Weather and Climate Control a
Reality? by Dr Chris Barnes, Bangor
Scientific and Educational Consultants,
April 2017. Email email@example.com
and planned weather, climate and hydrology control is discussed. Despite claims to the contrary, powerful
electromagnetic signals may be able to
influence the weather via AGWS although not presently predictively on a 3D
small grid scale.
contrails have highly predictable effects provided ice crystal shape and size
distribution is controlled. They can be
used for both cooling and hydrology control.
the downside is that flying in the northern Jetstream Leads to its instability
and to artic warming. A new energetic hypothesis is developed which confirms
the fears of Boucher,
achieve simultaneous control of the
weather in every quarter of the globe in a closed loop feedback engineering
sense might never actually be possible.
Firstly, the world and its meteorological system is not entirely closed
loop and secondly we have not yet the
technology to monitor and effect changes in small enough 3D grids, see also
set against this we can be fairly certain the world has had neither natural
weather nor a natural climate possibly since the discovery of agriculture and
most certainly since the industrial revolution. Further, the
most dramatic changes seem to have occurred since the use of
large scale electricity power
transmission grids and
with the explosively accelerating era of international jet
aviation. This is suggestive that
electrical and aviation technologies ought to be adaptable at least in some
sense to take control of certain aspects of weather and climate in certain
places of the globe.
grids emit power line harmonics shown to enhance significantly the
precipitation of 2-keV electrons over the eastern parts of the American
continents near L ∼
4. Some mid-latitude hiss bands appear to consist of sets of magnetospheric
lines and their associated triggered emissions, see Helliwell et al
(1975). Solar atmospheric coupling by
electrons and stratospheric gases has been shown to be a major mode of solar to
atmosphere (weather) coupling by Callis
et al (1998).
2012. I published an online paper,
Global Climate Change, natural, inadvertent and planned controls some
unsung concepts. By Dr Chris Barnes,
Bangor Scientific and Educational Consultants.
paper I discussed inter-alia the possibility
of inadvertent and intentional weather control using electromagnetic means.
I also discussed unintentional
weather modification as a result of upwelling AGW’s and infrasound arising from
windfarms. Since wind farms appear at least for the time being to be here to
stay I would expect long term climate
impact as well as local weather effects.
2013, I discussed unexpected
effects of aviation and shipping on climate stabilisation. I have also commented on an unexpected
effect of increasing lightning
i.e. causing negative climate
feedback. Indeed with the exception of
the early predictive paper by Eschenbach (2010), ‘The Thunderstorm Thermostat
Hypothesis: How Clouds and Thunderstorms Control the Earth's Temperature’ I am
the only author to support Eschenbach
and do so by my NOx hypothesis.
Toumi (2012) reaches exactly the opposite and in my opinion erroneous
conclusion by only discussing Ozone generation. I would add an extra mechanism by which
lightning storms stabilise temperature via AGW.
AGW then allow more ice-supersaturated regions (ISSRs) to form and provided either sub-visible
cirrus or persistent contrail cirrus with predominantly small ( <10 micron)
ice crystals form additional negative forcing occurs.
these mechanism are sufficient to totally stabilise climate remains to be
despite the recent hiatus in climate warming
and the coldest winter in Europe for many decades, globally 2016 was
still classed as the warmest year on record since modern weather records began.
I still predict further cooling in the next 20- 40 years or so in line
with my prevoius published works (refs), and the dominance of solar geomagnetic
ultimately the solar geomagnetic
cooling trend may end and, potentially,
anthropogenic warming may well re-ensue.
In the meantime human kind will have time to plan climate mitigation
strategies. One such very important strategy is to achieve carbon neutrality
because this also reduces ocean acidification.
However, since there are other greenhouse gases in the equation this may
not be sufficient, especially taken with the unknown and potential warming
effect of windfarms. In which case we
will have to plan and prepare for geo-engineering.
are numerous proposals for geoengineering.
SRM ( solar radiation management) via stratospheric particle injection appears from the literature to be one of the most highly researched and
theoretically muted strategies. To me,
however, such particle injection
proposals and ocean seeding seem the most ludicrous and dangerous. The standard particle injection protocol
proposed is the use of sulphate aerosol.
