Fund us here: paypal.me/VivaCundliffe or: gofundme.com/oxygen-airlift-to-cool-earth
Fund us here: paypal.me/VivaCundliffe or: gofundme.com/oxygen-airlift-to-cool-earth
We Do Owe Ourselves an Oxygen Airlift Program
A longstanding environmental remediation tradition for soil, air and water contamination is the use of oxygen or oxidation enhancement with hydrogen peroxide to restore harmony by making compounds inert and harmless to their surroundings. This principle applies to the atmosphere as it stands now, as well. Countless refrigerant gases and reactive greenhouse gases such as methane are set to increase in concentration at the layer of the lower stratosphere, where as of 2017, ozone is depleted the most, while the upper stratosphere at 25 Km and above is recovering. While we emit more CO2 and methane, and increase warming at an accelerated rate with these contaminants, we all owe ourselves a chance to remove some of these man made culprits and we can share the cost globally in a fair way
Each of is who has benefited from years of refrigeration, air conditioning and fossil fuels can bear some of the cost to cool us down with an oxygen airlift and then bigger “polluters” in developed economies can shoulder some, and then newer polluters could make up the difference a “pay as we pollute” scheme so the past actions get us started and the present maintains our ability to oxygenate.
Scientists know how to attribute emissions to emitters, but not how to have them pay for cleanup, so I am going to provide a provisional framework for cost sharing. We deserve to reverse some of the global warming we are experiencing in order to save lives, property, and economies, as we shift off of fossil fuels and reduce all emissions.
In my blog I outline and reference why an oxygen airlift to 20-25 Km above the Earth will help us cool off the planet, and oxygen is the only non-toxic element that will do this for us. Oxygen is a part of the natural system and we need it. We deserve to give ourselves a break from accelerating global warming; a mistake that we can at least partially pull back from. Of the 487ppm of CO2 equivalent warming we have, 87 ppm are because of the refrigerant and synthetic greenhouse gases which are trapping heat at 20-25 Km above us. That means that we could with a thorough, well modeled, and tested effort, reverse 40% of all of our industrial era warming by removing these gases using oxygen. The oxygen when dispersed, would be activated by the Sun into reactive atomic oxygen radicals which would then destroy these gases, and the system would bring them down naturally. Make no mistake, this is known to happen in both atmospheric chemistry and in the fossil records. If we reversed 40% of the warming, it may mean that we return some snow cover and planetary reflectivity. We would have to maintain this reversal while we reduced emissions, and avoid putting stuff up in the atmosphere as much as possible so that heat escapes continually. No other agent will encourage heat release to space.
A million tons per day of oxygen are created from our ground based oxygen factories. We would only need a fraction of this to affect the lower stratosphere in an airlift. We have enough oxygen at ground to borrow for this restorative protocol, and we have all the means at our disposal to do it. We have tanks, aircraft, and skilled people who can perform it. We only have a limited window of about two decades to start this kind of protocol before the warming acceleration becomes too powerful and our polar ice is gone. Consider heat trapping geoengineering with sprayed toxic aerosols the alternative. Do you prefer that…or this?
In the next article I will outline a scheme to fund this protocol based on a historical and present polluter pay scheme, after providing an estimate of the provisional amount to airlift and its cost.
There is ample capacity to send 3,000 to 10,000 tons of industrial oxygen in tanks to 2,000 feet above the cloud cover or up to 25 Km, to be activated by the sun and have the oxygen burn off major greenhouse gases. Only oxygen has slowly triggered glaciation in the fossil records 3 times over, solving global warming decisively. It’s the only non toxic plan that will work because we will not succeed unless the greenhouse gas levels are reduced. This is the lesson to take from the past and present is why I am sharing this conservation strategy.
The gases we can remove are also ozone depleting substances, which are warming the planet by 80 ppm of the excess 160 ppm we have put in the sky. Just think what the world would be like if we removed these gases…half of the present warming could be reversed. What an important opportunity. We would also likely restore the ozone layer if we airlifted the oxygen to 20-25 Km, returning the world to a time when UV radiation was safe for life under the ozone layer.
500 million ton per day of oxygen are not tied to special industries, therefore, we could actually do this with carbon reinforced tanks and proper nozzles. It would not work for the ocean unless the oxygen is ionized by corona discharge systems, but, again, this could be done. It probably would cost less than half of the plan to split CO2 by using existing pressure swing absorption. We don’t have the luxury of time, so please spread the word that we have this capacity. It would save us from the toxic geoengineering operations! I believe humanity is ready to try this and with some peer review which I invite you to help with by sharing this, it could be launched in a few short years. I will serve as the resource person for this for as long as I can afford to keep the blog and YouTube channel (Viva Cundliffe) up. I will put up a donation button as well so that this site is helped by good strangers who read the blog to learn about oxygen and its ions from our technology which is for sale at http://www.gcgreencarbon.com.
