Gobal Warming would this work to fix it?

[Tetigustas shadowson]

I had this thought...
If isolated carbon particles floating in the air have magnetic poles, why cannot we simply make them attracted to each other or to something electronic.

Effectively we could be removing the carbon from the atmosphere, something like a ‘near space’ vessel or unmanned flying craft was my thought.

Here is my thinking

Build a craft one that could hover or fly slowly around in the atmospheric layers, where the carbon is mostly concentrated…!
The craft would magnetically attract the carbon together and then onto itself and into a collector for disposal. This machine could compress the particles or hit them with a positive charge and drop them as tiny pellets onto a target zone.
A simple radio wave may do it, it could work as a catalyst for gathering up the particles or starting them to gather together by changing the polarity of another particle it would be attracted to the others, then the carbon would simply fall to the earth.


The craft could run near solely upon the sun always floating on the sunny side of the planet when the particles are extremely excited by the heat.
We have micro fuel cells and micro turbines, we could build tiny ships that weighed about 110 pounds.
These propulsion systems could run such a unmanned craft, with our technology there is no reason we cannot make this happen.
.

I do believe the particles have a specific gravity making them float at a certain point in the f-layers and all isotropic particles have poles. Some years back; I became a radio electronics repair technician, studying the effects of the atmosphere and radio waves.

Ps: a micro wave oven is a radio ‘not a mini nuke silo’ every one here should know, it just spins the water in our food ‘right?’

So tell me….. what do you think……?
Can we as humans, with our tech level, could we achieve such a feat?

It would answer the prayers of many people


this post is mirrored in my forum @ schnizits.com I also posted it to valhalls forum
I want large amounts of input to this maybbe there is something to my idea.

[Nohc]

I'm no expert, but I don't think this would work.

Edit: Quack. Not that it won't though, or that it's a bad idea.

[Devari]

Removing Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere would be very, very dangerous. In the first place, it is not the only "greenhouse gas". Besides which, removing massive amounts of any normally occurring substance from the atmosphere could have potentially dreadful effects to the ecosystem. After all, Carbon Dioxide is a vital part of the entire biosphere.

Not to mention, I do believe that it wouldn't work with the laws of physics, but I'll leave that judgment to someone with more knowledge in that area than myself.

[Gen. Volkov]

Sorry, wouldn't work. The electromagnetic poles on the carbon dioxide molecule are too brief. Carbon dioxide is a naturally neutral particle, that's why it's a gas until you get well below zero on Celsius and Fahrenheit. Neutral particles will spontaneously form poles every once in awhile as the electrons gather at one end or another, but they are too weak and too brief to facilitate collection. Even if we could somehow collect carbon from the atmosphere, such craft would be very hard to build and maintain in a working order. In addition, I'm sure some people would take potshots at them. Then there's the problem of what to do with the carbon once collected. You'd have to make sure that it won't just escape from where ever you put it.

One other thing to mention, and don't get offended, but carbon molecules do not just float around our atmosphere. At least not in large amounts, and it doesn't cause global warming. It's carbon dioxide that is the problem. It makes up a bit less than 1% of our atmosphere, but a small change in that level has far reaching consequences.

And yes, we know how a microwave oven works here. Though it doesn't actually spin the water molecules, it just agitates them and makes them vibrate faster.

It's a good idea, but in it's present form, it is not workable.

[bjornredtail]

Such craft do exist.. Look at this thing.

Problem is that such a system would be expencive and would remove so little gas as to have neglageable net effect. We would be better off covering a snifigant area of the plannet in mirrors or launching supercooled copper slugs into the upper atmosphere to condense escess water vapor up there. (Edit: Not that the argument of not-on-a-big-enough-scale doesn't appily to the latter though..)

[Devari]

I maintain that the environmental effects would be detrimental anyway, defeating the whole purpose of "saving" the environment.

Besides, the whole thing is attacking a symptom of the pollution rather than the root causes. It is kind of this weird laziness that actually requires a lot of work.

[Gen. Volkov]

Uh.. that thing is huge. As in a wingspan of well over 100 feet. I don't think that's what he had in mind.

