Carbon budgeting possibilities

An integrated  equitable Carbon economy is needed based on the actual carbon budget left globally, and here are a few very basic concepts that could be written into a society plan. It can be dry run for educational and testing purposes before it is fully implemented because we do have the computing power. This is a highly variable template of options.
1. Tradable carbon budgets constructed on a CREDIT card like system which are secure,
reloadable transferable, auditable and adjustable
2. Individual, Group and Community Carbon VISA, accounting systems possibly secured by block chain technology.
3. Personal Carbon budget based on preset lifestyle standards. People can check their budgets at different living standards
4. Each person can profile themselves and find their budget baseline, budget for buying or offsetting luxuries like bonfires for example. After certain limits, buying the privilege to emit becomes more expensive on a progressive or exponential scale because then the disincentive will match the current emergency need to halt emissions
5. Work and Professional Carbon budgets for commuting, air travel
6. Enterprise carbon budgets: Based on # working persons, FTE, commuting/non commuting,
vehicle/no vehicle
7. Family Carbon VISA
8. Borrowing rules, borrowing against future credits for family emergencies and family funerals
9. GHG Offsets Savings Plans
10. Offset Insurance-buying a policy which invests in offset technologies where liabilities like mobile emissions are hard to quantify, buying offset services direct from an offset technology provider
11. Offset project Investment plans, term deposits, notes, where investing in offset projects or services accrues a small percentage of growth in the credit at maturity
12. Assigning or inheriting offset credits-rules and procedures
13. Offset volunteerism, tree plantings, plant biomass credits, purchase & use of solar power equipment, buying bulk solar or hydro, carbon negative power, or carbon neutral power of heating, efficiency incentives
14. Offset technology loans, grants, investments should be incentivized with tax rebates, lower rates, tax reductions, patient terms to repay loans.
15. Carbon credit pooling for neighborhood, community, district, province/state/, Country projects.
16. Carbon sink development and protection, conservation, expansion project lending and incentives
17. People and projects which go over budget must be given lower priority/delayed purchasing power than those whom are getting their basic needs met. This needs to be phased in and scaled.

Avoid 1C of warming and take 1C of cooling

We could reverse 2’C of warming and avoid 2’C total of warming by having hydroxyl radicals working to remove reactive GHGs according to a couple of peer reviewed papers. I have dug deep to locate what gives the most accurate picture of what we can do with hydroxyl radicals.

Table 3 shows that 2’C of warming to 2100 can be removed with reactive GHG controls 2010-2100. Extra triggered methane problems of 1’c are dealt with also.

2C cooling table

(Arctic methane, Elena Dyupina a & Andre van Amstel a Journal of integrative environmental sciences.)

Figure 3 shows that a full degree of warming can be removed along with the reactive GHG removals.

1 C warming removed

Impact of short-lived non-CO2 mitigation on carbon budgets for stabilizing global warming, Joeri Rogelj1,2, Malte Meinshausen3,4, Michiel Schaeffer5,6, Reto Knutti2 and Keywan Riahi1,

According to peer reviewed science, we can reverse the 1’C we have now, and reverse any additional warming impact up to about a degree. This technology can be deployed now.

Methane warming of 6 celsius within 80 years a peer reviewed exercise

A study of the effects for the original hypothesis, based on a coupled climate–carbon cycle model assessed a 1000-fold (from <1 to 1000 ppmv) methane increase—within a single pulse, from methane hydrates (based on carbon amount estimates for the PETM, with ~2000 GtC), and concluded it would increase atmospheric temperatures by more than 6 °C within 80 years. Further, carbon stored in the land biosphere would decrease by less than 25%, suggesting a critical situation for ecosystems and farming, especially in the tropics.

Atsushi Obata; Kiyotaka Shibata (June 20, 2012). “Damage of Land Biosphere due to Intense Warming by 1000-Fold Rapid Increase in Atmospheric Methane: Estimation with a Climate–Carbon Cycle Model”. J. Climate25 (24): 8524–8541. Bibcode:2012JCli…25.8524Odoi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00533.1.

National Science Foundation: 22 degrees F (12’C) in 50 years found in ice core, 11,700 years ago


“Because gas hydrates globally sequester such a large amount of methane at depths that are shallow compared to those associated with conventional gas, even reputable publications sometimes posit that warming climate will lead to catastrophic breakdown of global gas hydrate deposits and the subsequent injection of the released methane into the atmosphere. Our review underscores the implausibility of such scenarios. The spatial distribution of climate-susceptible gas hydrates, the strong sinks that consume much of the methane released from gas hydrate breakdown before the gas reaches the atmosphere, and the thermodynamic barriers to runaway gas hydrate breakdown all argue against strong synergy between gas hydrates and the climate system. In fact, we estimate that seafloor emissions of hydrate-derived methane (most of which never reaches the atmosphere) is dwarfed by annual carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere from anthropogenic sources.”