New Analysis of CO2 levels in the fossil record:
CO2 levels follow warming cycle initiations because methane is the warming gas first, then- oxygen turns it into CO2 afterward. CO2 levels then rise after the methane releases. I believe this is what is missing in the analyses. Methane is on the rise now, so is warming, and this is where we should focus by targeting and removing the methane and the anthropogenic greenhouse gases using oxygen. Harada et al, “Transition to an oxygen rich atmosphere with an extensive overshoot triggered by the Paleoproterozoic…” 2015 Harada_et_al_2015_EPSL
This citation bears the clues to the methane watch and the condition of the oxygen-ozone-OH sinks:
Walker  used a simple chemical model to explore the effect of lower oxygen on ozone concentrations (which would scale with OH radical). He found that maximum ozone actually increased with a slight drop in atmospheric O2 (0.5 present atmospheric level (PAL)) because of enhanced penetration of UV radiation. Kasting et al.  explored the effects of much lower levels of oxygen with a more complete chemical model, finding that the methane residence time was slightly higher at 0.1 PAL but lower at 0.01 PAL and below. Another possibility is that the residence time of methane might increase substantially with a rise in methane flux if the tropospheric and stratospheric sinks became saturated. P 12: schrag et al.: initiation of a snowball earth 10.1029/2001GC000219
If the methane builds up, the oxygen based sinks are saturated and may need remediation, (which at the same time would lower UV penetration which is increased at present, causing skin cancer and sunburns to plants and animals).
Check out associated videos on YouTube: Viva Cundliffe
Viva Cundliffe, MSc
It is curious to me as a potential natural weather modification provider why California would not be receiving more precipitation. The convection in the ocean is not known to be irregular to the West. I can model this with a long trajectory triggering protocol using oxygen ions. There is only one reasonable pair of explanations for any place on Earth to be dry: it is being allowed or overlooked.
We can change what has developed in California. I would need help.
I wish you well
Makes 2-8″ pizza crusts 30 minute prep time- Total Gourmet outcome + 15 minutes hand chopping of toppings; PREHEAT oven to 350, mid-lower rack.
Mix dry ingredients, then pour in liquids, and mix w/ Spatula until soft dough balls but not runny. Set this bowl over a bowl of very warm water in another bowl for 25 minutes.
Once risen, you divide, and very gently pat into flat rounds on the well oiled cooking surface to keep bubbles in dough. Curl up edges. Top generously with herb spiked tomato paste, fav. toppings, mozzarella/cheeses.
Bake for 30 minutes, check progress at 20 minutes, 30 minutes with a 375 elevation for 6 minutes at the end produced these two pizzas with golden brown quality mozza cheese on top and very nice textured crusts on a typical cookie sheet.
Gluten Free Pizza Pizzaz– not difficult for commercial pizzerias to add to their menu.
Investment: $6.75 plus 45 minutes quality family time in & out of the kitchen. Unforgettable meal. Homemade wine cost $1.25 and 10 minutes prep time. (more about that later).
AMEG Blog: http://a-m-e-g.blogspot.com/
Citations available. Reposted from Arctic Sea Ice discussions board.
charney = “fast” feedbacks:
–albedo change with loss of land and sea ice and snow (stops when all snow and ice gone)
–cloud (both ways?)
–lapse rate (though this may also cut both ways?)
non-charney “slow” feedbacks:
–forests, grasslands, peat dry up and burn/die>CO2
–“ “ get bugs/diseases, die>termites>methane; die>burn
–soils, already weakened from above, wash away with increasingly extreme downpours, leaving no medium for plant that could absorb CO2 to grow
–terrestrial soils dry up>CO2 methane “If the bank of carbon held in the world’s soils were to drop by just 0.3 percent, the release would equal a year’s worth of fossil fuel emissions”
–permafrost melts—release CO2&methane from new bacterial activity/ free methane from deeper reservoirs, starts to (net) release rather than absorb (sink) C
–melting Greenland and Antarctic icecap uncovers same
–feedback combo: Each extreme weather event leads to less CO2 absorption, leads to more warming, leads to more extreme weather events, leads to….
