPA is impervious to such claims, should they go ahead with any real engineering studies.

Gregory Benford

[Michael Hayes]

Dr. Benson, et al.

I was typing out a response when you posted. First, giving Mr. Neff a fair warning of your prior art can prevent him spending more money and give the examiner cause for denial. Simply e-mail him with the proper links. The issue of "describes things that are obvious to those skilled in the relevant arts" can be debated. No one "skilled in the arts" before your claims came close to describing such a means. It is an issue of quality and no other SRM medium comes close to what you proposed for the reason(s) that you proposed it for.

I agree that the patent potential for any "geoengineering" means and method will most likely never lead to an enforceable patent. However, the credit of thought (concept) should be given.  Tesla was once asked about the Marconi radio patents. He simply replied that he enjoyed seeing others detail his concept(s). And, he was right....Marconi did not invent the radio.

I am hoping that the concepts which are being put forth on this site can be highlighted through a dedicated website so that folks like Mr. Neff (and myself) do not spend time re inventing wheels. "Publishing" has a new meaning with the web yet being able to find the information is getting harder. Did Mr. Neff even know about this group? Getting concepts posted on a site like this is an important legal issue. Developing a website to highlight new concepts can help avoid this type of situation by making it easier to find the concepts. Yes, many good concepts are offered here yet they are passed by in hopes of further consideration and support ....Even if the concepts are not fully worked out.... Remember, it is quality and dates..above all else.

I came close to your concept without knowing of your work (I was apparently trying to re invent your wheel and was informed of my mistake by a number of members...you have clear priority). How can we get concepts like yours and others floated to the top of a basic "Google" search? How can we make it easy for examiners and would be inventors to know the actual "state of the art"?

Michael (US Patent #4,885,811)

Michael Hayes

360-708-4976

http://www.voglerlake.com