This still leaves the question “What could cause abrupt warming that is not methane?”


We have to face up to the methane removal problem

When it comes to the 10 year window to 1.5C we have to face up to the prospect that 1.5C of warming will trigger between 50 and 500GT methane fully out of the Arctic. As for methane arresting technology, I suggest that given the data, no half measures in dealing with this problem, will suffice. We have to scale up technology to address this problem, or face certain death. I realize that people feel they have too much adversity with climate damages in January of 2019 already, but if we do not scale up, we will have the end of the world as Dr. Guy Mcpherson teaches. Here is a video of his below.

This 2013 Guardian article is wort a review:


Viva Cundliffe, CEO
We localize the removal of dangerous greenhouse gases and pollutants from your community for your successful survival.

What the hydroxyl radical does for an air shed

If a community is emitting OH* it is empowering its citizens with high air quality and fighting climate change!

When OH* is high, the air quality includes helpful chemical activity that is not widely known. The aerosols in the air shed are attached to, made heavier and more water soluble, this both removes them by dry deposition and makes them easier to remove by rain, and the OH* attaches to aerosols of all sizes so it has a full spectrum benefit. The PM is made heavier and removed more quickly and the visibility of the PM as haze is reduced and air clarity is enhanced while reducing the health hazard.

Because PM is lowered there is a corresponding small increase in night time heat loss from the air shed, as exiting long wave radiation is less interfered with by the combination of particulate and methane molecules. Greenhouse gases like methane and synthetic GHGs are removed, contributing to localized cooling effects, particularly at night. The impact of this in well mixed air is an 81ppm reduction in the 480 ppm CO2 e warming we currently have on the planet.

GHG removal contributes to the global GHG reduction needed to fight climate change, If we were emitting OH* everywhere, we could lower the planetary temperature by 0.5’C by removing the root cause, not “masking” the problem.

Aged VOC aerosols are whitened and may contribute to cloud brightening or albedo. Black carbon is also lightened in color or brightened.

6% of the OH* will enhance the carbonate buffering system of the clouds, increasing the cloud’s ability to rain out CO2 from the air and have it permanently weathered in the soils.

Odor causing molecules and gases are either made heavier and removed or chemically altered by oxidation and neutralized.

OH* can mix into an inversion layer, react with the aerosols and make rainfall more likely closer to the air shed, which cleans the local air further. It may shorten the lifetime of the inversion layer formations and make the air quality problem associated with them improve by helping aerosols become efficient cloud condensation nuclei, enter the cloud formation more readily, helping clouds more effectively scavenge pollution particles.

Urban air shed ozone levels are lowered.

Mercury, metals, and particles like asbestos are oxidized and removed by wet and dry deposition.

Smoke particle removal will be enhanced.

Industrial emissions of acids, carbon monoxide from vehicles and black carbon will be more oxidized and removed.

OH* recycles in the presence of Nox from combustion, so after release it can go on to protect the wider atmosphere for extended times.


Local Community Based Greenhouse Gas Removal Services Becoming a Reality

If the current man made greenhouse gases and methane were removed from the air, humanity would lower the global temperature by half a degree Celsius.

There is a technology which can emit the hydroxyl radical, whose formula is OH* on a large scale to do this. This OH* is lighter than water in air and floats along with the wind until it can react with one of the greenhouse gases and remove them. About half of the OH* put in the air meets with these gases.

When the OH* is made by the technology, it starts with one oxygen radical, an O*. This O* makes contact with water and forces the water to react and make two OH*.

The formula is O* + H2O→ 2OH*

In this way an oxygen-like OH is doubled, which makes the process much more effective and efficient.

Scientists have learned that this common molecule does over 90% of all of atmospheric cleansing but the synthetic greenhouse gases have components called halogens which require enhanced levels of OH to be removed or extra time to be exposed to OH* to be removed. We need to get the global temperature down as quickly as possible now or we face reaching more deadly tipping points from which it will be very hard or impossible to recover and this approach can definitely help.

Using solar powered technology we can produce the hydroxyl radical and send it into the air where this natural cleanser will be strengthened and remove the more potent gases which cause global warming. These gases are very much the culprits that cause worsened forest fires, floods, droughts and heat waves and we are told that we are going to experience worse impacts in these disasters in 2019.

While we are all working to reduce our dangerous GHG emissions, we need to be building technology and methods to remove GHGs from the atmosphere to protect everyone. We are all in danger of suffering from some form of disaster caused by global warming climate damages and we need to take real action to dramatically increase greenhouse gas removal.

Greenhouse gas arrester technology is a real action that can be taken to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and your community can put it to work for you so that you can do your part in reversing climate damages. GC Green Carbon Inc can work with your local government to put the hydroxyl radical to work reducing the whole community’s greenhouse gases, and leave the air quality higher at the same time, including providing odor reduction. Hydroxyl radicals are FDA approved for indoor use and because they are found in nature, they are considered helpful and harmless. Putting more of them to work in the air would only be logical. The provincial and federal governments will pay part of the costs of building the technology, and further, can pay an incentive for GHG removal work from the carbon tax.

