Comprehensive Scientific Study Calculates the Cost of Geoengineering

Comprehensive Scientific Study Calculates the Cost of Geoengineering

Dees Illustration

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

As more and more evidence is produced on what is virtually a weekly basis regarding chemtrails,
geo-engineering, and stratospheric modification, it is now the case
that individuals who deny the existence of these programs may be
classified as delusional, even as they have repeatedly attached this
label to those who have acknowledged the existence of such programs in
the past. Although the label of “conspiracy theorist” has been applied
to people who have spoken out about geo-engineering for many years, the
fact is that those who are incapable of acknowledging basic reality are
only eroding their own credibility as time moves forward.

For many, the ability to hold two contradictory thoughts (i.e.
“chemtrails are conspiracy theories” while “geo-engineering projects are
needed to combat global warming”) is a major impediment to any real
acceptance of the health and environmental consequences of barium oxide, cadmium, sulfur dioxide, and aluminum oxide being sprayed over their heads on a daily basis.

Likewise, the thought that governments, corporations, banks, and
academia might be working in secret toward nefarious ends is beyond
comprehension for a large portion of the general public.

However, as more and more mainstream media outlets and “respected”
scientific organizations begin to openly admit the existence of both the
technologies and the programs, the ability to deny it is a gift more
closely associated with a mental disorder than with ignorance.

Thus, the recent release of a study published in the journal Environmental Research Letters entitled, “Cost analysis of stratospheric albedo modification delivery systems,”
should only serve to weaken the ridiculous claims that those
individuals capable of looking above their heads and researching
government programs are conspiracy nuts.

The study, conducted jointly between three
researchers affiliated with three different institutions – Justin
McClellan of Aurora Flight Science Corporation, David W. Keith of the
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Kennedy School at Harvard
University, and Jay Apt of the Tepper School of Business and Department
of Engineering and Public Policy of the Carnegie Mellon University –
centered around the evaluation of the projected cost analysis of various
systems capable of “delivering 1-5 million metric tonnes (Mt) of albedo
modification material to altitudes of 18-30 km.”





The study also evaluated “existing aircraft cost of acquisition and
operations, perform[ed] in-depth new aircraft and airship design studies
and cost analyses, and survey[ed] rockets, guns, and suspended gas and
slurry pipes, comparing their costs to those of aircraft and airships.”

It should be noted that the study does not “address the effectiveness,
risks or social implications associated with the deployment of aerosols
to the stratosphere for solar radiation management (SRM).” This
particular study only evaluates the costs of “transporting a million
tonnes of material to the stratosphere.”

Still, the researchers are clearly favorable to the idea of
geo-engineering. In fact, this much is evidenced in their four-point
statement as to why this study was undertaken and why they felt it was
necessary to provide “rough order-of-magnitude estimates” of the cost of
transportation for these particulate matters.

The study states,

<blockquote class="tr_bq">
First, the basic feasibility of SRM with current technology at low cost
has been disputed. We think this work demonstrates clearly that it is
feasible by showing that several independent options can transport the
required material at a cost that is less that 1% of climate damages or
the cost of mitigation. Removing this uncertainty is relevant whatever
one’s view about implementation of SRM. Second, economists are beginning
to explore cost-effectiveness and perform option value calculations to
help understand the role of several types of geoengineering in climate
policy. Rough order-of-magnitude costs are needed for their work. Third,
political scientists and some policy makers are concerned about
unilateral action. Our analysis provides insight into what might be
possible – at a purely technical level – even for a small country,
assuming it is able to procure the aviation services on an open market.
Fourth, some atmospheric scientists are working on various methods for
creating and dispersing particles other than simple SO2 injection.</blockquote>
Notice that the authors write that scientists are already working on methods for geoengineering.

In addition, it is stated that “As early as 1992, estimates were made of
the cost of geoengineering,” citing the US National Research Council as
proof.

Building on the findings of previous studies, the authors also suggest
that, due to the nature of aerosols and the characteristics of
stratosphere, it might be most efficient both in terms of cost and
lifetime of the aerosols to disperse the material in the tropics above
the tropical tropopause. Thus, the study reads,
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To a rough approximation the circulation of air in the stratosphere
rises from the tropics and descends at middle and high latitudes.
Lifetime of air in the stratosphere is longest in the ‘overworld’
corresponding to potential temperatures above that of the tropical
tropopause and shorter in the ‘middle world’ roughly corresponding to
altitudes between the tropical and polar tropopause heights where air in
the stratosphere mixes more rapidly with tropospheric air. These
considerations suggest that long lifetimes and even distribution of
stratospheric aerosol can be most easily achieved by delivering material
in the tropics above the tropical tropopause.</blockquote>
The authors of this particular study were nothing if not thorough and
scientific (with the exception of their adherence to anthropogenic
global warming theories) throughout the entire process. Virtually every
possible variable was taken into account that might affect the cost of
stratospheric modificiation via aerosol dispersion.

