Cost of a significant Oxygen airlift to 19Km

$17 Billion USD for five years, lifting 3600 Tonnes of oxygen per day. We could roll 3-4 of these tankers onto the C-17 craft. The PDF shows the costs I found online in Google for the craft and oxygen, and these tankers. I priced this out as an alternative to aerosol spraying with aluminum and other toxic materials that will hold heat in as opposed to removing greenhouse gases and letting it out. (see other blog articles for more information). Note: The top fossil fuel companies responsible for 70% of the warming and CO2 emissions could pay for this.

images (1)

Here are the notes: A safety factor was added to the cost for hardening the tanks for flight at the end.

5 yr airlift cost

Ozone Layer Restoration Calculation
Dobson Unit
2.69E+20 molecule/m^2
One mole
6.02E+23 molecules
Weight of Ozone mole
24 grams/mole
grams ozone per DU
DU/mole*24g 0.010724252491694 grams O3/DU
Suggested airlift 6 MT
area of ozone hole South 20000000 Km^2
Km^2 to M^2 factor 1000000 factor
DU missing from full layer 189 DU
g/DU*area* DU missing 40537674418604.7 grams
amount in T 4053767.44186047 Tonnes O3
Convert O3 to 16g/mole O2 5404888.13023256 Tonnes O2
https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/statistics/annual_data.html
Used Sept 2017 Dureading
Advertisements

Help the Legal profession go global on climate harm legislation

Here is the press release and the letter written by West Coast Environmental Law this week, asking for the product liability that belongs with fossil fuel companies and their shareholders for climate harm, please enjoy and forward to your governments. It is time to set the right precedents and science can provide all the global and regional forensic harm data now as we see in the news regularly.

climate-related_harms_letter_to_prov_govt_draft8 (1)

Let’s see what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau does about this letter…perhaps we should all email him and other national heads? Maybe the UN and UNFCC would be happy to see this lead to a more ambitious climate target like performing and oxygen airlift to burn off some of our greenhouse gases.

https://www.wcel.org/media-release/bc-premier-asked-streamline-climate-lawsuits-against-big-oil?utm_source=LEB

 

The sooner we computer model an oxygen airlift -the better

download2

I recently asked 15 atmospheric computer modeling groups around the world to model the oxygen airlift to see what the effect would be according to their algorithms. Computers are the only place where the interference of EMF frequencies and chemicals can be removed if a basic study is done. We are almost inundated with interference in the atmosphere and it looks like it is going to continue that way. This is leading to the outgrowth of negative feedbacks from ice loss and methane explosions which are set to continue possibly up to tripling the CO2 content of the atmosphere.

The third world has acknowledged global warming because their agricultural droughts are causing loss of crops and life around them. They are prisoners of the industrial revolution on combustion.

We will have enough oxygen at ground to borrow it and place it up in the atmosphere for a limited time, because the methane explosion occurring is going to use up these reserves over time. If the oxygen airlift cooled the atmosphere, it may at least partially arrest this warming by slowing the explosions. This can be computer modeled and the modeling exercise would give us insight into a different option than solar radiation management. We have to have an idea of how much oxygen affects the computer model results. To increase oxygen at ground is important and can only feasibly be done by plats and the ocean plankton and algae, so we are faced with thinking about planting more greenery and more properly shepherding the ocean so that it does not continue to have anoxic zones.

Perhaps the large emitters should be planting the equivalent of their fossil fuel emissions of CO2 as CO2 converting plants.

The truth is that we are faced with up to 6 degrees of warming and so the sooner we look at these ideas, the better. If we start thinking in terms of generating an additional million Tonnes of dry plant matter from added plants, this equates to a million tonnes of carbon. If we are emitting 100 million Tonnes of CO2 per day, 27.2 million tonnes per day of dry, dead plant matter would completely offset this by fixing that carbon and giving off needed oxygen. 70% of the CO2 is given off by large emitters, so, the attribution has been made to them. Can they generate 19.04 million Tonnes of dead plant matter per day?

Plants convert 5 Tonnes of CO2 per year per hectare, which is 1.36 Tonnes of carbon, so the emitters would have to plant and bury the carbon on 14,000,000 Hectares of land per day.

There are 2.7 billion Hectares of arable land available so the 5.1 billion hectares needed for a year are out of reach for the emitters with business as usual. We would need to halve their emissions and plant all of the arable land.  http://www.everythingconnects.org/arable-land.html

Another way to view this statistic is that we have trapped oxygen in the CO2 molecule by double what we could potentially reverse with plants, so the oxygen reservoir is being lost to CO2.

This is the cost of our reliance on combustion in simple terms. Are we willing to face this situation with a shortening time window on our way to a 6 degree warming set to topple the web of life at that point.