Carbon taxes need to fund negative emissions technologies

Oct 2018 EMERGENCY DEBATE on Climate Change in the Canadian House of Commons.
Do Canadians prefer that Climate Change be reversed with technology instead of taking home a carbon tax rebate? The carbon tax could be used to pay for GHG removal and start to get us out of this predicament.
Best Cryptocurrency To Mine In 2019

The definition of public infrastructure must grow

David Suzuki never quite says it but it needs to be said this way…air, water, soil and photosynthesis all are the infrastructure of biological life and need to be managed as a global commons on a global scale as public infrastructure. The sooner we get policy around this infrastructure globally, the better. Then we can also begin to remove greenhouse gases from the air with technology, pursue water issues, soil issues, and living carbon removal and storage with plants. It would be a start.


High emitting individuals need to be CO2 regulated

We all face this dilemma- whose CO2 emissions are justified? Right now the only emissions that are justified, to be honest, are those expended in creating a net negative emissions trend. Negative emissions activities need to be rewarded while all others are reduced to an across the board liability.

This is why the cost of carbon should be very high- it is very costly. Note this graph of emitters: whom are spread throughout the world in many countries.


The great equalizer is that the richest 10% are no more important than anyone else, nor are their emissions. Income is the only determinant of emissions which are an existential threat to humanity. We can only hope to change this with an individual tradable emissions permit system and a whole new standard and metrics system for justifying emissions. Governments must immediately target the highest income brackets in each country, and create large fines for cheaters. To delay this policy is to shortchange society a 30% reduction in individual prerogative CO2 emissions, which is a significant amount of reduction in lifestyle emissions.

We also need to charge for past emissions which contributed to the past 60 years of climate damages, removing some of the wealth that was stolen early on in this crisis, and it was stolen. It needs to be reinvested in negative emissions technologies, the opposite impact is now the most vital on Earth.

We need a combination of a hydroxyl radical release program and solar geoengineering funded right away to cool the planet and remove emissions, with direct CO2 capture/removal and afforestation and rock dust dispersal scaled up to around 10 billion Tonnes a year, while halting growth.

IF this is not attempted, the planet will not be habitable. We are bringing in this for our children:


All techniques to remove GHG and heat are now needed

We did it, after COP 24 we now know we are on the worst global warming path for a few more years at least. That means an 8C scenario trajectory is what we are on and the confidence is high that we have committed to 4C for certain, even if we act fast. We are going to need solar geoengineering, direct GHG removal, dispersed GHG removal, rock dust absorption, marine cloud brightening, cirrus cloud removal, CO2 capture and storage, renewables, ocean remediation, and afforestation.

We need to call for a global operations headquarters to be a clearinghouse for these Global Cooling operations, and to ensure immediate funding. This would be the only global commons that needs global protection and cooperation because if we do not do this, we are brokering our extinction. We need to ask for these techniques to be treated as an emergency need at the local and international levels now.

Scientific blindness in a few leaders is a real condition, it is a mental deficiency and sometimes a criminal neglect. We need to sideline these people immediately. Of course the most wealthy countries are going to have trouble admitting that they consume too much, of course, but they need to address the stark alternative.


Non toxic Cirrus cloud removal

The aerosols (particles) that make up the persistent cirrus clouds above the aviation routes in the sky are trapping heat instead of precipitating out or clearing because they overload the atmosphere’s cleaning mechanism. If we dispersed oxygen radicals or hydroxyl radicals there, they would oxidize or “age” the particles, making them larger and more water soluble which makes them removable by deposition. Geoengineering proposals are generally more toxic, so if we could shift away from always choosing toxic methods in the environment this would be preferable.


NASA explains the hydroxyl radical but lulls you into complacency

Please look at NASA’s teaching on the hydroxyl radical and see my comments below:

All scientific knowledge on it points to our reliance on the hydroxyl radical. Ronald Prinn et al write extensively on it here Evidence_for_variability_of_atmospheric_hydroxyl_r (1) and project a 14% reduction in the radical by 2100, but that was done in 2007, before the Arctic permafrost methane problem was identified.

We have to update the importance of the hydroxyl radical as quickly as possible, so that we are ensuring that if we need to, we can restore this mechanism, or, if need be, enhance it so that it reduces the concentration of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere as these gases overwhelm our system. Hydroxyl radicals in some excess cause absolutely no harm, a claim that can rarely be made with natural systems and this sets the cooling -and cleaning opportunity that OH* represents far apart from geoengineering.

We cannot afford to take the hydroxyl radicals, nor the atmosphere’s complete oxygen system for granted, and NASA scientists have not seen the opportunity that lies within this natural group of compounds.

