Permafrost Insulation

[Alvia Gaskill]

I hadn't heard about this one before.  It involves some kind of engineered metal foam that wicks heat away from a surface.  Given the dark colors shown in the literature for it and the likely high cost in dollars and in GHG emissions, I doubt it could be used on the scale envisioned.  One advantage, however, is that since it is completely inorganic, it might not decompose as quickly as say, a polypropylene blanket as used in the Greenland wrapping study. 

 

http://www.metafoam.com/files/metafoam%20-%20metal%20foams.pdf

 

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

From: Pettigrew R. J.

To: agas...@nc.rr.com

Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:28 PM

Subject: Your agreement with some geoengineering options;my suggestion of a "soft" way

Dear Ms. Gaskill, [NO!]   Having read recently your " Aerosol Discussion", I agree with some of your points in this document.   They are:   1)Not all geoengineering is science fiction:some are  doable soon with the  20th centuries    technologies, such as one of your preferred option: the (NH4)2SO4 injection by aircraft.    And,  more easily,    my suggestion  later.   2)You said also: "...and can be applied in time to stop the melting of Arctic sea ice,  gla-    ciers and permafrost before a global catastrophe occurs".  I  agree and can add: some    must be tested openly(publicly) soon! In effect, since your Discussion, the bad news on    Arctic thawing were   further  pessimistic! The timescale is no more 2050, or 2040, but    closer to  2012!  So,  time to action is come: at least in the testing of promising ways.   3)I disagree in part with Ms.Cairncross(an economist 1stly)who said that"...more attention    needs to be paid to adapting to climate change, as a realization of its inevitability."    To me, adaptation is a form of   "resignation" and some defeatism...      I disagree with her also with:"geoengineering is considered as a  distraction". Adaptation    is as such to me since(she is right here)the  real issue is  reducing the GHG emissions.    My basic suggestion has something to do with GHG reduction(CH4 mostly).   4)Althought Ms. Cairncross can be right on "unilateral" action by US someday, and nega-    tive effects on its neighbors, to me that  depend on the  type of geoeng.g method used.    Your prefered option above will have effect on other countries since aerosol has no bor-     ders...  But negociation is possible to show the potential benefit(s) to them...  My sug-     gestion, despite the common point with your option(aircraft use for delivery), will  not     have directly at least such "no border" feature.   Here is my suggestion, based on a proven technology used in the North(and sub-arctic) for decades with some satisfaction and even handled well enough(for me)a big enough earthquake some years ago in Alaska.   This technology has never been used yet for GHG control per se, since not a real concern then(in 1977 for the TAPS pipeline in Alaska)and since the area I want to see used it and tested soon was always removed for any infrastructure protection use.   So, I want to see the methanogen microbes(archea type)be slow down a lot in their ana- erobic decomposition of organic matter in the so-called  active layer(or mollisol)above the permafrost, which thaws and refreezes each year with an improved model of the thermo- syphon installed in a regular enough grid when this top layer be smooth, in summer end.   A Québec firm, near Montréal, helped with the National Research Council of Canada, had conceived a new type of wick, with a metal foam.   This firm, Metafoam, is seeking partners, mostly for CPU cooling. But, as I told the marke- ting director, Ms. Vézina, more promising, and less in competition possibility exists for their breakthrought in soil cooling, such as the permafrost or, in my current concern, the mollisol, a high source of the CH4, up to 23X more a threat than the too mediatized CO2.   So, in barren zones such as in Nunavut, near the Greenland(East of it), where some gla- cier and permafrost is thawing(a threat for the tourists there this year)be only accessible by aircraft, since many airports around.   So, my concept I tried to plead to both Québec and Ottawa govts to test on the field or by PC simulation, or even in an instrumented soil, since about 2 years, can be seen as a "CH4 storage" technology without the need of capture since already in the soil.   If tested also in sea ice environment, it can help to increase the albedo there by making the new ice, too fragile and not enough cold, into the perennial type by further cooling of it.   In that instance, it can be seen as a "soft" geoengineering technology since no foreign chemical is brought in this fragile environment.   So, I invite you to survey the general aspects and current uses of the thermosyphon. You will see that imagination is important to find new uses for it.   I invite you also to exchange with your colleagues.   I thank you for your courtesy to read my limited american and even to share my concerns on a still neglected aspect of Clim. Change and my modest element of solution.   Yours Truly,   R.J. Pettigrew, B. Sc. Org. Ch. 15, Ch. Dunham Frelighsburg, Missisquoi Co. Québec, J0J 1C0   P.S.:  Ms Vézina email is:                            karine...@metafoam.com

[Mike MacCracken]

If one could figure out how to keep its effects from being overwhelmed by ice, an alternative approach to getting the same net effect (that is, to work to cool the Arctic and preserve the C in the permafrost) might be to use the material in the Arctic Ocean to transfer heat from the ocean waters up through the sea ice to be radiated away in winter (thus bypassing the insulating effects of sea ice—especially when a meter or more thick). This would help to thicken the sea ice and so keep it around longer, using its albedo to reflect away more of the solar radiation.

