b3ta.com links
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » links » Link 1616335 | Random

This is a link post Solar radiation management with a tethered sun shield
This paper presents an approach to Solar Radiation Management (SRM) using a tethered solar shield at the modified gravitational L1 Lagrange point. Unlike previous proposals, which were constrained by the McInnes bound on shield surface density, our proposed configuration with a counterweight toward the Sun circumvents this limitation and potentially reduces the total mass by orders of magnitude. Furthermore, only 1% of the total weight must come from Earth, with ballast from lunar dust or asteroids serving as the remainder. This approach could lead to a significant cost reduction and potentially be more effective than previous space-based SRM strategies.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 19:04, , Reply)
This is a normal post That’s all well and good but how well does it function as a mango dryer?

(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 19:57, , Reply)
This is a normal post Being in space in direct sunlight
would irradiate and sublimate your mangos almost instantly.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 20:02, , Reply)
This is a normal post Ooh urgh.... Ahhhgh
Never had my mangos sublimated like this before
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 20:29, , Reply)
This is a normal post New hipster dessert?

(, Tue 25 Jun 2024, 2:20, , Reply)
This is a normal post So the McInnes bound ...
Is that something to do with the energy needed to keep an object with significant surface area held at L1 against the effects of the solar wind?
And the "tethering" relates to suspending a dense mass on the sol-ward side of L1 to counteract the solar wind forces?
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 20:37, , Reply)
This is a normal post Basically
You place a large mass in front of L1 (which could be an asteroid or manufactured from dust launched from the moon), fix magic nanotube tethers to that, then hang a large sail-like shield structure from it that sits behind L1. The gravitational and solar forces should then even out, so the anchor pulls sunward and the shield pulls Earthward and the whole thing stays perfectly in place for ever and ever.

It's that last point I have most trouble with. The entire megastructure would need active station-keeping just by virtue of being at L1, either mechanical control of the tethers so the shield acts as a propulsive sail, or some kind of ion-propellant-based reaction control/orbital manoeuvring system. If you choose the latter, then why not just use that as the basis of the design and do without the anchor (and the magic nanotube tethers)?

I wish they'd get a move on, I'm seriously too warm.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 21:27, , Reply)
This is a normal post
www.amazon.co.uk/Inventor-Chilly-9-000BTU-Portable-Conditioner/dp/B07JQJBJG7
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 22:11, , Reply)
This is a normal post *orders 8 billion*

(, Tue 25 Jun 2024, 17:35, , Reply)
This is a normal post
"only about 35 kTon (or less) needs to be transported from Earth".

The word "only" is doing some seriously heavy lifting there.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 20:53, , Reply)
This is a normal post Well the alternative is 100 times that, according to the paper.
I notice they don't mention how the fuck we move an asteroid to L1 in the first place. I guess we just pick one up with a Kerbal AGU.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 21:33, , Reply)
This is a normal post Attach a mirror to one side of the asteroid with magic space tethers

(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 21:39, , Reply)
This is a normal post Tractor beam

(, Tue 25 Jun 2024, 2:21, , Reply)
This is a normal post sounds very Deere

(, Tue 25 Jun 2024, 7:49, , Reply)
This is a normal post
One of the drawbacks of these things being so Massey
(, Tue 25 Jun 2024, 11:09, , Reply)
This is a normal post
Realistically the alternative to lifting 35kTon to L1 isn't going to be lifting 3.5MTon to L1, it's going to be not doing it at all and finding a more feasible scheme.

I don't even want to think about the logistics of shifting that amount of mass up from the surface. We don't have a space elevator or torch drive, so the only thing that comes to mind would be Project Orion, and I can't see Greanpeace getting onside with that, no matter what the goal.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 22:11, , Reply)
This is a normal post It's only about twice the mass of what's in orbit now (according to the paper)
and considering how launch rates are increasing recently it's hardly the most problematic aspect of this proposal.

I quite like the idea of launching shit-tonnes of ash to L1, seems like a thing we could do rapidly.
(, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 22:43, , Reply)
This is a normal post We could try annoying N Korea until they snap and launch a nuke.
Plenty of ash to reduce solar energy, most wildlife seem to cope with the radiation, population reduction and low cost.
(, Tue 25 Jun 2024, 20:28, , Reply)
This is a normal post We could do that without the nuclear war and radiation
by releasing ash or some other reflective/sunlight-filtering dust into the upper atmosphere.

I wouldn't rely on North Korean bombs riding Russian rockets to do the job either way. Might as well put your faith in fucking Trident.
(, Wed 26 Jun 2024, 19:16, , Reply)
This is a normal post I'm not sure I trust humans to do it safely.
Before they find a way of commercialise/weaponise it.
(, Wed 26 Jun 2024, 22:01, , Reply)
This is a normal post So we let the planet burn because we can't guarantee safety?
These ideas are last-ditch contingency plans *just in case* we don't manage to save the environment through political and economic cooperation (lol). We are already commercially tartaruforming/gehennahforming/hellscaping the planet. These proposals at least offer a kind of terraforming that benefits life on Earth. Surely worth a shot.
(, Fri 28 Jun 2024, 17:54, , Reply)
This is a normal post Probably worth a shot certainly.
The obscene destruction is one of the reasons I didn't breed. Sometimes it occurs to me that they deserve it.
Then I watch 'Crime pays but botany doesn't' as we are kindred spirits.

Cheer up, 99% of all species have disappeared before and still came back.
(, Fri 28 Jun 2024, 19:47, , Reply)