GC Green Carbon Inc on its Emergency Methane Arresters

Logo (1)

GC Green Carbon Inc. Executive Summary

We envision fully counteracting the now coming “Hothouse Earth” disaster with our Oxygen based technology. Humanity has now “baked in” to its atmospheric infrastructure a 3’C warming by 2050 according to the 2018 IPCC Assessment Report, which means unprecedented fire, flood and drought disasters around the globe. Cambridge University teaches that the global methane emergency will cost 60 Trillion for 50 GT of released methane, which is 1090 times the cost to remediate it if we do it soon. To achieve this world-changing vision, we are leading with a high quality methane and multiple greenhouse gases destruction technology based on a plasma membrane. Funds gained from the Emergency Methane Arrester technology, will give GC Green Carbon Inc. the resources it needs to help preserve the planetary system, and this will have significant implications for solving environmental problems from CO2 gas buildup, and achieving sustainable development in the modern world as we help avert potential human extinction.

Our strategy will include meeting the emergency need for cutting greenhouse gases now found in the free atmosphere by aggressively dispersing hydroxyl radicals along with thermal-oxidative destruction of all species found in ordinary air, which supplies the oxygen for the hydroxyl radicals. Viva Cundliffe, M Sc, founder, experienced engineer and innovator, is leading the introduction of the Emergency Methane Arresters to the market.

The company’s technology can form the basis of a global cooling contingency plan using its oxygen products, and is presently disseminating this plan to governments urgently. Oxygen based cooling in the fossil records is the only known global warming reversal agent. Even aerosol spraying is known to be a stopgap measure which will only mask global warming 1.0’C and not ultimately get to the root of the problem- greenhouse gases. For every mitigation dollar spent, the Province of British Columbia has calculated that six dollars of losses are saved. At GC Green Carbon we think that funds invested in countering the Hothouse Earth will save humanity from likely extinction as the Arctic methane release is going to cause several accelerating climate warming feedbacks and humanity needs global scale methane destruction capacity. If we don’t prepare and begin removing the scheduled 50GT of free methane which is leaking into the atmosphere, everyone on Earth is going to suffer with a terrible desertification, food web collapse, famine, and more climate refugees (1 in 9 people) than can be managed safely with up to a 5.8’C temperature rise. Globally children in all countries are going to bear the brunt of the disaster. (AMEG, IPCC) The company will set up a pilot plant system for a year to 15 months and then go on to break even in year 2 month 6 after the pilot project, planning to build 3,300 Methane Arrester units in tandem scaled up arrays within six to nine years.

Using Oxygen is the only serious way to remove runaway 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.

Ordovician period:

Mean atmospheric O
content over period duration
c. 13.5 vol %[1][2]
(68 % of modern level)
Mean atmospheric CO
content over period duration
c. 4200 ppm[3]
(15 times pre-industrial level)
Mean surface temperature over period duration c. 16 °C[4]
(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[5]

Source: Wikipedia

Visit our advertiser

Methane Arrester Systems to fight the methane blowout disaster come on the market

Making Air that has absolutely no GHGs

In order to survive we need methane arresters that at the same time, remove all other gases and pollutants. No other air treatment will do to fight the soon coming runaway global warming caused by a colossal methane burp. Our fate lies in the balance. Order your arrester systems today.

We advise a global movement to set up the arresters to remove all greenhouse gases and reverse the present warming and be prepared for the methane emergency. Contact us today.

Emergency Methane Release Arresters


Basic Oxygen and oxidation Chemistry for the Methane Emergency part one

In order to oxidize methane it takes ten oxygen molecules ten years -normally- in the atmosphere. With a methane blowout we will want to shorten the time to methane destruction by putting up there the main oxidant that removes methane. In addition to airlifting oxygen molecules, there are two other options we should consider: airlifting atomic oxygen or hydroxyl radicals. Either of these will perform a faster oxidation of methane: shortened for brevity:

  1. CH4 + OH =CH3 +H2O, CH3 +OH = CH2 + H2O,
  2. CH2 + 2OH = C + 2H2O
  3. C + 2OH + O= CO2 + H2O

This chemistry uses the O from an O2 once, and the rest of the oxidation remains direct with OH. The OH can be a radical OH* or a negative or positive ion in the case of manufactured OH.

In the step where sunlight naturally excites molecular oxygen and splits it into positive atomic O1D ions, this atomic oxygen will either react to form ozone, O3, or react with water to form 2 OH radicals:

4. O1D +H2O = 2OH*

As we can see from this, the formation of two oxidant OH* would be very helpful as it changes the water oxygen into a scrubbing hydroxyl radical, effectively doubling the oxygen in play as the key oxidant. It would be very good to airlift this O atom and have it meet water molecules and form OH as it bypasses the time involved for the Sun to split molecular oxygen, engage in competing chemistry, and form OH. It is much more direct in addressing methane to make it and release it.

Taking OH that is made at ground in water is also an option. The oxygen is more dilute, but the water needed is brought into contact with the O atoms quickly, in the interests of time. The OH in water is airlifted and sprayed.

