Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-28 08:01:59

The human race clearly lacks the collective wisdom to avoid melting all the ice on the planet.

There are some who see this as a problem, I see it as an opportunity for entrepreneurs.

A sizable proportion of the human population will be displaced from land, and the obvious place for them to relocate is the open ocean.

There are some who might consider this to be overly challenging, because the ocean serves up some challenging conditions, and climate change is going to increase the number of those challenges, as well as their intensity.

However, I am confident that human ingenuity is up to the challenge, and that the specter of famine and war can be held at bay.

This topic is offered for those NewMars members who are willing to consider the use of the capitalist system to turn this challenge into an opportunity.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-28 08:02:36

This post is reserved for an index to posts that may be contributed by NewMars members over time.

(th)

Calliban · 2024-05-28 08:15:41

We are able to mount offshore wind turbines on steel /concrete monopiles driven into the sea bed. Could we put buildings on monopiles as well? This might help a lot in low lying countries like Holland. Even after the sea has flooded them, they will remain relatively shallow sea beds. Maybe we could build entire offshore cities in this way?

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-28 08:27:14

For Calliban re #3

Thank you ** very ** much for picking up on this opportunity!

The players on the scene are the optimists and the pessimists, and we have NewMars members who can wear both hats, although rarely simultaneously.

The pessimists are just waiting to pounce, and I have already heard from one of them (offline).

I like your proposal, for a variety of reasons.

The volume under the surface platform is NOT wasted ... it is an environment with plenty of potential for a great variety of activities.

The city design needs to have steady growth of water levels firmly in mind.

I'm told that due to human collective stupidity, we can expect all the ice on the planet to melt, so there will be a corresponding increase in sea level. In addition (I am told) the oceans will expand due to increased temperatures.

I would expect the cities to be built will be water tight and buoyant, while at the same time resting on poles anchored in the sea floor.

Break walls of some kind would seem prudent, but these could be designed to harvest wave energy.

This is, or should be, a mechanical engineer's opportunity on a global scale.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-28 08:41:01

For all ....

The capitalist system created the mess we find ourselves in...

The capitalist system can get us out of the mess, or more accurately, allow us to live with the mess and adapt to the new conditions.

This topic is available to ALL NewMars members to advance understanding of what it is going to take to move about half the human population from land based living to pylon based living.

The place for those pylons would seem (to me at least) to be right where all those folks are living right now.

There is no need to move offshore. The shore is going to move inland, and the sea will be ** right there ** to enjoy or endure depending upon weather.

The first business opportunity is in the media realm.

There are opportunities for authors to earn income from articles and from books, and for media producers to produce videos and even full length movies around this theme.

Beyond that, there are forward looking individuals who can afford to build up on pylons, and a number of these experiments are already in place in Florida, and probably elsewhere.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2024-05-28 18:09:37

The use of sand berms and large block levees that are to protect have been taken out by storm surges.
Places where the shallow ocean depth are surely some of the areas to look at doing. We will need large pumps and gates to control the ocean water levels for sure.
Reminds me of a submarine dry dock control....

SpaceNut · 2024-06-02 17:40:56

What is the Length of the US Coastline?

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), for example, took a measurement of all the United States coastlines in 1939-40 and again in 1970. They surmised that the total length of the combined US coastlines amounted to approximately 95,471 miles.
This measurement took all US territories and their borders with water into consideration, including Hawaii and Alaska, as well as other Pacific and Carribean islands.

here is the other topic... Architecture for Sea Level Rise on Earth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-03 07:07:32

For SpaceNut re #7 ... thank you for this addition to the topic, showing existing land area that is subject to sea water incursion. This land is potentially ideal for systems designed for the edge-of-the-ocean environment.

In this post, I am adding a part of a long conversation with ChatGPT4o about the opportunity that might be available.