Anthropogenic stratospheric aerosol injection would cool the planet,
stop the melting of sea ice and land-based glaciers, slow sea level rise, and
increase the terrestrial carbon sink, but the downside
would be the production of regional drought, ozone depletion, less
sunlight for solar power, and less blue skies, less UVB hence less vitamin D
for people, hence more illness and cancer. Furthermore it would hamper Earth-based
optical astronomy, do nothing to stop ocean acidification, and present many
ethical and moral issues. It would also
cost billions of dollars. According to
Robok et al ( 2009), further work is needed to quantify many of these factors
to allow informed decision-making.
it has also been proposed to release electrostatic or magnetic nanoparticles
into the atmosphere and rely on photophoretic lofting to lift them into the
stratosphere and the geomagnetic filed to move them to the poles at a cost of
between .1 and 1% GDP, see Keith (2010).
It is particularly disturbing that Alumina and Barium Titotanate have been
suggested as possible candidates for such particles. For example, alumina nanoparticles can elicit a
proinflammatory response and thus present a cardiovascular disease risk, see
Oersterling et al (2008). They also
produce immune effects in brain cells, see Li et al (2009). Nano-alumina is toxic in both cell culture
and animal models (mouse) and that
prolonged exposure may heighten the chances of developing a neurodegenerative
disease, such as AD, see Shah et al
Barium titonate in nano forms also has toxic effects as demonstrated by size dependent toxicity effects on Chlorella
vulgaris green algae, see Polonini et al (2015). These particles probably interact with
biology because of their peculiar piezoelectric and magnetic properties.
method of geo-engineering is marine cloud whitening, by for instance ship
tracks has been suggested as a means of causing climate cooling by increased
cloud albedo. Alternatively this could be done by spraying salt spray into
marine clouds. I have supported the
notion of ship use in the past (ref).
However, a more comprehensive study shows that although local effects
can be very dramatic, for example for
some regions of the west coast of North America the RF due to ship tracks can
be up to −0.05 Wm−2. However, because of the small global coverage
of ship tracks (0.002%), the global annual mean RF due to ship tracks is small
(−0.4 mWm−2), see Schereier et al (2007).
not SRM or ships, how is weather and climate control a realisable reality?
we do, if we do it locally and on a small
geo-temporal scale this is weather control. If it
is done globally for sustained times or is done in a part of the globe which affects the whole globe and for a
sustained time scale it becomes climate control.
countries now have ‘bureaus of weather’
offering to mitigate fogs, hail and rain and/or to guarantee dry weather
for certain events.
question is ‘ Is larger scale weather control
or seasonal or periodic control
as in change of actual climate really possible?’
if we think objectively, anthropogenic
climate control is already happening and has been since the respective dawns of agriculture, the industrial revolution,
electric power distribution at grid scales, more latterly aviation and most
recently of all wind farms. Even so the
solar (geomagnetic Ap) signal which controls GCR particle precipitation still
shows through, due to enormous and manifold amplification processes ionosphere
to stratosphere and stratosphere to troposphere.
me it seems almost futile arguing over the contribution of CO2 to climate
change because our knowledge is changing so fast that not everybody can ever be
properly informed. For example CO2 may
still be being released from the oceans following earlier warming periods
hundreds or even thousands of years ago (refs).
Perhaps this means that at least for the moment sustained
geo-engineering methods for climate control which are not easily reversed, such as particle injections, should never
be used, in case we over cook the books. For example, since my previous (2012) paper there is a considerable extra body of
information on sources and sinks of CO2 and feedback mechanisms pertinent
thereto. The present author does not
dispute that CO2 has the potential to be a greenhouse driver, however, to
reiterate what I have previously shown elsewhere and above. other factors such
as aviation and geomagnetic control of
our climate presently
seem to more adequately explain what is seen, especially in Europe.
vapour for instance in terms of its infra-red absorbance has the potential to
cause many times the greenhouse effect of CO2 and yet has only recently
entered into the great climate debate.
