Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Can Bill Gates Prevent the Next Katrina?

Posted by timothy on from the you-can-have-6-billion-guesses dept.

theodp writes "He once controlled the world's PCs. Now Bill Gates has set his sights on controlling the world's weather. And patenting it. On Thursday, the USPTO revealed that Gates and ex-Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold have filed five patent applications that propose using large fleets of vessels to suppress hurricanes through various methods of mixing warm water from the surface of the ocean with colder water at greater depths. The idea is to decrease the surface temperature, reducing or eliminating the heat-driven condensation that fuels the giant storms. Hey, a guy can only play so much golf in retirement."

64 of 380 comments (clear)

  1. Next up! by AltGrendel · · Score: 4, Funny

    He'll have an island in the middle of the ocean with a volcano that has a giant face on it that looks like him.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:Next up! by 2.7182 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, I think just about anyone would prefer it to be a skull on a volcano, rather than a face.

    2. Re:Next up! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And he will laugh maniacally, when the change in nature's cycles creates huge storms that wipe out entire Europe and half of Africa.

      Seriously, why do people still not understand, that everything in nature is a system of sensitive balanced cycles, and when you change things, you have to make a new working cycle or at least balance it all out again, to not create a catastrophe in the long term?
      Maybe because they still can. And because when it happens, they are long dead, or it does not affect them.

      Well I bet his method will be just as elegant and as well-integrating as Windows. :P

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    3. Re:Next up! by Panzor · · Score: 3, Funny

      The irony of your username is hilarious.

    4. Re:Next up! by rjhubs · · Score: 2, Funny

      both represent death

    5. Re:Next up! by Alinabi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Finally. It was about time someone made tropical weather as stable as Vista.

      --
      "You can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them." [Condoleezza Rice]
  2. How will they know.. by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Lets say they implement this sort of thing..

    How will they ever know that they reduced the number of storms?

    The number of storms on a yearly basis is anything but consistent.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
    1. Re:How will they know.. by FroBugg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They don't. That was one of the (many) problems with Project Stormfury, the government attempt to disrupt hurricanes with cloud seeding back in the 1960's. You don't get enough data to run any kind of reliable control. So not only do you not know for sure whether you're making a difference or not, you don't even know whether you're making things worse or not.

      Unless they can somehow manage to drive their fleet into every forming hurricane and make every single one suddenly fall apart, any success they claim is going to be very open to interpretation.

    2. Re:How will they know.. by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Lets say they implement this sort of thing.. How will they ever know that they reduced the number of storms? The number of storms on a yearly basis is anything but consistent.

      This is true--you wouldn't know instantly that you stopped a storm for sure. But as the length of time goes up without a hurricane, your confidence level rises until you surpass some threshold which is the longest distance of time between hurricanes. I'm sure meteorologists would like to speculate that the conditions are right but a new factor is stopping these storms. You'll just never really know.

      Now, there's a lot of things you don't know whether or not you're changing. Such as the natural cycle of hurricanes influencing unknown factors like wildlife or pressure systems in other areas or rainfall up the East Coast being reduced resulting in lower crop yields and dryer soil? What effect (if any) will pumping this warm water down and cool water up have on the wildlife or natural currents of the ocean? It's warm and cold bodies of air that create natural cycling of air, I assume the same is true for water. If water went still, it might be great for us but bad for wildlife. I think there's a lot of questions one could raise about this. I'm not arguing against it, I just hope this is taken into consideration.

      I mean, this 'weather control' should be used sparingly and I hope they don't take this to the next level and use airships to diffuse hot/cold fronts so that we don't get thunderstorms so that my power isn't knocked out for a few hours while my roommate complains he can't watch the latest episode of True Blood right away. Preventing hurricanes is a neat idea and I hope this works, I just hope there's not hidden costs like the rest of Bill's products. :)

      --
      My work here is dung.
    3. Re:How will they know.. by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Informative

      For the curious. I'm not going to sit down and read out the data and figure out the standard deviation, but you're not kidding. You'd have to do this for decades to know how effective it was, and if it turns out to be useless, the environmental cost would have been wasted. I'd hate to be the guy who gets to do the risk-benefit analysis on that one.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    4. Re:How will they know.. by MindKata · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "very open to interpretation"

      But then the question becomes interpretation or exploitation? ... (exploitation as in the opportunity to exploit events for marketing and PR reasons, to imply they are doing things to help when they are just exploiting events for future profits).

      Scientists are not the only people interpreting the results and often not the most vocal people most people get to hear. For example sales people in corporations have agendas they wish to push behind any PR opportunity that comes along. So what is seen as 'the truth' (tm) is constantly manipulated by them, ultimately for their own gain.

      --
      There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
    5. Re:How will they know.. by Demena · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If the Atlantic Conveyor fails, instant ice age in europe. Compare the latitude of the major european cities with the same latitudes in the US.