Now, one would have to be careful as spring came that the darker color of the material did not absorb extra solar and so transmit more heat to the ocean and melt the ice faster, so having a very light, reflective color in the visible would be required, and if it would float on the Arctic through any time of melting, it would have a higher albedo than the water, so would help slightly to reduce overall solar absorption.

So, a question might be how to design a shape that would best accomplish these purposes—transferring heat up and radiating it away in winter, and not absorbing sunlight—all without becoming iced over. Keeping the Arctic Ocean ice-covered would then keep the region cool enough that the permafrost would not thaw, releasing CO2 and/or CH4.

Mike MacCracken

[Alvia Gaskill]

I added the NO! as I am Mr., not Ms.  If I am understanding your concept correctly, you propose to drop these metal foam heat transfer devices from airplanes onto the permafrost areas where they will bury into the soil.  The cylinders containing the metal foam also contain a heat transfer fluid, ammonia or CO2 and are painted white to reflect visible sunlight. 

 

The difficulties of carrying out an aerial deposition program have been recently explored on the Discovery Channel Project Earth series episode where attempts were made to revegetate a denuded area via helicopter drops of seedlings.  The seedlings didn't grow, but a device was eventually fabricated that could bury into the soil and a drop pattern consistent with the project goals was also achieved.  Given the hardness of the Arctic soil, I think aerial deposition would be difficult.  My main concern about this idea is still the cost.  Covering a few thousand square feet of roads and area under oil pipelines is one thing, the thousands of square miles of land necessary to mitigate warming is another entirely.  You should develop some cost estimates and see if the idea is still feasible for that reason alone.

 

I don't see how this material could be used in the Arctic Ocean by imbedding it in sea ice, although certain of the copper, iron and nickel foams have stated densities less than that of water and should float.

 

http://www.metafoam.com/iron_foams.html

 

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

From: Pettigrew R. J.

To: agas...@nc.rr.com

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:26 PM

Subject: Thanks for your email; some information

 

Dear Ms. Gaskill,

 

For of all, I thank you for your fast reply, and those of your colleague, Mr. MacCracken.

 

I am sorry, about the (NO!) which appeared near your name. I don' t know how that hap-

pened since I did not found the symbol of the squared ( ) !!

 

In a sense only, I am "happy" to heard you said you never heard on that!  That conforts me

that my concept is really new!!

 

On the other hand, I can have more difficulty to convince some expert to check further!

 

Even at the Metafoam firm, Ms. Vézina(a marketing people at first)is intrigued with that!

 

But, for now, it seems that I am more confident that her about the capability of their pro-

duct for my concept!!

 

In short, the device(a vertical one, more or less as the "penetrator" designed(-- of course

the engine!!)to hit the Moon by the now aborted Planet A Japanese probe in late 90s),

with the metal foam wick and the thermal fluid, NH3(or CO2)hermetically in the casing

able to withstand the aircraft ejection in the muddy mollisol, which can be painted in whi-

te or other high albedo coating.

 

The aircraft be able to carry some thousands/flight, each weighting less than 3 kg and

create a grid of about 1000 to 3000 /km2 depending of the test results(and simulation)on

the device capability.

 

Unlike those in infrastructure protection, no short delay needed for results!  For ex., for

a highway protection, or the TAPS pipeline, results are expected within few days at most.

 

In my case, the 3 chill seasons will work together with the devices, so the real results be

seen in the early spring and the next early fall...

 

Of course, the expenses to install such a grid will be from the CO2 credits or C tax to be

paid by the High Emittors.

 

I wait for your comments again.     Thank you.

[Mike MacCracken]

Regarding putting such objects into the ground, to cool the permafrost region they would have to work only during the cold season, for during the warm season they would transmit heat down into the permafrost faster than it is being transported now. With the permafrost thawing, we know that at present the net annual flux of heat is into the permafrost, and putting in objects with better conductivity would, on first examination, thus be expected to speed the transfer of heat and thawing of the permafrost—so just the opposite of the intended effect. So, if this idea is to work, the material or the object it is made of needs to have a temperature sensitive conductivity—one that goes down as the temperature goes up so it is transporting heat out in the dead of winter and not down in the warmth of summer.

Mike MacCracken

----- Original Message -----
 
From:  Mike  MacCracken <mailto:mmac...@comcast.net>  
 
To: Alvia Gaskill <mailto:agas...@nc.rr.com>  ; petti...@yahoo.ca
 
Cc: Geoengineering <mailto:geoengi...@googlegroups.com>