Indeed, the authors took advantage of a set of CER (Cost Estimating
Relationships) developed by the RAND Corporation; the Development and
Procurement Costs of Aircraft (DAPCA) model. This model was instrumental
to the estimation of costs for aerosol dispersal using existing
aircraft (airplanes and airships) as well as the projections regarding
“New Aircraft designs,” meaning aircraft that has yet to be unveiled to
the general public at the time of the study.

Using the DAPCA model, a wide range of variables were considered such as
fuel cost, fuel weight, fuel burn rate, thrust specific fuel
consumption rate, personnel costs (air crews, site managers, maintenance
personnel and logistics, pilots, copilots, payload operators flight
crews, etc.), labor rates, and many other factors were all included in
the calculations of the cost of dispersing aerosols using existing
airplanes to the amount of 1 Mt yr -1.

All
of these figures are represented in Table 1 of the study under the
“Maintenance hours per flight hour” section. Other data included in the
table are the “acquisition costs,” “modification cost,” “Number of
aircraft required,” “Fleet acquisition cost,” and “Yearly operations
cost.” The types of airplane studied include the Large cargo Boeing
747-400, Zoom climber (Boeing F-15E), Business Jet (Gulfstream C-37A),
Airlifter (Boeing C-17), and the Supersonic Bomber (Rockwell B-1B).

In relation to the “Total yearly cost with depreciation and interest,”
the Large cargo Boeing (747-400) and the Airlifter (Boeing C17) were
tied at $1.1 billion. However, with modifications made to reach
altitudes of 18.2 km, the Airlifter costs increased to $3.6 billion.

In relation to existing aircraft and aerosol delivery, the study claims,
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Existing aircraft are optimized to transport a payload quickly and
efficiency over a long distance; they are not optimized for high
altitude flight and therefore are poorly suited to the geoengineering
mission. Operating existing aircraft at their ceiling, or beyond with
expensive modifications, requires lightly loading them, driving fleet
size up. The zoom climber type (F-15E) does have high altitude
capability, but its size drives fleet size to well over 100 aircraft and
fuel consumption makes operations costs the highest of all airplane
options examined. Supersonic bombers provide the payload and altitude
capability required for geoengineering but the feasibility of acquiring
and operating them is questionable and costs are high. Costs grow
rapidly as altitude is increased. Figure 1 summarizes the yearly total cost for existing aircraft systems as a function of altitude.</blockquote>
The authors go on to discuss the potential for optimal “New aircraft
design,” suggesting that “The optimized designs favor 2 engines over
greater numbers as engines are a large contributor to RDT&E and
acquisition costs as well as spare parts costs.” Other suggestions are
made in this regard which can be found in the “New aircraft section” and
section 6 of the supplementary data.

Notably, the study addresses other more novel forms of aerosol
disbursal. Or, at least, methods which are not readily visible to the
general public. These approaches include airships, rocket powered
gliders, guns, and floating platforms with slurry pipes or gas pipes.

After the discussion of conventional aircraft (i.e. airplanes), the
airship option finishes a distant second place. The authors sum up the
feasibility of this option by writing,
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Airships may provide an attractive solution to the mission of payload
delivery because of their large payload capacity and long endurance
potential. A key enabling innovation has been the use of internal
bladders with adjustable pressure (ballonets) that allow dynamic
adjustment of vehicle buoyancy. This allows the vehicle to descend after
releasing payload without dumping helium. In recent years the concept
of hybrid lift airships (HLA) that generate the majority of their lift
from buoyant forces but generate a small percentage dynamically due to
aerodynamic forces has emerged as a way to reduce vehicle size and
improve ground handling. The HLA technology shows promise for
geoengineering operations, but the technology is still in its infancy.</blockquote>
Rocket powered gliders were also considered as alternative means of
aerosol dispersal, but in less practical terms, mainly due to cost. The
study claims,
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
An analysis of a rocket powered system was carried out for comparison to
airplanes. The concept vehicle utilizes off-the-shelf rocket engines or
motors to boost a vehicle and payload to altitude. At apogee, wings are
deployed to increase the vehicle's lift-to-drag coefficient to allow it
to glide at altitude and disperse payload. Once dispersal is completed,
the wings retract to allow it to descend quickly. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Rocket glider cost estimates were developed (table 2 and section 8.1 of the supplementary data available at stacks.iop.org/ERL/7/034019/mmedia); however, a preliminary analysis showed this architecture is several orders of magnitude more costly than other systems.</blockquote>
In terms of guns, the study was even more unenthusiastic. Although the
authors claimed that guns could be used to reach higher altitudes than
what were dealt with in the study, the supposed lack of availability for
commercial use and prohibitive cost prompted the researchers to
discourage pursuit of this method as a central goal.