We are going to need to address methane as it is escaping at dangerous levels now. There are no known negative side effects from releasing natural (in situ) oxidants to the environment. The oxidants will remove all greenhouse gases but water and CO2, which will bring a significant amount of cooling as their levels are lowered from today’s levels.



Global infrastructure problems need global solutions including reverse engineering

Climate and CO2 deniers cannot hide behind the Ordovician period of 44 million years ago when the CO2 level was 12 times what it is now, and there was glaciation. CO2 is not beneficial to life because of the Ordovician period example. All greenhouse gases conspire to create warming, and back then there was likely an absence of methane because oxygen levels were high enough to burn off methane and maximize heat escape.

The lesson of the Ordovician is that CO2 cannot be oxidized by oxygen species in the atmosphere, it is the one exception greenhouse gas. What this tells us also is that if we oxidized off all other greenhouse gases, which we might have the power to do in a significant partial measure, we can trigger a global scale cool down.

All regional methods to try and cool the Earth down, and even forest fires which cause regional cooling, are only temporary short time scale cooling measures. We need the longest time scale cool down we have at our disposal. There is only one measure that will work, a global scale measure, global removal of greenhouse gases, and the only way left to us is to concentrate oxygen at ground and send it up to the ozone layer where sunlight will activate the oxidation cycle and burn off these gases. If we could shade the Sun, we would still have the problem of greenhouse gases, and we would lower photosynthesis, which is another global scale infrastructure we need to maximize for both CO2 level removal and evaporative cooling.

Chemicals and physics not found in nature are not the only ways to modify the weather, the climate, the global temperature. In fact science has gone completely mad with these ideas and methods and is destroying the planet, and the sooner this is admitted by science, the better. these methods, from all over the globe, which can be seen at credible sites like, to weatherwars 101, to Gaia, to aboriginal group objections, and many others, catalogue the science hubris and madness that is going to drive humanity into starvation. The only people that will be left if we don’t change course will be the wealthy who instead of proper stewardship methods, chose capitalism/cannibalism and invested their wrongly earmarked profits into deep underground bases, so they could inherit tunnels in an aftermath which they piloted. These are cunning people not intelligent people.

The planet is small enough that we can damage it and lose life support. Trying to overwrite natural principles of chemistry and thermodynamics contaminates our biological heritage and legacy. Before all resilience in the system is lost, and we are in the tunnels, we need to try to do better. We need to stop overpopulating the Earth now, right now each and every woman should be educated in this imperative reality now. We went forth and multiplied without the right resource distribution and management systems in place and now we have millions either at each other’s throats, or dying slowly in droughts. The lines between competition and cooperation on this earth are not drawn correctly. We need to do some rewriting whether we like it or not, and it has to be done with the consciousness that our decisions very clearly affect others, and the environment we have is the most important treasure we have. It is more important than all of the synthetic treasure we think is valuable. Greed for those synthetic treasures has created a dying natural world, and because of it, now our task is to salvage what is important while many are still ignorant, and while the cunning try to prep their way into the tunnels that will be needed to house survival goods that we had above ground on a stable planetary system. Had we made better choices in chemistry, physics, and governance, we would not be looking at a dying infrastructure of life.

Luckily we have a store of oxygen in the atmosphere that will be there for us for a long time, but let’s remember that plant life put that oxygen there for us. The other infrastructures we need are going to be distributed by careful thought, brute force, competition, or climate forces. The profit models of the past, which fueled manic greed and delusions of security, or wealth addictions, have left many investors sitting on their funds for lack of enough profit in the business models of needed projects. There is an abundance of innovation in waste to energy projects, green infrastructure, but these do not make enough profit for the ones with quite a lot of the wealth. If they don’t lower their profit expectations and remember that right now we need all of the waste management  and green technology we can possibly have to protect and salvage life on Earth we could lose it all.

Much is going to fall away for people living a human experience on this planet. It is now our task to let go of what is not important in deference to the longevity of life support infrastructure that we have globally damaged, one mistake at a time. We for example, are not going to solve global warming with anything less than a global cool down that reverse engineers our plight. The one available to us with the least number of drawbacks is an oxygen airlift that will do some ozone layer restoration at the same time that it cools us down. We just have to get the dosage right, and we can model this with computers. I propose that life support infrastructure needs to be fully protected globally as soon as possible in full contrast to every man for himself darwinian philosophy. We are going to need to take some writ large actions and writ large policy direction changes in the near future, so prepare with an open mind, and be as smart as possible about the environment even while increasing CO2 levels are lowering your IQ.


Snowball Earth in 2018 REVISION 1

Important analysis of oxygen outgassing from the ocean

Usually an Oxygen level spike in the atmosphere, if it is big enough, it is pro cooling as shown in the fossil record. When there is warming of the ocean however, dissolved oxygen and CO2 come out of solution. The oxygen migration out of the ocean presently is 0.5 Million Tonnes a year. What should alarm us is that the oxygen is supplying more oxidation to the atmosphere, but the greenhouse gases that can be removed by oxygen are still increasing, so, we are losing ground increasingly.

