Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

MarsDog · 2005-12-10 03:35:35

With temperatures rising, lowering of sea levels might be accomplished by shielding Antarctica from ocean currents. Barrier islands could be built. Antarctica would become colder, allowing the rest of the world to become warmer.

Eskimos and polar bears could relocate there.

Grypd · 2005-12-10 07:47:41

And since the Inuit are Sueing the USA I take it it will be the USA that will pay for this. Especially after the UN conference on Climates problems in Canada all being blamed on the USA not wanting to commit to anything even talks....

John Creighton · 2005-12-10 21:55:04

And since the Inuit are Sueing the USA I take it it will be the USA that will pay for this. Especially after the UN conference on Climates problems in Canada all being blamed on the USA not wanting to commit to anything even talks....

It is interesting. Canada signed onto Kyoto and the USA didn’t, however science the signing of the agreement, greenhouse emissions of Canada rose more then the greenhouse emissions of the United States. Thus what we have is a world of nations patting themselves on the back for signing an unworkable agreement.

SpaceNut · 2005-12-12 06:57:55

But other options could be to develope under ground caverns to store it in or above ground storage tanks. Another thought is to send it to mars in advance of teraforming.

John Creighton · 2005-12-12 12:34:23

But other options could be to develope under ground caverns to store it in or above ground storage tanks. Another thought is to send it to mars in advance of teraforming.

Or just burn it all in a fusion reactor.

MarsDog · 2006-01-02 04:31:45

And since the Inuit are Sueing the USA I take it it will be the USA that will pay for this. Especially after the UN conference on Climates problems in Canada all being blamed on the USA not wanting to commit to anything even talks....

The Inuit will have to adapt with the Polar Bears.
Moving South may be their only option.

It is interesting. Canada signed onto Kyoto and the USA didn’t, however science the signing of the agreement, greenhouse emissions of Canada rose more then the greenhouse emissions of the United States. Thus what we have is a world of nations patting themselves on the back for signing an unworkable agreement.

Time to be creative, not restrictive.
Earth will have to be terraformed. Warm it up while lowering ocean water levels.

But other options could be to develope under ground caverns to store it in or above ground storage tanks. Another thought is to send it to mars in advance of teraforming.

The crust will sink.

Antarctica is the heighest continent because ice has lower density than rock.
It comes down to consolidating the ice in one place, conveniently Antarctica.
Use Antarctic mountains as material for the barrier islands.

Similarly, digging deep holes, dredging the lighter rock on the ocean bottoms
would consolidate density, lower sea levels, to form islands. I wonder how many millimeters the Dutch are raising sea levels worldwide with dikes ? There would be some rebound of the below sea level land, and sinking of ocean bottoms.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.garykuehn.com/custom_006.htm
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2004/ … heimer.pdf
If you moved the mountains around the Weddell and Ross seas to the edge of the Antarctic continental shelf considerably more ice could be enclosed.

Ocean levels 400 feet lower is the goal.
Won't need dikes in New Orleans !
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/warnings/waterworld/

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& … tnG=Search

karov · 2006-01-03 07:48:07

I like this scenario.

How much land will earn the mankind ( indeed the contries at the coasts , but because the project is planetary the inland states will be compensated somehow of course) totally in case the sea level drops with these > 130 meters?

Because the wider land masses could mean widening of the arid zones, the artificially augmented Antarctic ice sheet will serve also as water source.

I think such big interference in the "natures affairs" is inevitable, and that it is possible with conperativelly modest investment in computer processing power to learn how to manupulate the water and air currants of the planet in order to be capable to sustain such huge temp. differential between the hemispheres...

Commodore · 2006-01-03 19:40:37

Or we could just adapt our agricultural processes to be less suseptable to climate changes, which will happen regardless of what we put in the air.

karov · 2006-01-04 04:35:59

I agree - no matter what we put in the air, no matter how much CO2 we release, the anthropogenic influence is literraly nothing compared with the natural disasters, simply because we dont have now even a bit of their energy...

The Earth will inevitably kill us all unless we don`t counteract the bad changes.

karov · 2006-01-04 04:40:41

MarsDog,

Could you show us, what would like the new "asymetric heat" world as global map of water/ice/land distribution? I see that it would be close to the situation of the 20 000 years Before present, but what was the overall climate out of the frozen Antarctica than? Of course regarding completely ice free yearround Northern Hemisphere?