In the section, “Guns,” the study states,

<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We examined conventional and advanced gun designs, and reexamined a widely cited analysis of guns (US National Research Council 1992)
that analyzed the costs of delivering sulfur to the stratosphere for
geoengineering. The basis for this analysis is the Iowa-class
battleship's 16'' Mark 7 naval gun. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Our scoping analysis of new gun technologies under development that
utilize electromagnetics or hydrogen gas suggest that, while these
technologies might be preferred for altitudes at or beyond the upper
(100 kft) boundary of our study, they would not be preferred for the
50–80 kft altitudes of primary interest (supplementary data section 8.2
available at stacks.iop.org/ERL/7/034019/mmedia).
We also note that these new gun technologies are unlikely to be
available for non-military uses for some time to come. The 16'' naval
guns represent a mature, deployable technology with almost a century of
heritage. We consider these, and a modified gun using modern materials.
Both were found to exceed the cost of deployment using other systems by
one or two orders of magnitude.</blockquote>
The least feasible method of injecting aerosols into the stratosphere,
according to the study, is the floating platform solution which involves
the development and maintenance of an actual space elevator. Because
this type of system has yet to be publicly developed, as well as a lack
of available materials and adequate knowledge of cost, this method of
stratospheric modification was relegated to future study.

In regards to the floating platform, the authors write,
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The practicality of a space elevator is limited by the strength of
existing materials. However, the tension in the tether for a
stratospheric elevator is less than the yield strength of existing
materials, for example, Kevlar. We conducted a preliminary analysis
(summarized in table 2)
of systems utilizing a lighter-than-air platform to support a pipe,
sometimes called a floating platform (Intellectual Ventures 2009, Blackstock et al 2009); see section 8.3 of the supplementary data (available at stacks.iop.org/ERL/7/034019/mmedia). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It is important to note that these systems are purely theoretical and
are at or beyond the limits of today's materials and technologies.
Analysis was conducted to determine approximate costs for comparison
purposes, but uncertainties are very large and true development costs
are extremely difficult to predict. Deploying these systems may require
significant advancements in fluid mechanics, aerodynamics and material
science.</blockquote>
All in all, we must remember that this study is only designed to
effectively estimate the cost of dispersing aerosols into the
atmosphere, not the reasons for doing so and certainly not the inherent
dangers that necessarily go hand in hand with it. Still, the conclusions
in regards to cost are astonishing to say the least.

This is because the money that would be required to inject 1Mt (Metric
Tonne) into the stratosphere is not much larger than that required to
implement a typical large scale engineering project. Furthermore, the
cost of the program would be akin to that of the operational costs of a
small airline.

The study also states that the costs associated with stratospheric
aerosol dispersal using existing airplanes would actually be much
smaller than that of larger airlines like FedEx or Southwest.

Thus, the conclusion states:

<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Delivery of material required for stratospheric solar radiation
management appears to be feasible from an engineering standpoint. Costs
are comparable to other large engineering projects or aerospace flight
operations (see table 1, figure 1 and section 5 of the supplementary
data available at stacks.iop.org/ERL/7/034019/mmedia). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
. . . . . </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Airplane geoengineering operations would be comparable to the yearly
operations of a small airline, and are dwarfed by the operations of a
large airline like FedEx or Southwest (supplementary data section 3.3
and supplementary data table 2).</blockquote>
Lastly, the report states,
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To put these cost in perspective, the costs of climate damages or of
emission mitigation are commonly estimated to be 0.2–2.5% of 2030 global
GDP (Barker et al 2007)
equivalent to roughly $200B to $2000B per year. Our estimates of the
cost of delivering mass to the stratosphere—likely to be the most
substantial part of the cost of SRM deployment—are less than 1% of this
figure.</blockquote>
In the end, it is almost unbelievable how anyone is able to continue to
deny the existence of geoengineering projects such as aerosol dispersal
and/or chemtrails any longer. Without the aid of clear cognitive
dissonance, such denial would be virtually impossible absent total
ignorance.

Still, the mainstream media, government outlets, and academia will
undoubtedly continue to label any discussion of these programs as fringe
“conspiracy theories,” even as they promote the further expansion of
the science.

Regardless of the reaction given by the perpetrators or by the
uninformed, studies such as the one detailed in this article only add
more evidence to the mounting heap of previous other documents and
admissions relating to geoengineering projects the world over. It is for
this reason that, as the geoengineers continue to step up their
programs of reforming the environment of the planet, those of us who are
aware of the overarching agenda must step up our own efforts to awaken
the masses to these programs and subsequently demand that they be ended
immediately.

Source:-
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/12/comprehensive-scientific-study-of.html