Stratospheric water vapour concentrations decreased by about 10% after
the year 2000. Solomon et al ( 2010) show that this acted to slow the rate of
increase in global surface temperature over 2000–2009 by about 25% compared to
that which would have occurred due only to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse
gases. More limited data suggest that stratospheric water vapour probably
increased between 1980 and 2000, which would have enhanced the decadal rate of
surface warming during the 1990s by about 30% as compared to estimates
neglecting this change. Their findings show that stratospheric water vapour is
an extremely important driver of decadal global surface climate change, more so
than CO2. Rosenlof et al consider ten
data sets covering the period 1954–2000 are analyzed to show a 1%/yr increase
in stratospheric water vapor. The trend has persisted for at least 45 years,
hence is unlikely the result of a single event, but rather indicative of
long-term climate change. A long-term change in the transport of water vapor
into the stratosphere is the most probable cause. Schmidt
et al (2010) conclude that clouds and water vapour per se are responsible for
up to 50% of climate greenhouse
dryness of the stratosphere has been explained, in general terms, as water
condensation from the rising branch of the Hadley cell at the tropical
tropopause (Brewer, 1949), but Ellsaesser (1974) suggested that the mean
tropical tropopause is not cold enough to account for the observed water vapour
mixing ratios. During intense
thunderstorms that in part penetrate the tropopause, investigators have
observed (1) an increase in local stratospheric water vapour and (2) the
temporary presence of air parcels substantially colder than and higher than the
tropopause. These cold parcels are calculated to have extremely low water
vapour mixing ratios, and their occurrence in the stratosphere suggests a
mechanism whereby the effective condensation temperature could be
systematically colder than the tropopause. Ice crystals from the cloud,
evaporating in the warmer stratosphere, presumably cause the observed increase
in water vapour, but mixing of cold desiccated air parcels with lower
stratospheric air would tend to decrease its water content. Johnston and Solomon (1979) consider there are
opposing factors concerning the role of severe cumulonimbus storms on
stratospheric water, and it may require detailed, microphysical analysis to see
which effect is larger. I have commented on increased thunderstorm activity
being a natural negative feedback response to climate warming whether
of natural or anthropogenic cause.
There is great consolidation of my hypothesis and observation here.
leads me to proposal number one.
‘Control storms’ and we can control global temperatures, via
stratospheric water and NOx content, we
also modulate Ice supersaturation.
and Deen (1991) first commented on the apparent
response of the troposphere to MeV-GeV particle flux variations and the
fact that there appeared to be a connection via electrofreezing of supercooled
water in high-level clouds.
ionization production by MeV-GeV particles (mostly galactic cosmic rays) in the
lower atmosphere has-well defined variations on a day-to-day time scale related
to solar activity, and on the decadal time scale related to the sunspot cycle. Their
results based on an analysis of 33 years
of northern hemisphere meteorological data showed clear correlations of winter
cyclone intensity (measured as the changes in the area in which vorticity is
above a certain threshold) with day-to-day changes in the cosmic ray flux.
Similar correlations are also present between winter cyclone intensity, the
related storm track latitude shifts, and cosmic ray flux changes on the decadal
time scale. These point to a mechanism in which atmospheric electrical
processes affect tropospheric thermodynamics, with a requirement for energy amplification by a factor of about 107
and a time scale of hours. They hypothesized that ionization affects the nucleation and/or
growth rate of ice crystals in high-level clouds by enhancing the rate of
freezing of thermodynamically unstable super-cooled water droplets known to be present at the tops of high
clouds. The electro-freezing increases the flux of ice crystals that can
glaciate midlevel clouds. In warm core winter cyclones the consequent release
of latent heat intensifies convection and extracts energy from the baroclinic
instability to further intensify the cyclone. As a result, the general
circulation in winter is affected in a way consistent with observed variations
on the inter-annual/decadal time scale. They proposed effects on particle concentration and size
distributions in high-level clouds may also influence circulation via radiative
forcing. Net cloud radiative forcing
is positive in most cirrus cases. However the exceptions are very important for climate cooling
control. These are cirrus clouds with a large number (>107
m−3) of small (mean maximum dimension <30 μm) ice crystals and
cirrus clouds with bi-modal crystal size distribution and large particle size
for the second maximum peak, see Zhang et al (1999).
leads me to proposal number 2 ‘Control energetic particle precipitation
you also control stratospheric water, storm tracks and radiative forcing’
work on the magneto-acoustic phenomenon known as the Hum suggests a link with
renewable energy systems the world over (refs) and a further link with the UK (European) and US Electricity Grids. Furthermore the Hum has links with weather
forecasting. Thus either directly or
indirectly as a consequence of or in parallel with the Hum, world power systems
must already be influencing our
weather. It is well known they influence
space weather and hence the ionosphere (refs).