And the best method is to STOP USING SO MUCH FREAKING CARBON!!!!! You can cover the planet in mirrors, condense water vapor, put big mirrors in orbit, but the best and easiest solution is to STOP BURNING HYDRCARBONS. The planet will naturally clean the atmosphere. The oceans eat ALOT of carbon. We just have to stop burning coal for our electricity, and stop using oil, and natural gas, and all the other ancient plant and animal products. It's not like it's hard to do. We could use nuclear power. Even done the wasteful way it is currently practiced here in the US, with 100% of electricity for the whole planet generated by nuclear plants, there is still over ONE HUNDRED YEARS worth of nuclear fuel. You start building breeder reactors and recycling fuel rods and you have the potential for many centuries of power. That's PLENTY of time to develop fusion, and once you have fusion, you have essentially free power forever. And the electricty generated can be used to split water and fuel hydrogen cars. And boom, no more global warming worries, now we just have to worry about the looming ice age.

[Devari]

Besides, the whole thing is attacking a symptom of the pollution rather than the root causes. It is kind of this weird laziness that actually requires a lot of work.

^
|

[Gen. Volkov]

Yes well, I typed that and then saw your post. So

[Devari]

yourself.

[Gen. Volkov]

I'll whoever I want to you head!

[bjornredtail]

Well, I for one belive that humans have so little overall impact on overall carbon emissions as not to have an overall impact on the greenhouse effect. In fact, CO₂ isn't even the most abundant greenhouse gas. That would be H₂0. Perhaps we should watch our water vapor emissions more carefully then?

We could use nuclear power...

But what would we do with the waste then? Noone wants the stuff and there are few places you can stick stuff that must be isolated for thousands of years without people then.

And the electricty generated can be used to split water and fuel hydrogen cars.

But it will not be.. Electralisys is extremely inefficant as it is. Nearly all the commercial hydrogen produced today is done through reformation... Which means emitting carbon.

[Gen. Volkov]

Yes, but which is more effective at trapping heat? Carbon dioxide. Small changes in that level have much more effect than very large changes in humidity. And we are putting several hundred billion tons of carbon dioxide in the air every year over and above what is naturally produced. The ocean only absorbs so much, so more and more is staying in the air. CO2 levels have risen at the same rate global temps have risen. At some point we have to stop saying there's a correlation but no connection and face the fact that we are slowly killing ourselves. The sea ice is shrinking, the water levels are rising, and the temp of the planet is going up, and it's almost certainly OUR FAULT. Most studies say we should be headed into an ice age right now.

The waste can be recycled. 90% of it can be reused. The remaining ten percent takes up alot less space and there are places to store it. Other planets for one.

Electrolysis is somewhat inefficient, but fission and fusion produce so much power, so cheaply, it almost doesn't matter.

[Tetigustas shadowson]

It is the kina weird laziness that happens any how, so why not give it a go.
besides the type of carbon you would want to remove,
would have a specific resonant frequency.
much like quarts crystals, CO2 has a crystalline structure as well it would also have a specific frequency that causes it to react.
Just because we call it a gas doesn’t mean its not also a solid, our perception of atomic structure is skewed by how little we really know.

Something I learned in the oil patch…
They super heat the crude after other processes then shoot it into a tall tube closed at the top and extract it in shelved like levels, at intervals equal to their atmospheric weight.

We have fuel cell technology lets use it, hydrocarbons of all kinds produce greenhouse gasses.
One fuel cell could run your car for a 10 years, its funny how water traveling through a bizarre material, separating it into hydrogen and oxygen makes electricity…!

radioactive fuel rods can be plunged into the depths of the earth, back down where they can from! My best friend lives in Minnesota where plutonium is under their farm, a mining company offered them a low price to buy their farm so they could strip mine. ‘they own a large farm‘

Hydro carbons spent to get an alternate fuel, just like military intelligence. Ha ha haa

[Devari]

It is the kina weird laziness that happens any how, so why not give it a go.

But it doesn't actually solve the problem, just attempts to reduce the effects of one of the symptoms.