Ocean Heating Energy Trade
Hello Again - I'd like to start a new topic, to see if a hypothesis might stand up to scrutiny - may I enlist your assistance?
ChatGPT
Absolutely, I'd be happy to help. Please go ahead and share your hypothesis about ocean heating and energy trade, and I'll do my best to assist you in scrutinizing it.
Let's establish some facts and conditions for the discussion. Let us set the scene as a square kilometer of ocean surface on the equator of the Earth. Let us determine the amount of solar energy that impinges upon the surface. We can be reasonably confident that photon flux at night is close to zero, even if there is a full moon, but I'd like to know what you think might be the level of illumination from a full Moon directly over the plot.
ChatGPT
To set the stage, let's start by determining the amount of solar energy that impinges on a square kilometer of ocean surface at the equator.
Solar Energy Impingement
Solar Constant: The average solar constant (the amount of solar energy received per unit area at the top of the Earth's atmosphere) is about 1361 W/m2.
Day Length and Sun Angle: At the equator, day length is about 12 hours year-round. The sun is directly overhead at noon on equinoxes. To simplify, we will assume an average insolation of 1000 W/m2 over the 12 daylight hours.
Calculation for a Square Kilometer:
[] 1 km2 = 1,000,000 m2
[] Total solar energy per hour per square meter: 1000 W/m2 × 3600 s = 3,600,000 J/m2
[] Total solar energy per hour for 1 km2: 3,600,000 J/m2 × 1,000,000 m2 = 3.6 × 10^12 J
[] Over 12 hours: 3.6 × 10^12 J/h × 12 = 4.32 × 10^13 J
Moonlight Illumination
Moonlight is much less intense than sunlight. On a clear night with a full moon directly overhead, the illuminance is approximately 0.25 lux.
Lux to Watts per Square Meter:
[] Moonlight illuminance: 0.25 lux
[] Conversion: 1 lux ≈ 0.0015 W/m2 (this is a rough estimate, as it depends on the wavelength distribution of the light source)
Moonlight irradiance: 0.25 lux × 0.0015 W/m2/lux = 0.000375 W/m2
Calculation for a Square Kilometer:
[] Total moonlight irradiance per square meter: 0.000375 W/m2
[] Total moonlight irradiance per square kilometer: 0.000375 W/m2 × 1,000,000 m2 = 375 W
Over 12 hours: 375 W × 3600 s/h × 12 = 16,200,000 J
Summary
Solar energy during the day: 4.32 × 10^13 J over 12 hours.
Moonlight energy during the night: 16,200,000 J over 12 hours.
The solar energy impinging on the ocean surface during the day is vastly greater than the energy received from moonlight during the night.
With these conditions established, what aspect of this scene would you like to explore further?

(th)

Calliban · 2024-06-03 08:59:15

One thing of note: At the equator you get 8 hours of full sun equivelent per day. Although the sun is above the horizon for 12 hours, flux on a horizontal surface varies according to a half sine wave, such that average flux is Qmax x 1/2 x sq root 2. If Qmax is 1000W/m2, then average flux over 12h is 707W/m2. That works out to an equivelent of 8.48 full sun hours per day. Factor in dust attenuation clise to horizon and atmospheric lensing effects and an equatorial surface with clear sky will get 8kWh/m2/day.

RobertDyck · 2024-06-03 09:20:45

Dutch floating houses

RobertDyck · 2024-06-03 10:37:48

tahanson43206 wrote:

The human race clearly lacks the collective wisdom to avoid melting all the ice on the planet.

You just had to push my buttons. The planet has cycles of ice ages followed by interglacial periods. Interglacial is a warm period between ice ages, we're in one now. A new ice age begins approximately every 100,000 years. Before that ice ages occurred every 40,000 years. Millions of years ago the planet was warm all the time, no ice ages.

Here is the graph I keep referencing. This is global temperature taken from ice cores, going back 450,000 years. EPICA are Antarctic ice cores taken by a European project. Vostok is also from Antarctica, from a Russian project. Note the peak temperature during the last interglacial recorded by EPICA is roughly 6°C above the preindustrial temperature. That's just due to nature. So before you get all uppity about human activity, realize a portion of climate change is due to nature, a portion due to human activity. More is due to nature than you think. If we were to halt all human activity, it wouldn't stop climate change, just slow it down.

Scientists found some deeper ice deposits, have been able to get ice cores that go back even farther. This one goes back 800,000 years. So while the EPICA and Vostok ice cores cover the last 4 ice ages and last 4 interglacial periods, the new one covers the last 8. Yes, this is from the journal Nature. Careful, the top graph time scale is right-to-left, while the new one is left-to-right. This is also from the EPICA ice dome, but they found a spot that goes deeper. It gives a little more precision; was the peak temperature of the last interglacial only 5°C above the preindustrial temperature? A little hope, but the long term trend is the peak temperature is increasing. My point is the Paris Accord that sets the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above the preindustrial temperature simply by limiting carbon emissions is delusional.