Gherzi 1946 was the first to establish a
link between the Ionosphere and weather forecasting and examined radio echoes
from the various ionised layers we usually associate with HF radio reflection, i.e. E, F and F2. They concluded there were forecasting
aspects relating to the future movements of the world’s major air masses. It is usually accepted that the ionosphere
is controlled at least in part by space weather input such as solar flux and
GCR flux. Very early
meteorologists also knew about another
space weather influence on the ionosphere and atmosphere, namely meteors. In ancient history, the term meteorology
literally meant the study of anything that fell from the sky. Meteors from
outer space were called "fire meteors". Rain was called
"hydro-meteors", and frozen precipitation, such as hail and snow was
referred to as "ice meteors".
A comprehensive discussion of my work here can be found at http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/Putting%20the%20Meteors%20back%20in%20Meteorology%20(1)%20(1)%20(1).html.
The conclusions reached are that GCR flux
is most relevant to UK weather but solar and meteor input cannot be
are at least four distinct links between the ionosphere and the lower levels of
the atmosphere. These are : heat/light
energy fluxes, the global electric
circuit, two way propagating gravity
waves and atmospheric chemistry.
almost complete model has been provided by Simoes et al  and I further
refined it as above in 2012, see
(1982), was probably one of the first to review and discuss the link between Atmospheric
gravity waves generated in the high-latitude ionosphere and particle
precipitation in the auroral regions and the link between travelling
ionospheric disturbances and AGW.
number 3 ‘Use ionospheric heaters to control particle precipitation and or
original patents for ionospheric heating systems envisaged, inter alia, weather
control, see US2007238252 (A1) ―
2007-10-11, http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US20070238252, claim 18. Despite this there are no actual references
in the scientific literature to direct weather effects from people that have actually worked at such
facilities. There are however, dozens of
alarmist publications by journalists and the like.
and Wong (2007) also summarise the stated aim of the use of high power EM waves
in the atmosphere in general: ‘Powerful electromagnetic (EM) waves can exert
well-defined influence on the atmosphere, ionosphere, and magnetosphere. These
active EM interactions can provide spatiotemporal information on the near-Earth
space environment (geospace). Objectives include remote monitoring and
controlling of a wide range of parameters of geospace, controlling
properties of the ionosphere and magnetosphere, as well as interaction with
large-scale natural energy sources. In addition, applications such as
mitigation of atmospheric pollutants and solar power satellites are
discussed. Studies of EM wave interactions also contribute to the knowledge of anthropogenic
effects in the geospace environment, such as the increasing use of EM
can be clearly seen that if we can modulate ionisation ( heating), AGW and
clouds/aerosols we ought to be able to strongly influence or even take control
of weather/climate. So what of the
recently indeed Prikryl et al (2016) has
established a link between high-speed
solar wind streams and explosive extratropical cyclones. Their evidence shows that explosive extratropical
cyclones tend to occur after arrivals of solar wind disturbances such as
high-speed solar wind streams from coronal holes when large amplitude
magneto-hydrodynamic waves couple to the magnetosphere-ionosphere system. These
MHD waves modulate Joule heating and/or Lorentz forcing of the high-latitude
thermosphere generating medium-scale atmospheric gravity waves that propagate energy upward and downward from auroral
zone through the atmosphere. At the tropospheric level, in spite of
significantly reduced amplitudes, these gravity waves can provide a lift of
unstable air to release the moist symmetric instability thus initiating
slantwise convection and forming cloud/precipitation bands. The release of
latent heat is known to provide energy for rapid development and intensification
of extratropical cyclones. In my 2012 paper I challenged the normally
accepted view that gravity waves were only relevant to the extent that they
ascended upwards from the troposphere to the ionosphere. I set up my two-way model and added it to
Simoes’ diagram. Prikryl’s observation
confirms my hypothesis and thus
brings electromagnetic weather and
climate control into the real world.