    6. Re:How will they know.. by DrgnDancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is what I was thinking as soon as I read the article. Even if it works (and the theory seems valid if they could do it on a massive enough scale, but it would have to be MASSSIVE) what else are you screwing up by doing this? What place do hurricanes occupy in the ecosystem of the east coast of the US? How is all of this cold water going to affect marine life? I mean, you'd need HUGE amount of colder water to affect storm development. We're talking about one of nature's most powerful forces here, you're not going to break it up by dumping a couple of buckets of ice. You're making a huge expanse of the upper ocean several degrees cooler, and simultaneously making a huge expanse of the lower ocean several degrees warmer, what's that going to do?

      And before some anti-environmentalist starts saying "Well, yeah, but who cares if we screw up the ecosystem a bit if we're saving lives and property?", do you think the people on the Gulf Coast will thank you if you eliminate hurricanes but cause an overgrowth of algae that ruins the fishing and shrimping industries? Those industries are critical to southern Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and a good chunk of Florida. Or if the weather pattern change causes a heat up in the region and traditional crops to fail? Or for that matter a cool down with the same affect? We have no idea what this kind of thing could do, even assuming we got it to work.

      This would need tons of modeling and study before it could be safely deployed, and even then, as parent said, if should be used sparingly.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    7. Re:How will they know.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      its not to stop the hurricane its to lower the speed by making slightly cooler water. Im more worried about bottom fish, not all fish like the warm water. there's a reason they are on the bottom

    8. Re:How will they know.. by TapeCutter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "What effect (if any) will pumping this warm water down and cool water up have..."

      One possibility: If the mixing warms the water at the bottom it may be enough to release methane from methane hydrates deposited in the ocean bed. On the down side this will make global warming worse, on the upside the mass of bubbles will sink Bill's fleet of ships.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    9. Re:How will they know.. by rhsanborn · · Score: 2

      To be fair, it isn't just million dollar beach homes that get pummeled by hurricanes. there are some incredibly poor areas in Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana that get trashed just as bad and don't have the insurance policies to recover nearly as easily as the owners of said million dollar homes. And for most of these people, simply moving is not nearly so simple as it sounds. It's a very significant problem.

    10. Re:How will they know.. by nizo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a very significant problem.

      Very true, so now we need to figure out the best course of action. Screwing with weather patterns probably isn't the best (or even cheapest) solution.

      --
      I Am My Own Worst Enemy
    11. Re:How will they know.. by bberens · · Score: 4, Funny

      Looks like the EU hit Microsoft with one to many anti-trust rulings.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
  3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope it doesn't blue sky on us.

  4. Re:So... by noundi · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Where do you want to blow today?"

    --
    I am the lawn!
  5. Whatcouldpossiblygowrong! by mspohr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I only have one thought...

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:Whatcouldpossiblygowrong! by __aayejd672 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Blue sky of death?

  6. Oblig. Dennis Miller quote by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Face it - Bill Gates is a about a white Persian cat and a monocle away from being a Bond villain."

  7. Gulf Stream by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There has already been talk about the possible shutdown of the Gulf Stream plunging Europe into a mini-ice age. It seems like meddling with the mix of warm and cold ocean water in this fashion could make things even worse. And who knows what pumping billions of gallons of cold water from the depths up to the surface would do to the marine wildlife.

    Nobody likes hurricanes. They cause massive destruction and they kill people. But they are part of nature.

    I think a better solution would be to act a little smarter about where we build our population centers, and do not offer insurance to people who choose to build in a location where hurricanes are known to strike on a somewhat regular basis.

    1. Re:Gulf Stream by selven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in hurricane territory, it's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you. So if you want to live in a warm place on the coast, go ahead, just make sure you eat the negative consequences yourself instead of passing them along to the taxpayer.

    2. Re:Gulf Stream by cranky_chemist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'll move away from the Gulf Coast as soon as everyone in Kansas and California are stripped of their homeowner's insurance. Oh, and also residents of New York, because only fools would live in a known terrorist target.

    3. Re:Gulf Stream by mlush · · Score: 3, Informative

      Offer lower rates if the building has been properly built

    4. Re:Gulf Stream by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody likes hurricanes. They cause massive destruction and they kill people. But they are part of nature.

      I agree. I also worry about the amount of rainfall that would be lost if Bill Gates plan actually works. Believe it or not there are some useful aspects to a hurricane and more importantly tropical storms.

      I think a better solution would be to act a little smarter about where we build our population centers,

      Here I sort of agree. We should be smarter about where we build our population centers, but more importantly HOW we build our population centers near the gulf.

      and do not offer insurance to people who choose to build in a location where hurricanes are known to strike on a somewhat regular basis.