Any helpful positive atmospheric feedback that may have happened over the past three decades of a significant total (roughly 18 MT) of oxygen outgassing have not improved the state of the ozone layer, nor oxidized off enough greenhouse gases to effect a reversal of the global warming trajectory as it has done in the fossil record when enough oxygen was present and synthetic greenhouse gases were not present. The refrigerant gases that are destroying the Ozone layer and causing a big chunk of global warming (80ppm CO2 eq) need to be dealt with before rising CO2 takes us into the irreversible hothouse Earth state by warming the planet enough to trigger a deadly level of methane farts, which have already started to happen. Where is our integrity? We owe ourselves and everyone else we share the Earth with an upper atmospheric repair effort.

The oceans have let go of enough oxygen to start causing anoxic zones which are a part of the present mass extinction, but atleast the outgassed oxygen can be sent by plane up to the ozone layer to mitigate its several lingering problems, which should be deemed unacceptable. Why are we accepting so much damage to the earth system? Why are we accepting that the polluters who caused this do not need to show full integrity and pay for the cleanups? Forensic science is capable of doing a full attribution on who should pay, and how this should be funded can be a compilation of consumers and suppliers in the developed world. Anyone who thinks this is too much to ask has forgotten the computing power we can easily deploy to get this done. The sooner we bring this into integrity, the better for everyone. There are many fair ways that can be used to fund our emergencies- or- we can pay nothing and pay the ultimate price of perpetrating an extinction-and being extincted, boiling us down to a brutish, ugly species with all of the right technology to steward the planet. but no real leadership or innovation in the financing of the stewardship needed to stabilize it. We need to be involved in active global mitigation efforts on a routine basis because the planet is small enough to be damaged and fail in its ability to support us if we do not weigh and measure what we are doing. Most of us understand that now. For every methane molecule we allow in the atmosphere, we will need 10 oxygen molecules to remove it, so, the sooner we work to cool the Earth with oxygen, the less oxygen we will squander on methane farts and great discomfort, if not deaths, in the future.

This paper was referenced for the Oxygen outgassing facts: plattner

Possible to stop the global warming tipping points with oxygen

In their perspective paper, Rockström and his team corroborated existing literature on various natural feedback processes and concluded that many of them can serve as “tipping elements.” When one tips, many of the others follow.

Nature has feedback mechanisms, such as a rainforest’s capability to create its own humidity and rain, that keep ecosystems in equilibrium. If the rainforest is subject to increasing warming and deforestation, however, the mechanism slowly gets weaker, Rockström said.

“When it crosses a tipping point, the feedback mechanism changes direction,” Rockström said, and the rainforest morphs from a moisture engine into a self-dryer. Eventually, the rainforest turns into a savanna and, in the process, releases carbon, he said.

This, in turn, can become part of a cascade that would influence other processes around the world, such as ocean circulation and El Niño events. Other tipping points include the thawing of permafrost, loss of Arctic summer sea ice and the loss of coral reefs.”

If we oxidize off all the greenhouse gases except CO2 at the level of the Ozone layer, using oxygen, we may remove our problem, in the Ordovician ice age this happened. The Ordovician period had 14 x the CO2 levels of present day, and yet, there was glaciation. The other greenhouse gases were removed and the Sun was at a solar minimum. We put so much CO2 into the air, and it is only really removed by plants, but it is a relatively weak greenhouse gas compared to others. It may not hold all of our needed heat in if it is the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere-this is the potential lesson of the Ordovician period. We have too many oxidizable major greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and we need to remove a large portion of them scientifically and the only relatively fast and very safe method is using an oxygen airlift technique.


Snowball Earth in 2018 REVISION 1

Oxygen airlift links ozone depletion and Greenhouse gas problems

Many people do not know that ozone depletion is considered a cause of global warming as well and it is very significant. The Ozone-Oxygen cycle absorbs UV radiation UVB and UVC. Because the Ozone layer is depleted, this heat is getting through because Ozone is formed by default where UV can get through to oxygen. The reason this causes warming is that when UV hits oxygen or ozone at any altitude, the UV is converted to heat energy. (Madronich). If the reaction happens lower down then because it did not happen higher up, it comes with a heat conversion and heat product.

For every 1% of ozone depletion the calculation has been made that a 2% increase in temperature is happening. It is estimated that the ozone column on average is now 6% depleted in 2018, so that would translate into a 12% temperature rise, which would roughly translate into an average of 1.68 degrees in a world where average warming has already increased the temperature by 1.5 ‘C and is approaching 2’C. Almost all of the warming is accounted for in this simplified way, but the temperature anomaly is not even in distribution because the poles have greater ozone depletion than the tropics, yet we still see a close correlation.