2012 I quoted some 2005 references to suggest AGW modulation ought to be
possible. Further since that 2012 publication there is now overwhelming
evidence in the scientific literature that ionospheric heaters, including
HAARP, EISCAT and SURA belonging to at least two world super-powers are indeed
capable of generating AGW’s when operating
at 100MW plus power levels. See
for example Panasenko et al http://repository.kpi.kharkov.ua/handle/KhPI-Press/11207. Kunitsyn et al (2015) describe artificial AGWS with a spatial
period of observed
disturbances is 200–250
km and they
are easily traced by satellite up to a distance of 700–800 km from the heated
region. Andreeva et al (2016) similarly
but there stated purpose is to create artificial radio ducting, but we must
understand the effects this will also have upon weather and climate if
sustained. Padipta and Lee (2013)
refer to AGWS generated at the HAARP facility.
is no longer operated by the US military
and since 2015 has been used on an experimental basis only by Alaska
Fairbanks University, Geophysical
RADAR is an ideal tool for mapping the movement of AGW’s created and wave -wave
interaction of AGW’s in a turbulent
atmosphere and thus it is my sincere belief artificial AGW’S will be able soon
to be used for purpose in weather, climate and hydrological control.
number 4 ‘ Use contrail engineering in
conjunction with proposal 3 either in an active mode or in a diagnostic
up over the last couple of decades, there is
now a huge body of evidence
relating to the ways in which aerosol and aviation effects weather and climate.
have previously mentioned effects of contrails and persistent contrails. Control these and you can also control
weather. Recent patents (refs) allow
safe enhancement and suppression of contrails without needing to resort to the use of dangerous chemicals. Typical regions where the occurrence of
contrails is above average are in the upper atmosphere: (a) ahead of a
surface warm front either in moist warm layers before the cirrus clouds arrive
or more likely with the cirrus in a warm conveyor belt and (b) ahead of a
surface cold front in rapidly moving cold air in the turbulent regions near a
band of strong wind (though the speed is not necessarily as high as in a jet).
Usually, the atmosphere is baroclinic in the contrail region. Most of the
detected contrails occur in divergent flow patterns in the upper troposphere in
slowly rising warm or locally turbulent cold air masses.
A) Diagnostic mode: Contrails (especially the persistent) variety
have very characteristic Satellite LW spectra. Effectively over Britain they mark the
edge of the transatlantic jet stream.
So can thus be used in a diagnostic mode
to see if the jet can be artificially displaced. There is sufficient literature on AO and NAO
teleconnections to suggest this to be possible because particle precipitation will alter
arctic cloudiness and polar vortex, see also my papers on the Hum.
B) Active mode: I have discussed this in its simplest sense
elsewhere. Although there is much
dispute about the sign of radiative forcing
of persistent contrails in the
literature even those authors which suggest entirely positive forcing, suggest
some three times less positive forcing when flying by day compared to with by
night (ref). I have made experimental
studies which show that while climate change is beneficial to London and the
South East it is highly detrimental to North Wales which is becoming much
colder. I attribute this to many more
daytime than night-time flights over Wales.
The work of Meerkötter et al
strongly supports my notion (ref). Their
conclusion is a simple but critically important one: ‘Contrails cool the surface during the day and
heat the surface during the night, and hence reduce the daily temperature
amplitude. The net effect depends strongly on the daily variation of contrail
cloud cover. The indirect radiative forcing due to particle changes in natural
cirrus clouds may be of the same magnitude as the direct one due to additional
cover.’ Stuber et al (2006) have
flights account for only 25 per cent of daily air traffic, but contribute 60 to
80 per cent of the contrail forcing. Further, winter flights account for only
22 per cent of annual air traffic, but contribute half of the annual mean
forcing. These results suggest that flight rescheduling could help to minimize
the climate impact of aviation.