BTW, it is not necessary to move around billions of tonnes of rock and dirt to build artificial islands barrier - instead pneumatic pannels / gas or water bags could be used... Like the atmosphere retention methods proposed for closing the gas escape routes for open air cosmic habitats - supramundane shells, makaroni habitats, partial surfacial terrafoirming with open skies...

karov · 2006-01-06 03:18:54

Just to remind:

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=343

MarsDog · 2006-01-07 18:04:09

Karov's idea might take the shape of a bicycle wheel.
the spokes radiating from the South pole and the rim containing the ice.
On a smaller scale, ancor the cables to nearby mountains.
Have to figure out total mass of cables and retaining material.
This may be quickest way to change ocean levels.

============

Three densities to work with
. Ice 0.9
continents - granite rocks - density 2.7
ocean floor basaltic rock density of 3.0

" the percentage of the solid immersed in the fluid will be equal to the specific gravity of the solid divided by the specific gravity of the fluid"
Which is 2.7/3.0 = 90 percent or only 10 % of mountain is above.

Moving mountains to seal off Ross Sea 1,000 km opening with 5 km tall mountains would require moving 2.5X5X1000X10 = 125,000 km^3 of rock ? (the mountains would mostly sink into the heavier rock below)

=============

If you could move the high density ocean floor rocks onto the south pole, letting it displace the lighter continental rocks below. Mountains would form, similar to the process near the subduction zone where the crust sinks below then floats back up.
Designer mountains ?

=============

http://www.mindfully.org/Water/Water-On-Earth.htm

Total Water on Earth = 1,400,000,000 km^3
or 1,200 km sided ice cube.

Area of Antarctica = 14,000,000 km^2

Ice cap 100 km thick, but sinking 30 km into the dense rock.
gives 70 km height, need a few more km for Low Earth Orbit.
Good place for electric rail launch, above most of the atmosphere.
Two problems solved at once ?

Interesting, will have to google this more

karov · 2006-01-08 05:54:05

What`s the compression strenght of the ice in different temperatures bellow the melting point?

What`s the compression liquifaction point for ice? I doubt that we could have ice column higher than several kilometers in 1 gee. Regardless that 100 km hight ice will penetrate the crust to much warmer zone and the melted water will burst asside...

About the mountaines -- lets make the barrier mounts from ice itself. We need just to pack it in something that:
-- provides almost perfect thermal isolation
-- has photovoltaic properties of at least 50% electric efficiency
-- provides Peltier permanent cooling directed to the crust ( in order to stiffen it further )

In the summer ( antarctic day ) the sunlight will power the package peltier refrigeration, in night halfd of the year, the heat source for melting is missing. The same tech could be applied to keep frozen a , say, 10 000 km2 packaged ice sheеt at the Equator. BTW the ice "artificial crust" ( terraformed above) could indeed "leak" through pipes providing with crystal clear water the cities and the zones around the equator -- the only condition should be sufficient refrigeration, in order the ballance to be kept - indeed giant water refreshing factory...

wellstone? ( google or wiki for it!)

If it is possible an 10 km high water ice column to stay supported by its own compression strenght, than what decrease in the worlds ocean level we have if we package in "wellstone" at least the rims of new expanded antarctic ice sheet covering say 10% of the earth`s surface ( about 50 000 000 km2 x 10 ) -- 500 000 000 km3 or to capture about 1/3th of the earht`s hydrosphere in such "ice box"?

The remaining 2/3ths liquid water salinity should rise trice?
The melting fresh water could be pumped north to the countries and cities in mega-pipes providing not only water but also heat exchange?

karov · 2006-01-08 05:56:40

... and ice 10 000 meters high, placed in the higher gravity environment at the poles will have sufficient gravitational energy stored in it to provide net gain of electricity untill traveling north... The Earth rotates the gravity at the equator is lower and the hight is lower with 10 kms...

karov · 2006-01-08 06:50:39

...The ~50 mln km2 new "ice crust" continent if sufficiently packed , could also to be "terraformed" with land on top. If the ice-land is too high penetrating through the atmosphere or elevated off ground via orbital rings system, it should be "fenced" with pneumatic pannels in order to prevent the tickened atmosphere over it to leak down in the gravity well... Good thermal isolation + turning all the strets , highways, buildings, parkings, etc ( say, 10% of the territory) in 50% efficiency solar pannels ), will give us opportunity to keep all that ice frozen for solid ground, and to leak it in huge pipes ( artificial rivers ) to any point of even the other hemisphere...