With this kind of an ozone layer depletion baseline, and the addition of the heat being added from elevated methane levels, elevated CO2 we need to be thinking about what can we reverse. So far, with an oxygen airlift to the ozone layer we could reverse the ozone depletion and with enough oxygen, we could destroy significant amounts of methane and significant amounts of  all our synthetic greenhouse gases. Next week (August 25, 2018) we will have the logistics presentation for the oxygen airlift posted, contributed by engineer and contractor, Donald Hugh D’Arcy Evans, from Rushden, UK.



Call to replace CH2Cl2 with less ozone depleting compounds

A popular industrial solvent, Dichloromethane is damaging the ozone layer over human populations. It’s already listed in the Montreal Protocol as a hazardous substance but it needs to be replaced with greener alternatives. While this solvent is classed as a very short lived substance, it is taking a large toll on the ozone layer.

When we combine this with the loading of atmospheric bromine and for every 5 ppt of that, we have an ozone loss of 1.3% and it could get as high as 350 ppt ( Impact of Very Short-Lived Substances on Stratospheric Bromine Loading, Jan Aschmann Doctoral Dissertation). Just the Bromine releases could wipe out 90% of the ozone layer.
“Several human-produced chlorocarbons not controlled by the Montreal Protocol are present in Earth’s atmosphere. Among the most abundant of these compounds is dichloromethane (CH2Cl2)—an industrial solvent also used as a feedstock in the production of other chemicals, among other applications 13,14. Unlike CFCs, which are virtually inert in the troposphere and have long atmospheric lifetimes (decades to centuries), CH2Cl2 is a so-called very short-lived substance (VSLS)15. Historically, VSLS have been thought to play a minor role in stratospheric ozone depletion due to their relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (typically <6 months) and therefore low atmospheric concentrations. However, substantial levels of both natural and anthropogenic VSLS have been detected in the lower stratosphere 15,16,17,18 and numerical model simulations suggest a significant contribution of VSLS to ozone loss in this region 19,20,21. Long-term measurements of CH2Cl2 reveal that its tropospheric abundance has increased rapidly in recent years 15,21,22,23. For example, between 2000 and 2012, surface concentrations of CH2Clincreased at a global mean rate of almost 8% per year, with the largest growth observed in the Northern Hemisphere (NH)21. Given that natural emissions of CH2Cl2 are small, this recent growth likely reflects an increase in industrial emissions 15. While the precise nature of the source remains poorly characterized, industrial CH2Cl2 emissions from Asia—in particular from the Indian subcontinent—appear to be growing in importance 23”

These growth rates are exponential, and we seriously risk another ozone crisis in addition to the one addressed by the Montreal Protocol. In order to reduce the risk, a call to replace dichloromethane with alternatives needs to be made, and upgrade it to at least a partially-banned, controlled substance. If we do not take measures like this in the near term, we run the risk of even more dangerous UV radiation in the environment and cancelling out the benefit we see from the Montreal Protocol.

What’s worse, we run the risk of losing our ozone layer while we watch greenhouse gases and miss this very real risk which could lead to the need for an emergency oxygen airlift to replenish ozone.



Observed trends and growth rate of surface CH2Cl2 and simulated stratospheric loading of chlorine.

Not doing an oxygen airlift is suicidal

How many degrees of demise will we allow if we have the power?

The New York Time magazine is coming out with a big spread tomorrow, August 1, entitled “Losing Earth”, about how policymakers have been aware as far back as the 1980’s that emissions were a climate problem, but did not act. Neighbors, friends, and family have now internalized how deep and steep the warming trajectory is ahead of us. We all know that we need an answer like an oxygen airlift to cleanse the culprit gases and reinstate the ozone layer at the same time.

The truth is, oxygen is the only answer we have ever had; it has been our maid and butler in the environment since it appeared on Earth. It makes toxins inert and removes unneeded junk everywhere it is applied. Its use and optimization is a staple of the environmental engineering profession for contaminated water and soil. In its forms of O2 and O3, and hydrogen peroxide it is prescribed to oxidize the vast majority of endangering pollution. Even in incineration, it is the exposure time to the oxygen of the combustion process which is maximized in standard operating procedures.

We need to take this to heart. We know we are missing oxygen at the level of the ozone layer and that synthetic greenhouse gases are building up there. Oxygen and Ozone both block ultraviolet radiation and cool the Earth, at this point we can model how well it does this by computer. We need to compel authorities to model this, and if it looks promising, they should do it. Expense, when compared to the degrees of demise we are all contemplating now, is going to be irrelevant either way.

Should we look to oxygen for its potential as a panacea as the environmental profession often does? Yes. I don’t see any other candidates. Do you?

Please share this article and teach others that oxygen is a tool to reduce global warming that triggered glaciation as known in the fossil record. It happens to be widely available, which we can produce in quantity and airlift to where it should do a lot of good.