Thus to cool the climate all flying
should be done by day and in summer and none
contrails are now extremely prevalent around the World. In a 2003 study they were found to exist
53% of the time in Europe. In a 2008
study they were found to exist for between 40-80% of the time in Ireland. Estimated sky coverage of contrails is
evaluated by satellite. However, no
satellite program or papers in the literature discuss the very dramatic effects
observed living underneath a major air
corridor. Areal coverage expressed by
satellites are often quoted as low as .1 -8%.
one lives under such an air corridor,
one often experiences the
transition from contrail to persistent contrail, the spreading into cirrus
cloud either full white sky, mares tails, sub –visible or blanket
cirrostratus. One can often
witness amazing and cyclic transitions
between these cloud types over periods of minutes or hours,
catalysis by fall streaks or AGW all
of which are easily visible to the naked eye and one can witness amazing once
rare optical effects and haloes and sun dogs at any latitude once reserved for
the polar regions.
the contrail and contrail cirrus cases black carbon (BC) particles dominated
the residual size spectra for particles smaller than 1 μm. The coarse
residual particle mode (Dp≥1.5 μm) in contrails consisted almost
completely of mechanically generated metallic particles which contributed only
about 1% to residual particle number but approximately 50% to residual particle
volume. Observed particle number concentrations and BC mass concentration of
the residual particles were 0.2 cm−3 and 16 ng m−3 inside the
contrail and 0.02 cm−3 and <2 ng m−3 inside the cirrus. The
fraction of BC particles (0.1 μm<Dp<0.8 μm) in the interstitial
aerosol samples increased with altitude from <70% at 8 km to 95% at 11 km
near the air-traffic corridors with number concentrations of ≈0.1
cm−3, see Petzold (1998).
point I make is these things are so common they now completely dominate earth’s
climate. The danger is there are now
patents springing up on how to completely suppress contrails. We should be extremely careful before moving from a policy of all to none in
view of the negative climate feedback that contrails are showing in some parts
of the world.
flying at different heights ought to be sufficient to test climate models. Following the findings of Petzold
(1998), flying higher should make more
small crystals and cool more. This is
directly contrary to existing ideas about flying lower to avoid contrails!
crystal shape also has a substantial effect on the cloud reflection and
absorption for a given size; more complex ice particles reflect more solar
radiation. For most solar reflection it has been proposed to use a contrail cirrus cloud model consisting of a
combination of bullet rosettes (50%), hollow columns (30%), and plates (20%),
with sizes ranging from 1 to 90 µm in association with radiation perturbation
studies, see …
AGWS and aircraft vortices may also be
accidentally relevant for climate cooling by assisting cirrus and
contrail cirrus formation with the right size ice crystals.
(1996) discusses the extreme dryness of the lower stratosphere is believed to
be caused by freeze-drying of air as it enters the stratosphere through the
cold tropical tropopause. Previous investigations have been focused on
dehydration occurring at the tops of deep convective cloud systems. However,
recent observations of a ubiquitous stratiform cirrus cloud layer near the
tropical tropopause suggest the possibility of dehydration as air is slowly
lifted by large-scale motions. In this study, we have evaluated this
possibility using a detailed ice cloud model. Simulations of ice cloud
formation in the temperature minima of gravity waves (wave periods of 1–2
hours) indicate that large numbers of ice crystals will likely form due to the
low temperatures and rapid cooling. As a result, the crystals do not grow
larger than about 10 µm, fallspeeds are no greater than a few cm-s−1, and
little or no precipitation or dehydration occurs. However, ice clouds formed by
large-scale vertical motions (with lifetimes of a day or more) should have
fewer crystals and more time for crystal sedimentation to occur, resulting in
water vapor depletions as large as 1 ppmv near the tropopause. Gradual lifting
near the tropical tropopause, accompanied by formation of thin cirrus, may account
for the dehydration.
have previously discussed global aviation and the way that it can account more
effectively than CO2 alone for recent warming and cooling hiatus evets, ref ……
recently indeed, Storelvmo et al (2014) have discussed cirrus cloud seeding
from a theoretical basis as ‘a climate
engineering mechanism with reduced side effects’. Their analysis shows that
seeding of mid and high latitude cirrus clouds has the potential to cool the
whole planet by 1.4K. The analysis does
also show, however, a modest reduction in rainfall.