–sea bed permafrost, clathrates, free methane
–sea surfahttps://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?topic=540.0ce increased activity of methanogens
–newly flooded areas from sea level rise become new swamps—more methane
–as atmospheric humidity increases with global warming, the amount of high troposphere ice particles will increase, and as these ice particles generally serve to reduce the rate of methane oxidation; this implies that with increasing global warming, the global warming potential, GWP, of the methane in the atmosphere over the Antarctic will increase.
–Rising CO2 In Atmosphere Also Speeds Carbon Loss From Forest Soils
–newly ice-free Arctic ocean erodes islands and coastlines releasing carbon in soils
–warming ice encourages dark cryophilic bacteria which alters albedo
–Trees excude CO2 rather than taking it in
–Sudden switch from a three cell NoHem system to a one cell system because of loss of temp differential between equator and No Pole. One cell will transport heat from equator to pole much more efficiently.
–if methane reaches a big enough level in the atmosphere, its average time aloft starts going up, because saturation point is reached to where there’s not enough OH around in the atmosphere so that methane can be split apart that way
–warmer ocean absorbs less CO2
–warmer oceans kill phytoplankton that otherwise sequester CO2
–draw downs behind damns during (CC induced) droughts increases methane release
–drought, an expected outcome of GW, can increase intensity of heatwaves
–end of change of state–when all ice gone in a region, no more heat sucked up by its melting
–newly open Arctic Ocean evaporates more H2O (a GHG) (but open ocean can also absorb more CO2)
— Stripping of Oxygen from the Oceans
–melting permafrost releases NOX
–accelerating albedo shift with black carbon (soot) concentrating on surface as melt goes on
–accelerating albedo shift with more trees growing in the tundra; now happening faster than once thought, since many ‘shrubs’ native to and widespread throughout the tundra grow into trees as conditions warm
–uplift from isostatic rebound as Gr icesheet melts changes angle to greater slope down which ice slides faster
–similar activity could cause local earthquakes which may increase collapse of fragile ice
–Loss of GIS accelerating as highest areas melt down to lower, warmer areas, not only increasing sea level (see above), but also hastening the time when there will be no more ice cap to absorb hundreds of quintillions of joules of energy as it melts (see above)
–More wild fires also means more soot in the air which further changes albedo of ice and snow, leading further to the effects mentioned immediately above
— Bigger storms from GW cause updrafts to carry moisture all the way into the stratosphere, reducing ozone and creating more ghg (water vapor) into part of the atmosphere that has very little of it.
–Hadley cells shift “so that air is being pulled along the earths surface from mid latitudes towards the Arctic… more soot and dust will accumulate on the remaining ice including on Greenland.”
–Reversal of the Polar Vortex
“Putting together the above information, we see what powers the polar vortex. As the Arctic air radiates heat into space, it sinks, sucking high altitude air toward the poles. Coriolis effect skews this flow of air to the right so at high latitudes, on the surface of the earth there are North East winds (flowing towards the South West). With more and more heat being absorbed by an ice free Arctic ocean and transmitted to the air, this circulation pattern should reverse. This would be expected to bring a huge flux of warm air from the south which would exacerbate the effect and cause sudden extremely warmer conditions in the Arctic for the months in question. These will be South West winds (flowing toward the North East)”
–As beetles and other diseases move north aided by GW, the number of sick trees increases rapidly. The levels of methane these emit can be high enough to ignite
— mixing has an immediate effect upon ice through churning rather than the longer term greenhouse effects from bubbling methane, which of course opens up more water which, through albedo, warms up the water, which radiates down to liberate more methane…
–Loss of GIS and other ice sheets (as well as other shifts in water on land –drying and flooding…) lead to tectonic shifts and increased eruptions of volcanoes—releasing carbon that leads to likely longer-term warming (though their aerosols and other particles will lead to a temporary cooling).
–Oceans that grow more acidic through Man’s fossil fuel burning emissions, can amplify global warming by releasing less of a gas that helps shield Earth from radiation http://phys.org/news/2013-08-science-global-source-sea.html (Thanks to johnm33 for just posting this one on the science thread, though as ccg points out, it is unclear if they are talking about direct aerosol shielding, or about increased cloud formation.)