Also note CO2 levels. Peak during the last interglacial period, about 125,000 years ago, was around 290 ppm. Peak 3 interglacial periods ago, about 325,000 years ago, was about 300 ppm. This is take from gas bubbles trapped in the ice cores. When snow fell, air was trapped between snow flakes. As more ice fell, deep snow was crushed to form ice. This trapped air bubbles at the time the snow fell. This gives us a direct sample of atmosphere, one year at a time, going back the age of the ice cores. This is not indirect, it's a direct sample.

The reason I emphasize this is a warning. Do not do what Canada is doing. Canada has created a carbon tax that does absolutely nothing to help climate change, but is destroying our economy. The Trudeau government has also imposed restrictions on oil and natural gas projects. They're pandering to political activists, climate extremists, who treat this as a cult. They want all fossil fuels left in the ground. We can't do that, we don't have the technology. I have proposed several things to help climate change but the current Canadian government has ignore me and any other moderates, choosing instead to take extreme measures that are absolutely ineffective. Canada is a cold country; summers are beautiful, but winters are cold. We need heat in winter. Ending all home heating is not an option.

Quebec, Newfoundland and Manitoba have plentiful rivers that have been dammed; 100% of electricity is "green". Electricity there is not all hydro, but mostly hydro. Manitoba has some windmills, but they contribute 3% of electricity on the grid, hydro is 97%. Quebec has 94% hydro, <5% wind (rounding). But Ontario has already dammed all the rivers they can, even Niagara Falls is dammed. Only 30% of the water flows over the falls during the day, 10% at night. The rest goes through turbines. Ontario built nuclear power plants to generate enough for that province. Alberta is in the foothills of the Rocky mountains, they definitely have a drop in altitude, but they don't have large rivers with significant water flow. Saskatchewan has rivers with significant water flow, but it's flat as a pancake, no drop in altitude. You need both water flow and drop to generate hydro power, so those two provinces will never have significant hydro power. They converted from coal to natural gas to produce few carbon emissions, and to eliminate other pollutants from coal burning. But the political activists are not happy. The current Canadian federal environment minister has demanded all province convert the electric generation to 100% green. That's just not possible in Alberta or Saskatchewan.

Northwest Ontario used to burn coal to generate power, but one power plant was converted to burn wood pellets. There is a major pulp and paper industry in the town of Dryden, close to the Thunderbay power plant, so using waste wood sawdust pressed into pellets only made sense. However, they didn't produce pellets, they imported pellets from Norway. Do you realize how much carbon emissions are produced by the ships required to cross the Atlantic? And sail up the Saint Lawrence river and Great Lakes to Thunderbay? This defeats the point! Citizens and business in Dryden have repeated asked to purchase electricity from Manitoba, since they're so close to Manitoba and Manitoba has the lowest electricity rates in Canada. But he Ontario provincial government doesn't want to do business with Manitoba. Well why not?!?!?! (expletive!!!) Damn arrogant politicians! Politicians from southern Ontario are willing to do business with Quebec, the neighbouring province on the eastern side, and willing to do business with the United States, but don't want to do business with Manitoba. But Manitoba has additional rivers that could be dammed; over 4,000 megawatts additional generating capacity that hasn't been built because they don't have a customer. Why not run power lines to northwest Ontario including Dryden? Use hydro power to replace thermal power plants. But did they do that? No, instead they created a new tax!!!

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-03 18:45:15

For RobertDyck re #11

Thanks for your thoughtful post, and for reminders of the advantage of hydro power.

This topic is about opportunity to create cash flow.

it seems clear that the ice will melt, whether that occurs due to natural progression as you seem to expect, or due to human shortsightedness and obstinancy. The ice doesn't care in the slightest. It just melts, and humans can make of it what they will.

There is very little point in arguing about the cause. Now is the time for far sighted entrepreneurs to scope out the trends and plan to deliver the equipment and services people are going to need.

Right now is a good time to sink pylons deep into the Earth under the regions that are currently dry.

The pylons can be designed so they can be lengthened as needed, to stay above the high tides.

The land will be covered with water eventually, but well designed homes and businesses will remain as these changes occur.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-04 07:54:56

For Calliban re Post #9

Thanks for your reminders of various factors that will reduce the incidence of solar radiation at any particular part of the ocean's surface.

The hypothesis I am working is that capture of solar energy before it enters the ocean can reduce heating of the ocean.