We definitely need to know if an oxygen airlift will help because it has triggered ice ages in the past; we won’t be able to trigger an ice age, but we could trigger removal of methane and synthetic greenhouse gases and give ourselves a needed delay to the 6 degree warming we face. We deserve to know what this option might do for us.

Governments Should Subsidize the 90 fossil fuel companies to transition to renewables

We need to identify root causes.

Ordinary people are not the problem, 90 companies with the wrong products are. We need to tell them to transition us off of their deadly products into a more distributed economy running on renewables.

While we have Canada missing the farmers who could run solar and wind farms -while farming in Alberta like they do in Europe, Canadian taxpayers are financing the oil sands. Large scale policy shifts like this one are needed.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/20/90-companies-man-made-global-warming-emissions-climate-change

We have seen the costs of bulking up on high rises, energy, food production, and industry and are now living with the tradeoffs, to our imminent demise. The increasing conservation movement is leading to larger preserved areas that may fail completely as we experience our recent extinction event. All of our assets for life are on the line because of global warming caused mainly by the products of these corporations now. We now know this.

Count Company Percentage of global industrial greenhouse gas emissions
1 China (Coal) 14.32%
2 Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Aramco) 4.50%
3 Gazprom OAO 3.91%
4 National Iranian Oil Co 2.28%
5 ExxonMobil Corp 1.98%
6 Coal India 1.87%
7 Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex) 1.87%
8 Russia (Coal) 1.86%
9 Royal Dutch Shell PLC 1.67%
10 China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) 1.56%
11 BP PLC 1.53%
12 Chevron Corp 1.31%
13 Petroleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA) 1.23%
14 Abu Dhabi National Oil Co 1.20%
15 Poland Coal 1.16%
16 Peabody Energy Corp 1.15%
17 Sonatrach SPA 1.00%
18 Kuwait Petroleum Corp 1.00%
19 Total SA 0.95%
20 BHP Billiton Ltd 0.91%
21 ConocoPhillips 0.91%
22 Petroleo Brasileiro SA (Petrobras) 0.77%
23 Lukoil OAO 0.75%
24 Rio Tinto 0.75%
25 Nigerian National Petroleum Corp 0.72%
26 Petroliam Nasional Berhad (Petronas) 0.69%
27 Rosneft OAO 0.65%
28 Arch Coal Inc 0.63%
29 Iraq National Oil Co 0.60%
30 Eni SPA 0.59%
31 Anglo American 0.59%
32 Surgutneftegas OAO 0.57%
33 Alpha Natural Resources Inc 0.54%
34 Qatar Petroleum Corp 0.54%
35 PT Pertamina 0.54%
36 Kazakhstan Coal 0.53%
37 Statoil ASA 0.52%
38 National Oil Corporation of Libya 0.50%
39 Consol Energy Inc 0.50%
40 Ukraine Coal 0.49%
41 RWE AG 0.47%
42 Oil & Natural Gas Corp Ltd 0.40%
43 Glencore PLC 0.38%
44 TurkmenGaz 0.36%
45 Sasol Ltd 0.35%
46 Repsol SA 0.33%
47 Anadarko Petroleum Corp 0.33%
48 Egyptian General Petroleum Corp 0.31%
49 Petroleum Development Oman LLC 0.31%
50 Czech Republic Coal 0.30%
51 China Petrochemical Corp (Sinopec) 0.29%
52 China National Offshore Oil Corp Ltd (CNOOC) 0.28%
53 Ecopetrol SA 0.27%
54 Singareni Collieries Company 0.27%
55 Occidental Petroleum Corp 0.26%
56 Sonangol EP 0.26%
57 Tatneft OAO 0.23%
58 North Korea Coal 0.23%
59 Bumi Resources 0.23%
60 Suncor Energy Inc 0.22%
61 Petoro AS 0.21%
62 Devon Energy Corp 0.20%
63 Natural Resource Partners LP 0.19%
64 Marathon Oil Corp 0.19%
65 Vistra Energy 0.19%
66 Encana Corp 0.18%
67 Canadian Natural Resources Ltd 0.17%
68 Hess Corp 0.16%
69 Exxaro Resources Ltd 0.16%
70 YPF SA 0.15%
71 Apache Corp 0.15%
72 Murray Coal 0.15%
73 Alliance Resource Partners LP 0.15%
74 Syrian Petroleum Co 0.15%
75 Novatek OAO 0.14%
76 NACCO Industries Inc 0.13%
77 KazMunayGas 0.13%
78 Adaro Energy PT 0.13%
79 Petroleos del Ecuador 0.12%
80 Inpex Corp 0.12%
81 Kiewit Mining Group 0.12%
82 AP Moller (Maersk) 0.11%
83 Banpu Public Co Ltd 0.11%
84 EOG Resources Inc 0.11%
85 Husky Energy Inc 0.11%
86 Kideco Jaya Agung PT 0.10%
87 Bahrain Petroleum Co (BAPCO) 0.10%
88 Westmoreland Coal Co 0.10%
89 Cloud Peak Energy Inc 0.10%
90 Chesapeake Energy Corp 0.10%
91 Drummond Co 0.09%
92 Teck Resources Ltd 0.09%
93 Turkmennebit 0.07%
94 OMV AG 0.06%
95 Noble Energy Inc 0.06%
96 Murphy Oil Corp 0.06%
97 Berau Coal Energy Tbk PT 0.06%
98 Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk PT 0.05%
99 Indika Energy Tbk PT 0.04%
100 Southwestern Energy Co 0.04%

