MCB paper

[John Latham]

Hello Andrew,

I hope you dont mind my checking with you as to whether you
kindly sent out to Google-group members the pdf I sent to you of our
Phil Trans Roy Soc MCB paper. I feel sure that you did, but I've had
no reaction and I dont seem to have recd a copy.

All Best Wishes, John.


John Latham
Address: P.O. Box 3000,MMM,NCAR,Boulder,CO 80307-3000
Email: lat...@ucar.edu or john.l...@manchester.ac.uk
Tel: (US-Work) 303-497-8182 or (US-Home) 303-444-2429
or (US-Cell) 303-882-0724 or (UK) 01928-730-002
http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/people/latham
________________________________________
From: geoengi...@googlegroups.com [geoengi...@googlegroups.com] on behalf of Andrew Lockley [andrew....@gmail.com]
Sent: 09 August 2012 14:38
To: Russell Seitz; geoengineering
Subject: [geo] Re: Testing brightwater

Russell,

I've been thinking further about testing the 'brightwater' idea.
Reference Seitz, R. (2010). "Bright water: Hydrosols, water
conservation and climate change". Climatic Change 105 (3–4): 365–381.
doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9965-8

I'm interested to know whether the salinity of the water is likely to
have a material effect?

My suggestion is that testing in rivers would be a good first step.
There is limited mixing with unaltered water, and there should be a
clear correlation between distance and time, which would potentially
allow residency testing in a variety of different temperatures and
turbidity environments with ease. Costs of such testing could be
considerably lower than in open water, as an unmanned bubbler could be
placed in a static location, left running, and samples taken
downstream. By using a pseudorandom pulse, it should be possible to
get a very clear indication of the effect of mixing and dilution on
the bubble flow. Albedo and turbidity measurements could be taken
continuously.

However, all of that is irrelevant if it doesn't work in rivers.
Perhaps you, or another reader, could comment.

Thanks

A

On 21 April 2011 01:28, Andrew Lockley <andrew....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> It seems to me that Brightwater is suitable for 'homebrew' testing, and
> indeed would greatly benefit from this work. Water bodies are very variable
> by salinity, choppiness, cloudiness, temperature, etc.
>
> Is it possible to create a set of standard tests which can be conducted by
> people to test BW in their local area? A bucket filled with seawater in
> California may behave very differently to a bucket of seawater in Scotland.
>
> I would imagine that it would be possible to test the idea using a 2 gallon
> bucket, a bicycle or car tyre pump, clock, standard diffuser nozzle and a
> ruler with a coin taped to it (for checking cloudiness). A colour-
> comparison chart may also be useful. Sure, these would be very basic
> results, but they would be very helpful if (for example) we discovered that
> water near river mouths was better than water from open ocean shorelines.
> I'm guessing that all the equipment that wasn't available in an average home
> would be able to be bought and posted for likely a lot less than 50 dollars.
>
> I may be offending the sensibilities of those with big labs and high
> standards, but my guess is we could quickly gain some very useful data on
> this with the participation of some people on this list, and maybe beyond.
> Who knows, maybe this could become a very popular experiment in schools and
> colleges?
>
> A

--
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.

[David Lewis]

The "Marine Cloud Brightening" paper, if that's what you're talking about, is freely available at the Royal Society site, at least for now.  Here is the link.  All the other papers in that issue are also freely available, but in a more roundabout way than the Latham et.al. MCB one.  

It turns out that the Royal Society is making every paper except one in that Geoengineering issue freely available from their website, at least for now.  You are stopped at a paywall if you use the links from their online Table of Contents, but if you use the links at the bottom of their online Preface to the issue, you can get free access to every paper except one.  

I.e., if you go to this page on the Royal Society website and click on the  "Read the Preface to this issue FREE" link you get taken to the Preface.  At the bottom of the Preface, if you click on any link to a paper you get sent to an abstract page that has a "Free To You" link on it which opens to the full paper. 

And the last paper, i.e. The Runaway Greenhouse... which I found impossible to obtain at the Royal Society website,  is available as a preprint at arXiv.org i.e.at this link.