I am taking into account that any capture method is likely to need a cold sink, and the ocean is a logical cold sink. The end result of the discussion with ChatGPT4o seems to be that a capture of about 33% of the arriving energy is possible. That means that for a given area on the ocean surface that is managed in this way, about 1/3rd of the default energy will NOT enter the ocean. The net effect would be reduction of heating, which I want to distinguish from cooling. The amount of heating under that patch of ocean will be reduced to 2/3rds of the default value.

The 1/3rd that is captured can (presumably) be used for some worth while purpose, such as making ammonia, which can then be transported to locations where it would be useful.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-04 07:55:43

Here is another installment from a long conversation with ChatGPT4o, about capture of solar radiation before it enters the ocean...

Continuing the Discussion
ChatGPT:
With these conditions established, what aspect of this scene would you like to explore further?
I am taking it as a given that heating of the oceans is caused by solar flux. Heating of the oceans contributes to the intensity of storms, so it would seem reasonable to reduce heating of the oceans to reduce the intensity of storms. My plan is to build up to the hypothesis in a step-by-step fashion. Let me now ask what we might expect if a thick cloud passes over our square kilometer when it is Noon and light intensity is maximum. Light will still be present as diffused radiation from the region around our plot. Can you estimate how much might impinge upon our plot under these circumstances?
ChatGPT:
Certainly! When a thick cloud passes over the square kilometer of ocean surface at noon, the direct solar radiation is significantly reduced, but there will still be some diffuse radiation due to scattering and reflection of sunlight by the clouds and the atmosphere.
Estimating Diffuse Radiation Under Cloud Cover
Clear Sky Solar Radiation: On a clear day, we have already estimated that the solar irradiance is about 1000 W/m2 at noon.
Cloud Attenuation Factor: The amount of solar radiation that reaches the surface under thick cloud cover can be significantly reduced. Thick clouds can reduce the solar irradiance to about 10-30% of the clear sky value. Let's assume a conservative value of 20% for thick clouds.
Calculation:
[] Direct solar irradiance under thick cloud cover: 1000 W/m2 × 0.2 = 200 W/m2
[] Total Energy Impingement on 1 km²:
[] Area of the plot: 1,000,000 m2
[] Total irradiance per square kilometer: 200 W/m2 × 1,000,000 m2 = 200,000,000 W
[] If we consider this value over an hour:
[] Total energy per hour: 200,000,000 W × 3600 s = 7.2 × 10^11 J
Summary
Under clear sky conditions at noon: 3.6 × 10^12 J/h
Under thick cloud cover at noon: 7.2 × 10^11 J/h
Thus, under thick cloud cover, the solar energy impinging upon our square kilometer plot at noon is reduced to approximately 20% of its value under clear skies, resulting in 7.2 × 10^11 J over an hour.
If there are any other factors or specific scenarios you would like to explore, feel free to let me know!

(th)

SpaceNut · 2024-06-04 17:33:45

Since you have waves crashing against the walls that are built why not use it to do the energy creation.

Also, all of the estuaries with the tidal water can spin turbines in each direction of the water flow every day as another method.

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-04 17:51:20

For SpaceNut re #15

Your post is interesting on multiple levels. This topic is about earning income by providing goods and services.

There is a starting point for every successful business, and your Post #15 may be such a starting point.

To help you get started, I'll offer a suggestion for something you've done already ... finding related reports/articles on the Internet.

I've read about tidal energy projects that have been funded, built and are operational. Is your idea about wave action already in practice somewhere?

It would definitely be a worth while addition to this topic if you can find examples for us to study.

(th)

RobertDyck · 2024-06-05 09:31:18

Housing must be built taking into account potential flooding. Even if flooding doesn't happen often, it does happen. Homes must be built to survive. One cottage community in Canada was built on a flood plain, but it never flooding during the 20th century. Realize what a flood plain is. It's flat and level because of past floods. If you build on a flood plain, calculate maximum water depth and build your house on stilts (piles, piers) to be above that. If you don't, you will get a nasty surprise sooner or later.