A liquid oxygen airlift and dispersal at the lower stratosphere would address these six issues:

  1. Reduction and removal of synthetic greenhouse gases which are causing 80 ppm of CO2 equivalent warming to the planet.
  2. Ozone depleting substances removal or reduction.
  3. Thickening up the ozone layer, increasing needed UV protection by reducing the relative chlorine, fluorine and bromine fractions.
  4. Methane gas removal which appears to be becoming extremely urgent.
  5. Reduce acceleration of global warming and species extinction.
  6. Slow and may even reverse ice loss.

Six issues a non toxic oxygen airlift would address

A liquid oxygen airlift and dispersal at the lower stratosphere would address these six issues:

  1. Reduction and removal of synthetic greenhouse gases which are causing 80 ppm of CO2 equivalent warming to the planet.
  2. Ozone depleting substances removal or reduction.
  3. Thickening up the ozone layer, increasing needed UV protection by reducing the relative chlorine, fluorine and bromine fractions.
  4. Methane gas removal which appears to be becoming extremely urgent.
  5. Reduce acceleration of global warming and species extinction.
  6. Slow and may even reverse ice loss.

We have everything to gain and nothing to lose at this point as we wrestle with carbon emissions more slowly than we can afford to.

Airlift Overview

Cost: $50B, Size: 6 million Tonnes of oxygen over 5-10 years. Remember the other alternatives we have; the are toxic or take a very long time.

Oxygen links greenhouse gases and ozone depletion in global warming predicament

Many people do not know that ozone depletion is considered a cause of global warming as well and it is very significant. Ozone absorbs the high heat UV radiation UVB and UVC. Because the layer is depleted, this heat is getting through at 48 times the hotness of infrared radiation.  Dr. Peter L. Ward is a prominent retired Geophysicist who teaches the science behind ozone depletion as the main cause of warming and what he writes highlights this problem as relevant from a physics perspective which is what we need.

If we combine these two theories, greenhouse gas warming and ozone depletion theory, we have the main culprit problems causing global warming and it’s no surprise that it is accelerating. These two theories are both dependent on oxygen to solve their problems. Ozone needs oxygen to form and greenhouse gases need them to be removed by oxidation. Oxygen could be used at the lower stratosphere where the ozone is the most depleted and the greenhouse gases also persist at the same place.

There is possibly twice as much justification for the oxygen airlift because of its links to both of these predicaments.

Solar radiation and volcano activity also influence the temperature, but mankind’s part in this problem may be cataclysmic, so, we may need the man made intervention that can solve both theoretic situations, the oxygen airlift. In this blog we discuss the aspects of the idea and have proposed that it be computer modeled so that we gain a full picture of how effective it might be. We will update as we get new information about modeling activities. What you can do to help is become informed and inform others so that this idea is vetted and finds a way to becoming funded.

For more information about Dr. Peter L. Ward’s teachings on climate change go to:; where an important side effect of erupted volcanic aerosols is ozone depletion after a short lived and relatively minor cooling phase.

Warming: Its almost all about removing greenhouse gases

As we experience the massive release of methane from pockets in the permafrost and from methane clathrates now, the globe is going to continue to heat up. The only element that can remove this methane is oxygen, which we will have enough of to do it but the problem is that the methane caused warming will last for hundreds of years unless we remove it asap.

Almost half of the warming we have is caused by synthetic greenhouse gases (Prinn et al), which can be removed by oxygen if there is a concerted effort to use it by airlift to 18-22 Km.   As methane is added, this warming is going to increase and could triple the warming and raise temperatures by a total of 6’C.

If we add geoengineering caused warming to this, by attempting to “shade” the Earth, it will put more heat trapping walls up to the heat that needs to escape. Any physical barrier would cause this, and this is why I think oxygen is preferable. Oxygen breaks down all of the greenhouse gases except CO2 and water. Chemicals being used for weather modification right now are halting precipitation in many areas, like California. Oxygen across the system does not force sacrifices like this, it allows heat release from everywhere once it is diffused into the environment.

If we do not focus on the real cause of global warming, our greenhouse gas problems, we are set to suffer more and more heat accumulation that no amount of geoengineering will significantly reduce. Aerosols simply will block the heat escape mechanism we need right now and for a significant period of time.

Humanity has the capacity to airlift anything now in vast quantities. Oxygen is available in our developed nations for this airlift protocol. We have proof in the fossil record that oxygen removes greenhouse gases and oxygen is relied upon to form all the oxidants which remove pollutants and gases from the atmosphere. We need to have this airlift computer modeled and discussed in public as the non toxic alternative to geoengineering with aerosols.

Dr. Peter Wadhams states in this presentation that the methane release will ultimately cost is $60 Trillion as global warming costs. $40-50 billion for a first oxygen airlift seems reasonable to work to avoid these direct costs as indirect costs are not yet calculable.




Viva Cundliffe

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.


The sooner we computer model an oxygen airlift -the better


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.

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.

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%


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:


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:

Atmospheric Research

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

The effect of aerosols on long wave radiation and global warming


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.


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.