Source:

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

I am asking these companies to change their products as quickly as possible by investing in a renewables infrastructure urgently. Their circular economy which they rely upon, bulking up on high rises, energy, food production, and industry be changed to a distributed system. The concept of performance contracts for renewables can also be applied to designing less dense cities, downsize big steel, clean or carbon neutral energy, distributed smart, clean food production, and carbon neutral or negative industry. Their profit and financing models are too ambitious and are creating unrealistic iniquities with no effective benefits even to the grandiose profit takers doing this at the expense of our collective human existence.

This Saudi Prince made some real meaning happen with his fortune. He gave it away in an organized fashion. His charity will mean something in the long term if others in the same demographic pare down stagnant and unearned or non critical income focusing on CO2 intense products in the same fashion to power their lives, businesses and income on renewables: 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/11712286/Billionaire-Saudi-prince-to-give-away-32-billion-fortune.html

 

The only way to help greed, money and wealth addictions is through consequences. The consequences from a frenetic paradigm of growth are in full swing and are going to increase. The beliefs around money range from believing that GOD blesses only those who can multiply money- as in the case of the biblical story of the talents; others believe that past lives of merit causes the wealthy to be chosen to those lives. On a small planet today, the bulked up enterprises and all of the imbalances in the ecology, income brackets and economies don’t look so divinely guided now. The industrial revolution banked on the combustion engine and brought us to danger. We all have to embrace what we face, and embrace the shift we are being confronted with. This moment in our time is critical as we face so much. The root causes of what has happened need to be very clear.

Physics of weather modification and geoengineering approaches trap earths heat

Every time we put a substance, except oxygen, into our atmosphere we are putting up walls that stop heat release from the Earth to space. Heat release is the correct physics problem to tackle, not putting up more walls to block heat escape. Reactive oxygen, activated by the sun removes heat trapping substances.

I am inviting all scientists and policymakers to contact me with how to advise the AMS and other agencies that weather modification aerosols have failed to address the problem correctly. Please forward this blog to help others realize that science focused on the wrong physics and that we can still attempt the correct approach with a lot of work which has been started. The alternative is much disaster and is coming quickly upon us. You and I deserve to have correct science problems being addressed. Any important email comments can be directed to: viva.cundliffe@gmail.com

Atmospheric Research

Volumes 135–136, January 2014, Pages 102-111
Atmospheric Research

The effect of aerosols on long wave radiation and global warming

Highlights

The effect of aerosols on LW radiation was studied with narrowband LW calculations.

Aerosols were added to the LW scheme based on observations in Europe and China.

A stratospheric aerosol load was found to induce strong local LW warming.

A near-surface aerosol load was found to have an effect similar to a thin low cloud.

Aerosol induced LW greenhouse effect is non-negligible under heavy aerosol loads.

Abstract

The effect of aerosols on long wave (LW) radiation was studied based on narrowband LW calculations in a reference mid-latitude summer atmosphere with and without aerosols. Aerosols were added to the narrowband LW scheme based on their typical schematic observed spectral and vertical behaviour over European land areas. This was found to agree also with the spectral aerosol data from the Lan Zhou University Semi-Arid Climate Observatory and Laboratory measurement stations in the north-western China.

A volcanic stratospheric aerosol load was found to induce local LW warming and a stronger column “greenhouse effect” than a doubled CO2 concentration. A heavy near-surface aerosol load was found to increase the downwelling LW radiation to the surface and to reduce the outgoing LW radiation, acting very much like a thin low cloud in increasing the LW greenhouse effect of the atmosphere. The short wave reflection of white aerosol has, however, stronger impact in general, but the aerosol LW greenhouse effect is non-negligible under heavy aerosol loads.

We Owe Ourselves an Oxygen Airlift Program

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.

viva.cundliffe@gmail.com

The Oxygen Earth Protocol to remove major atmospheric greenhouse gases by oxygen airlift

The Emergency Oxygen Plan to remove atmospheric greenhouse gases by oxygen airlift and cool the planetary temperature.

It can be done as a bypass of the carbon cycle.

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 [1979] 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. [1985] 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

viva.cundliffe@gmail.com