See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Could scientists de-intensify storms?
Source:
News 10 Now
URL Source: http://news10now.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=50006
Published: Sep 23, 2005
Author: Joleene Des Rosiers, News 10 Now Web Sta
Post Date: 2005-09-23 22:42:13 by robin
Keywords: de-intensify, scientists, storms?
Views: 102
Comments: 7
Updated: 9/23/2005 9:35 PM "If there was someway we could de-intensify these storms, we could reduce the risk in terms of death, we could reduce the amount of damage that would be done by hurricanes. So the idea was being driven by economics, and also by saving lives," said Climatologist, Mark Wysocki. But Mark Wysocki feels scientists looking to stifle the storm will only cause more devastation worldwide. "They don't think forward. They're thinking short term. Yes, I sympathize with what the people are going through. But to spend all this money and to possibly change the energy budget of the earth just to stop what's happening in the Gulf, not knowing or realizing how you're going to redistribute it around the world. I think is a foolish attempt," said Wysocki. Scientific American Magazine outlines three different ways to kill a hurricane: As they did 40 years ago, pilots would fly above the storm, seeding it with silver iodide to 'freeze' the rain. Or the second, scientists would top the bodies of water where the storm is expected with a bio-degradable oil. This would keep the water from absorbing into the hurricane, and again keep the rain from accumulating inside the eye of the storm. The third way is an idea that is still on the drawing board and it involves sending satellites into space. The satellites would capture the energy of the sun to 'cook' the top of the hurricane, thus stabilizing it so the hurricane would collapse. Now while the idea of stopping a hurricane before major devastation occurs seems like a good one, Wysocki says we have to look further than the surface. Plain and simple, he says...leave mother nature alone. “Live with it. Just learn to live with it. And we could do that. We can do that by how we live along the coastal regions. How we build our cities. How we build in levees and control of canals and so fourth,” said Wysocki. Wysocki feels money spent on these types of 'temporary' remedies should be shifted...and put toward safe house structures and evacuation processes.
By: Joleene Des Rosiers, News 10 Now Web Staff
Project Storm Fury was a futile attempt in the 1960's to stop hurricanes. The idea was reborn last year after four hurricanes rocked the Florida coast. Now with the aftermath of Katrina and the onset of Rita, scientists are even more in tune with such a possibility.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#1. To: *KATRINA*, *RITA* (#0)
MSM on controlling the weather ping!
That's the ticket. Resistant structures on deep piles, building on mounds, water drainage systems. Hurricanes are heat engines and are an integral part of the transfer of heat from the equatorial regions to the poles. Shutting them down (if at all possible) could potentially lead to a buildup of energy in the ocean systems they affect leading to either severe climatic disruption or the evolution of a super hurricane from the energy buildup.
Bingo. The force of the hurricane is also expending alot of the built up solar energy. In deriving their energy from the water, hurricanes serve to cool the waters that feed it. Supress hurricanes, and the heat in the water builds, creating the potential for a mega-hurricane. Kinda reminicient of the suppression of natural, healthy forest fires creating the potential for a mega forest fire which is truely destructive to forest life.
hey! are ya settled in?
There are no replies to Comment # 6. End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: robin (#1)
Wysocki feels money spent on these types of 'temporary' remedies should be shifted...and put toward safe house structures and evacuation processes.
#5. To: Axenolith (#2)
#6. To: Neil McIver (#5)
Replies to Comment # 6.