I tried to get the name of the cottage community on a flood plain, but couldn't. Here's a list of floods in Canada.
The most devastating cottage country floods in recent history

One of the floods listed is southern Manitoba in 2009. I live in Winnipeg. Winnipeg has a flood basically every spring when the snow melts. The Red River flows north through South Dakota, North Dakota, Manitoba, draining into the southern end of Lake Winnipeg. The city of Winnipeg was built on the forks of the Red and Assiniboine Rivers. In 1950 a flood submerged all of downtown Winnipeg causing millions of dollars in damage. The mayor decided to build a water diversion system called the Floodway. It's a massive water channel about as big as the main river channel; it goes around the city. Banks of the Floodway form a levee around the east end of the city. Levees along river embankments in and around the downtown were also built. THe mayor chose to build the Floodway slowly with funds available, not to go into debt. His political opponents criticized the project as a waste of money. It was the world's third largest earth work project, behind the Panama Canal and Suez Canal. Mayor was Duff Roblin so his opponents called it Duff's Ditch. However, the very first spring after the Floodway was completed, another massive flood. This time the Floodway worked, the city encountered no damage. Cost to build the Floodway was less than cost to repair damages, based on damages from the 1950 flood. So it paid for itself. Construction started November 1962, completed March 1968, the flood was April 1968. That shut up his opponents!

There was an even larger flood in 1997. Water through the Floodway was 10% more than design capacity, causing damage that had to be repaired after the flood was over. More water was allowed through the river main channel than normally would be allowed. Levees downtown had to be raised with sandbags. Many homes close to the river within the area protected also required temporary sand bag levees to protect them. To prevent water from flowing around the protect systems, the military was employed to build a large levee to the west of the river. It all worked! But small towns south of the city were not so lucky. Some built ring dikes. I guess they're levees rather than dikes, but media called them ring dikes. After the flood of 1997, those towns made their ring dikes permanent. A lot of farms were flooded, but that couldn't be helped. The best a farm could do is build a small hill for buildings such as the farmhouse, so they will remain above water next time the floods come.

The Red River Floodway includes a gate in the main river channel. This normally lies flat on the bottom of the river. Media talks about "opening" the floodway, but there is no actual gate to "open" the Floodway. The intake of the Floodway includes a ridge that water must flow over. This ridge prevents water from flowing into the Floodway during winter and freezing to form ice that could clog it. The only gate is the in the main river channel, that rises to restrict flow of water down that channel. River water is deliberately allowed to back up until the water is high enough to flow over the ridge at the intake of the Floodway. Because this involves deliberately making flooding worse south/upstream of the gate, the city told citizens to not build any houses there. But that meant land south of the gate is cheap, so some people did build anyway. Those houses get flooded every time the gate is raised to force water into the Floodway. Houses in the area are not allowed any flood insurance. The government just says "I told you so".

Climate change is expected to result in reduced rainfall in western Canada including Alberta, Saskatchewan, and southwest Manitoba. Geologists said in the past this area experience deep prolonged droughts, so expect those droughts to return. However, that same change in rainfall will result in increased rainfall in southeast Manitoba, east side of Lake Winnipeg, northwest Ontario, and Minnesota. Will it cause increased or decreased rainfall in North Dakota? Scientists cannot give a straight answer. But one effect is increased flooding along the Red River. So flood protections must be increased. After the floods of 1997 and 2009, people realize flood protections must be increased. Sometimes they have to be proverbially hit in the face before they get the message.

Hydro dams are along the Winnipeg River and Nelson River. The Winnipeg River drains northwest Ontario and southeast Manitoba into Lake Winnipeg. Minnesota drains through Lake of the Woods into the Winnipeg River. The Nelson River drains Lake Winnipeg into Hudson's Bay. This means climate change will increase water flow through these rivers. So the hydro projects are secure, at least for the life of the dams.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2024-06-05 09:39:24)

RobertDyck · 2024-06-05 09:43:40

During the flood of 1997, filling sand bags was a lot of manual labour. I said we need a truck that could extrude a plastic or fibreglass tube, and fill the tube with sand as it's extruded. Instant levee, no manual labour. One businessman must of heard me, because it built it. He operated his trucks for a short while, but then made a further improvement. Instead of filling the plastic tubes with sand, he filled them with water. The plastic must be water tight, but no sand is needed. I could complain that someone "stole" my idea, but I spoke about it openly in hopes that someone would make it. That worked, a businessman did manufacture these things. So I don't have to shove sand into bags any more.

SpaceNut · 2024-06-05 19:15:17

First other than Nasa data no one is viewing or monitoring with measurements for places that need help now. Other than the news story that near ocean loss of property we never hear anything until it's too late to put a plan into motion that would save them.