MarsDog · 2006-01-08 09:13:04

19,883 meters is difference between lowest and highest point on Earth.

Approx 30 km below (due specific gravity (0.9/3)*100) and 10 km mountains above.
Only 60 km to go.

Make an exponential chimney with panels held together, radially, by cables.
High strength steel untimate failure is around 2 gPa
Carbon nanofiber considerably more.

Interesting to solve this.

karov · 2006-01-09 03:41:41

http://www.sfwa.org/members/Nordley/Gravity.pdf

Ten kilometers of ice over denser rock bed seems plausible on Antarctica if suitably sloped.

Cover it entirelly with "welltone" acting as solar power transformer, radiator, etc. necessary... To stay solid and not to flow aside.

MarsDog · 2006-01-09 21:15:36

100 km total:
30 km below + 10 km mountains leaving 60 km

Assume high pressure ice, same density as water.
1 atmosphere per 10 meters : 60,000 meters is 6,000 atmospheres
1 atmosphere is 101325 pascals : approx 10^5 pascals
Steel ultimate failure 2 gPa : design for 1 gPa

If you had 2 meter (r=1) horizontal rings, tied with cables to a central tower

thickness=pressure*radius/stress : 6,000 * 10^5 / 10^9 = 0.6 meter

Thickness is manageable, but the cable and supporting concentric towers ?

http://physics.uwstout.edu/StatStr/stat … cols65.htm

karov · 2006-01-11 03:53:39

I mean the expanded and elevated ice cup to be SELFSUPPORTING. I.e. the maximum compression strenght of ice, wich could support itself without to melt down bellow due to the self pressure, and to not sink the solid rock bed underneath so much than to reach melting temperature... Without towers or armature.

MarsDog · 2006-01-11 12:03:56

Although this is true, most crevasses are only approximately 100 feet deep since most are squeezed shut by the pressure of the ice passed this point.

Ice under pressure is modeled as plastic or very viscous fluid.
Glaciers are rivers of ice. Just takes a long time to flow.

You would have to design for fluid.

==========================

However if you could keep it very cold

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ice

Ice near its melting point has a hardness of about 1.5 on the Mohs scale. This is about as hard as talc. At much lower temperatures ice becomes much harder. At -70 oC ice has the hardness of quartz (about 6-7 on the Mohs scale). The importance of this is that ice generally is not hard enough to abrade rock by itself. It usually needs tools in the ice to abrade and erode bedrock.

karov · 2006-01-12 13:33:09

Perfect! I knew it!

Keep the "wellstone" packaged ice in such temperature in order it to be as hard and stable as the ordinary rocks ( basalt?) which it covers... -30 degrees celsius?

It is achievable if we have enough insulating blanket, serving simultaneously as solar power collector, for refrigeration with Peltier-Seebek elements, export of electricity north, etc. 50 000 000 km2 of ice trapped in such smart ice-bag even if we assume "only" 50% conversion efficiency, and average insolation of ~ 0.5 Kw / m2 in the antarctic summer/day 6 months period means 250000000000000000 watts of power production. During the night the insulation should be sufficient... The fresh water pipes carrying also electricity to all lower points of the earth`s surface, i.e. everywhere?

Assuming homogenous Moss number for the ice and the rock bed -- than the hight of the solid is defined solely by its weight / buoyancy... Charge the rocks with ice untill the rocks sink almost to the ice line. 10 000 meters of selfsupporting icecap super-chilled to -30 degrees sounds feasible. Who could calculate this?

MarsDog · 2006-01-13 00:05:54

googling:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& … tnG=Search

======

Trying to understand figure 1
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2001/pdf/2067.pdf

Significant is the Temp/MeltingPoint ratio.
Might have to cool with liquid nitrogen. ( T/Tm=77/273=0.28 )
How high to be stable over geologic time ??