engineering for hydrology control
addition to Storelvmo et al (2014),
Schumann et al (2015) also comment on contrails impacting the entire hydrological cycle in the
atmosphere by reducing the total water column and the cover by high- and
low-level clouds. The mass of water in
aged contrails may exceed 106 times the mass of water emitted from aircraft.
a personal study of the weather in North Wales going back 5 years, I have shown
Wednesdays to be a predominantly
dry. This would appear to be
the result of Wednesdays being the heaviest
day in transatlantic west ( USA) TO East ( Europe) flights.
flights often take advantage of the prevailing eastwards flowing Jetstream. It has long since been known that turbulence
in jet streams allows the formation of natural Jetstream cirrus http://journals.co-action.net/index.php/tellusa/article/viewFile/8906/10367
aviation will modify this cirrus and the ice crystal shape and size
proposal is that flying in jet streams probably has the tendency to reduce
rainfall and cause frontolysis.
the other hand when aircraft fly through lower cloud they have the potential to
cause local precipitation and without the need for additional seeding agetns,
see Heymsfield et al 2010. This may be
regarded as localised or very small scale frontogenesis.
of the above effectors are monitored extensively by air, from the ground and by satellite.
If you can monitor and you can
control even haphazardly, then you can establish cause and effect and perfect.
am forced therefore to pose the question
if an independent scientist with only
self –training in meteorological aspects can arrive at such conclusions why haven’t meteorologists and climatologists?
alternative question could also be posed, ‘if they have why no public
disclosure ?’ Ever since Canute, human kind has dreamt of being able
to tame the elements. I now sincerely
believe the potential, if not the
moment, has arrived.
A closing note backing up
those who have proposed that a day’s international flying has more effect on weather
and climate than a year’s worth of CO2.
decided to look at this from a very different perspective than it is has, as
far as I am aware, ever been looked at before?
Aircraft often fly in the Jetstream. The
Power of all the world’s Jetstreams =
us approximate those of the Northern hemisphere to 3.75 million megawatts.
four engine jet produces 300megawatt. If they are all flying in the jet stream and
14000 are in the air right now, we have 14000x300 = 4.2 million megawatts!
to drag ratios are usually about 4:1 thus we have an equivalent of 1.05 million
combined drag of all the aircraft flying in the jet stream in any one day
equates to a very significant percentage of the power of the Jetstream itself.
there any wonder then that the Jetstream is becoming more and more displaced
and less predictable as aviation expands.
have previously made the observation that statistically Wednesday is the driest
day of the week in Gwynedd. I ascribe
this directly to roughly 40% more early morning
flying in the Jetstream due to midweek business travel.
the 21 Century phenomenon of a vast expansion in aviation, cheap foreign
holidays and the like is fuelling climate change more than CO2.
flip side of the coin is that these
‘inadvertent’ changes to weather and
climate can easily be ‘manipulated’ by changing flight paths, number of flights
and time of flying on any specific day of the work. Hypothesis will doubtless be shown to be
reality within the near future.
the short time, we could never precisely control the weather in every part of
the globe at small scale grid levels because we presently do not have the
technology to instrument for the requisite feedback loops. This could potentially change in future maybe
by using nanobot systems.
electromagnetic energy from power systems and ionospheric heaters only being a tiny fraction* of solar
incident power there is no doubt that it can generate acoustic gravity waves
(AGW) which could potentially influence weather, climate and hydrology
particularly in the further as we learn more about their interactions and those of the
ionosphere and troposphere. * Analogous
to the ‘butterfly’ effect in a chaotic system.
For example tiny ‘dust devils’ in
the Sahara can spawn major storms elsewhere.
ice seeding has the potential to cool the planet if used appropriately.
technology can also be used for hydrological control.
in the Jetstream is having disastrously detrimental effects in the Northern
new ‘energetics’ explanation of (5) above has been advanced.
I propose that changes to weather and climate
can easily be ‘manipulated’ by changing flight paths, number of flights and
time of flying on any specific day of the work. Hypothesis will doubtless be shown to be
reality within the near future.