Reminds me of the slow glass topic....

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-05 21:02:29

For SpaceNut re #19

Your observation about NASA sure looks right if you are thinking of overhead viewing. However, people on the ground are taking observations in real time. The country of Panama just began moving residents of an offshore island to onshore accommodations the government created for them. That happened because people where making measurements and observations where the action is. I understand that the residents of South Sea islands are doing much the same thing, which is why representatives of those Nations are raising such a fuss at the United Nations. They didn't cause global warming, but they are sure going to be paying the brunt of the penalty.

This topic is about business opportunity.... there are islands all around the world which will be losing land to the see in coming years, and hurricane resistant habitats on pylons might do well in those situations.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2024-06-06 19:43:09

We have the inverse in the Pacific as China is building the rocks into bigger pieces of property.

Other money-making is through property insurance guard for the wall that is built. Surveying of lots to know where it can be built. Waterway rights of the land that resides within its reach but also from the standpoint of law.

update:
The company that builds the wall would want to get interest so they would also want to do insurance so as to prove that they are behind their product that they build.

Over build the wall to meet the 500 years high and there should not be any failure.

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-07 06:14:14

For SpaceNut re #21

The strategy of adding to existing islands will certainly work if China has the resources to spend. It took the energy of a volcano to make many of those islands, and it seems to me that equivalent energy investment will be needed to keep their heads above water.

Insurance is an interesting choice for income. In a time of rising seas, it seems that prudent insurance companies are getting out of the business.

Insurance is the art of spreading risk and squeaking out a profit when the guesses turn out well, and absorbing losses when they don't.

Insurance is ** not ** for the faint of heart.

When everyone is experiencing the same damage, there is no practical way to spread the expense to those not affected by damage.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2024-06-07 11:34:40

For Void re #23

This topic is about business opportunities.

The topic itself is set up in the new Business Proposals category.

Your post is certainly interesting, and it stands up well on it's own, but I don't see a connection to Business, or to sea level rise in particular.

What I'm hoping this topic might be able to do is to stimulate thinking about how to make money from the inevitable sea rise that is coming, whether humans want it or even if we deny that it is happening, as some members of this forum appear to be doing.

We have had traditional proposals so far, such as sea walls, and we have at least one proposal to build on pylons.

We have also seen a proposal to pile rocks on top of existing rocks, to elevate the top surface of an area.

There may be other ways of earning income from the rising of the sea.

This topic is set up to allow innovative ideas to find an audience.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2024-06-15 14:02:52

Government officials battle homeowners in race to protect coastal state from impending disaster: 'I'm very concerned'

Residents of coastal Florida are finding themselves stuck as they're faced with leaving their homes vulnerable to increasingly strong hurricanes or granting public beach access that will allow for federal restoration.
What's happening?
Many towns are at risk of damage and flooding because of increasingly severe storms in the Gulf of Mexico, as Grist reported. While the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers typically handles restoration for these areas, it cannot haul in thousands of tons of sand to complete these projects unless property owners grant easements to their private slivers of shore. Unfortunately, many people are refusing to allow such access.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2024-05-28 08:01:59

Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#2 2024-05-28 08:02:36

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#3 2024-05-28 08:15:41

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#4 2024-05-28 08:27:14

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#5 2024-05-28 08:41:01

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#6 2024-05-28 18:09:37

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#7 2024-06-02 17:40:56

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#8 2024-06-03 07:07:32

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

Ocean Heating Energy Trade

Solar Energy Impingement

Moonlight Illumination

Summary

#9 2024-06-03 08:59:15

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#10 2024-06-03 09:20:45

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#11 2024-06-03 10:37:48

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#12 2024-06-03 18:45:15

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#13 2024-06-04 07:54:56

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#14 2024-06-04 07:55:43

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

Continuing the Discussion

Estimating Diffuse Radiation Under Cloud Cover

Summary

#15 2024-06-04 17:33:45

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#16 2024-06-04 17:51:20

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#17 2024-06-05 09:31:18

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#18 2024-06-05 09:43:40

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#19 2024-06-05 19:15:17

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#20 2024-06-05 21:02:29

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#21 2024-06-06 19:43:09

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#22 2024-06-07 06:14:14

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#23 2024-06-07 11:34:40

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

#24 2024-06-15 14:02:52

Re: Sea Level Rise Business Opportunity

Board footer