If you can get 10 km above mountains - 1.000 atmospheres or 100 megapascals
then there is 10 km below, for a total of 30 km

27 km above sea level with 13 below would be 40% of all the water.

karov · 2006-01-13 14:39:07

http://www.neofuel.com/iceships/iceshipsvg.htm

http://www.crrel.usace.army.mil/sid/hop … _iutam.pdf

The cold reeealy stiffens the ice.

MarsDog · 2006-01-17 17:46:20

karov's idea of extreme cooling;
effectively turning the ice into low density rock
is the last part of the jigsaw puzzle.

The strong ice, it's own container,
supporting a large plateau, even up to the edge of space.

the geothermal heat is not nearly enough to melt more than a tiny bit of Antarctica's ice

http://www.google.com/search?client=ope … 8&oe=utf-8

===========================

I am imagining deep cooling pipes,
perhaps using easily awailable Nitrogen or more efficient Hydrogen.

Forming a wedge, sinking deep down,
creating, or stabilizing, plate movements underneath.

karov · 2006-01-18 04:57:28

MarsDog,

Yes - google for " Lovelock disaster nuclear " you`ll find the last sayings of the father of the Gaia hypotesis. Yes, we must regulate in gross scale the Earths spheres in order to survive.

Cold-hardened Antarctica, could contain the mentioned 1/3th of the earths hydrosphere, venting the heat as huge radiator + some liquid to supply the northern city regions ... etc. Not only we would keep the earth north of 60 degrees south parallel, but also we could keep at green , no deserts, no permafrost...

If we lock on antarctica 1/3th of the earths water how much land will be "poldered" open for habitation?

Antarctica with dozens of kilomeers of cold stiffened ice will be:
-- improved and augmented planetary radiator to deal with the excess heat collected - with this modification our planetary habitat will collect more solar energy ( a VERY black spot 10% of the surface) and will re-radiate "by force" more heat in space. Such planet would have quite interesting thermal signature -- almost even distribution of wate and hat on the lands without ice, and very cold spot during the day in antarctica, and very hot night spot of antarctica...
-- fresh water storage / for water supply and hydropower needs /
-- giant solar power collector ( indeed we should use it more as PHOTOCHEMICAL converter , than as photoelectric one - the photochemical dissociation of water would be dozens of times more efficient than plant chrolophile photosynthesis, will bring the water up-globe in form of hydrogen, en situ reformed in liquid at room temperature sinthetic carbohydrate fuels for storage and distribution...)
-- easing of the space access ( obviously the frozen packed antarctica will be slopy to the center, not the whole surface will erect into space, and the shear lenght of the ice cup radius is more than enough augmented by the relevant lack of air drag to launch big cargoes with open design maglev acceleration / deceleration...)

I doubt that someone will agree to be touched the earth itself, but why not to implement such scheme on closer orbitin to the primary worlds - alike Venus, Mercury, etc...

These worlds need improved heat sinks ( not venus, but mercury yes) , and it is good option instad of parasoling, to provide mechanism for asymetric heat distribution - the hot areas to become warm, the cold -warm, the colder - coldest. The advantage of such scheme is that you shouldn`t supportinfrastructure in space... polar radiatoring

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-12-10 03:35:35

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#2 2005-12-10 07:47:41

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#3 2005-12-10 21:55:04

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#4 2005-12-12 06:57:55

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#5 2005-12-12 12:34:23

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#6 2006-01-02 04:31:45

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#7 2006-01-03 07:48:07

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#8 2006-01-03 19:40:37

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#9 2006-01-04 04:35:59

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#10 2006-01-04 04:40:41

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#11 2006-01-06 03:18:54

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#12 2006-01-07 18:04:09

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#13 2006-01-08 05:54:05

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#14 2006-01-08 05:56:40

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#15 2006-01-08 06:50:39

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#16 2006-01-08 09:13:04

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#17 2006-01-09 03:41:41

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#18 2006-01-09 21:15:36

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#19 2006-01-11 03:53:39

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#20 2006-01-11 12:03:56

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#21 2006-01-12 13:33:09

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#22 2006-01-13 00:05:54

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#23 2006-01-13 14:39:07

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#24 2006-01-17 17:46:20

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

#25 2006-01-18 04:57:28

Re: Keeping Earth warm while lowering sea levels

Board footer