–geo—engineering attempts gone bad
–more and more people moving to avoid consequences of GW—refugees, both burning oil to move and burning ff to build new cities…
–more and more ff-fueled infrastructure built (sea walls, etc) to stave off effects of GW…
–aerosol—as we turn away from coal in response to GW (and clean up aerosol pollution from those that remain), the ‘aerosol parasol’ goes away causing and essentially immediate global temp increase of .5 – 2 degrees C. (see below)
–rush to ever dirtier sources with lower EROEI—tar sands, low grade coal, deepwater oil…
–Rivers dry, barges can’t haul material—more sent by more ff intensive truck and rail
–newly ice-free Arctic leads/has lead to more ff extraction/burning as well as new oil spills, and perhaps activity that further accelerates methane hydrate (and other methane) release
Negative (=damping) Feedbacks (and related dynamics)
–black body radiation ^4, Planck and all that
–weathering of rock, mountains; the reaction SiO3 + CO2 > CaCO3 + SiO2 (?) runs faster in a warmer climate (but this effect is limited by the amount of exposed rock available, so it is a very slow feedback)
–same enhanced in Arctic by loss of sea ice
–a more ice-free Arctic may directly absorb more CO2 into its waters
–desertification alters albedo so more light reflected into space(?)
–increased biological activity in warming permafrost and tundra (overwhelmed by other factors?)
–lapse rate–as heat and moisture get distributed more evenly through the whole air column, it can more easily be radiated into space (help needed here)
–Loss of GIS and other ice sheets (as well as other shifts in water on land –drying and flooding…) lead to tectonic shifts and increased eruptions of volcanoes—whose aerosols and other particles will lead to a (temporary) cooling (but likely longer-term warming).
—-flooding and deepening of continental shelves increases the activity of the ‘continental shelf pump’ which moves particulate carbon off of the shelf (where it might eventually get back into the atmosphere) down into the deep sea, where it is likely to remain for a very long time.
–SLR increases pressure on subsea clathrates keeping them stable (but not as fast as ocean temperatures increase?)
–some plants growing faster with increased atmospheric CO2 (overwhelmed by predominantly negative effects of GW on plant growth?)
–as major impacts kick in, global PTB or general population wakes up and drastically decrease ff burning…(dream on)
–planting native grasses in mid latitudes, trees in tropics, terra-preta (?)
–geo-engineering (very likely to very wrong—best in other side)
–eating less meat, traveling less (esp by plane), consuming less, make fewer babies…
–alt energy, because of promotion through policy, economic tipping points, or a combination, rapidly replace nearly all ffs (are we seeing the beginnings of this??)
–major breakthroughs in C sequestration technology that can be rapidly built out with minimal use of ff (but this could prompt ‘moral hazard’ behavior, and in any case seems rather a techno-fantasy than an even remote likelihood)
–revolution (could go either way?)
–grimmer—gw leads to widespread shortages of basic food supplies—mass starvation, fewer using ff-powered machines…; econ collapse…same (BUT economic collapse also could lead to big drop in coal plant emissions—good in the long run, but in the short run, this would quickly bring down aerosol emissions. Aerosols have been working as a “parasol,” blocking sunlight from entering the lower troposphere, so keeping us perhaps 2 degrees C cooler. So with this removed, we could see a sudden increase of 2 degrees, which could set off other positive feedbacks discussed above.)
We can only head this off with an oxygen burp that destroys methane
Any other method of cooling will not be lasting. As shown here, even in the Ordovician, Oxygen was used up in oxidizing methane to CO2, left lowered oxygen levels, High CO2 levels and a 1’C warmer temperature than present day. If we are going to remove methane, we are going to use up our oxygen; this cannot be stopped. The runaway methane event now underway could be shortened and oxygen conserved with the use of a separation membrane that cleaves O2 and releases the atomic oxygen to go and react with water so that it can do even more. The O atom reacts with water, forming 2OH, providing a free doubling of oxygen. Using the OH magnification, and the shorter route to destruction that is offers, makes the process twice as effective and it uses only 3O2 net, or 30%, rather than 10 O2 net without help. No where else will there be such an opportunity to conserve oxygen while going through a methane emergency. Nowhere else will there be an opportunity to shorten the lifetime of methane as well. Oxygen has been there doing this since the beginning.
No one is serious unless they are talking about using hydroxyl radicals to combat the methane release. We cannot rely upon the private sector to pay for this measure either. It will have to be paid for by governments. Thankfully compared to many project budgets, it is not that expensive. The problem is that we are in an emergency situation and we absolutely should not wait for the Paris Climate agreement. The longer we wait, the more damage will be left from the delays.
|Mean atmospheric O
2content over period duration
|c. 13.5 vol %
(68 % of modern level)
|Mean atmospheric CO
2content over period duration
|c. 4200 ppm
(15 times pre-industrial level)
|Mean surface temperature over period duration||c. 16 °C
(2 °C above modern level)
|Sea level (above present day)||180 m; rising to 220 m in Caradoc and falling sharply to 140 m in end-Ordovician glaciations|
Visit our advertiser https://coincentral.com/blockchain-and-construction/