      I totally disagree. Most of the hurricane's damage is from storm surge not wind. So we should limit the amount of construction on shores and surrounding low elevation areas. However your insurance idea, which by the way is already being implemented, penalizes people who live in the same area (county) but built smartly and rarely have catastrophic damage done on their property.

      I did not file any insurance claims for hurricane Katrina. Most of the damage from Katrina was FLOOD damage which isn't covered by regular home insurance anyway. But I pay 4 times the state average for insurance, and have a storm deductible based on a percentage of my home's market value. So not only do I pay more, I am less likely to be able to even file a claim. Basically the existence of hurricanes has given insurance companies political cover to rip me off.

      There are folks in northern Alabama who have hail damage on their roofs almost every year from the spring storm season, and yet I hear no calls to raise their insurance nor limit the coverage from wind or hail damage. They have a history of tornadoes touching down and wiping out neighborhoods and commercial property, yet their insurance remains unaffected. There are areas in this country where people are susceptible to lose their homes from fires, mudslides, or tornadoes on a yearly basis and yet I hear no calls to relocate them.

      Pardon me but you can take that "offer no insurance" idea and shove it up your arse...

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    5. Re:Gulf Stream by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Informative

      I also worry about the amount of rainfall that would be lost if Bill Gates plan actually works. Believe it or not there are some useful aspects to a hurricane and more importantly tropical storms.

      Here is the chart of the water levels of Lake Lanier, which is Atlanta's only major water supply. The record low elevations line that you see was set last year, which was the second year of a drought (you might recall our governor's response to the drought, which was to pray for rain, aside from suing all of the neighboring states to try to take their water). The big bump that you see in the minimum recorded lake elevations just before September was hurricane Gustav, which essentially saved us from a situation where the lake would have been within 10 feet of a standing pool, and Atlanta gets its water on the outlet of the power generators. In fact, most of Atlanta's problems were because the El Niño shut down the hurricanes into the gulf for a couple of years after katrina. Now that they're back, and the wet weather in general, our water supply is fine for the moment.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    6. Re:Gulf Stream by osvenskan · · Score: 2, Informative

      I also worry about the amount of rainfall that would be lost if Bill Gates plan actually works. Believe it or not there are some useful aspects to a hurricane and more importantly tropical storms.

      Hugely useful. Here in central North Carolina (NC), the ends of our summers (August - October) are hot and often very dry. We get thunderstorms now and again but for a nice steady, soaking rain we rely on a tropical storm or hurricane running up the coast or moving north through the Gulf of Mexico, breaking up over land and then sweeping east over us as the remnants get caught up in normal weather patterns.

      Have a look at the paths of the storms in 2007. Notice how few approach NC? That was also the year of the worst drought in over 100 years. We didn't get those late summer storms to mitigate an abnormally dry year.

      Compare that to the 2006 map and the 2008 map. Lots more rainfall for us.

      whatcouldpossiblygowrong indeed. Read John McPhee's Control of Nature for some examples. The story of the defense of the harbor on Iceland's Heimaey is inspiring. The story of redirecting mudslides near LA is a cautionary tale. Similarly, the story of how the US Army Corps of Engineers tool control ("permanent" control from humanity's point of view, "temporary" control from Nature's) of the flow between the Mississippi and Atchafalaya. Before that, the river rose and fell and people accepted it because they had no choice. Afterwards, people complained that the water was too high, or too low, and probably too wet as well.

      Control a hurricane? Even if I had a magic wand with which to do it, I'd say no thanks. I would not want to catch that tiger by the tail.

    7. Re:Gulf Stream by sabs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in earthquake territory. It's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you.
      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in flood territory. It's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you.
      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in Wild fire territory. It's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you.
      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in Tornado territory. It's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you.
      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in High Crime territory. It's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you.
      No one is saying you don't have the right to build in Blizzard territory. It's just that insurance rates will be 10x higher and the government won't help you.

      we could go on for a while.

  8. Vaporware... by ghostis · · Score: 5, Funny

    Great - more vaporware from Bill Gates... ;-)

    --


    Computer Science is all about trying to find the right wrench to bang in the right screw. -T.Cumbo?
  9. whatcouldpossiblygowrong by dtml-try+MyNick · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where is the whatcouldpossiblygowrong tag when you need it?

    I don't think there has ever been a more appropriate reason to use it....

    --
    Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
  10. Re:So... by JustOK · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd at least wait for the first service pack before I install it on my planet.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  11. The first thing I thought ... by krou · · Score: 4, Funny

    Weather man: The sky is lovely and blue today ...
    Us: ZOMG! Blue skyz of deathz!

    --
    'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
  12. Proof of concept by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2, Funny
    I hope that no patent will be granted until they produce a working prototype. On another planet, identical to this one.

    The catch is that as Bill would have to visit Magrathea to get the planet built, it would be cheaper just to engage them to fix the global warming on this one. (and add a few more fjords while at it.)

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  13. Gates-way to eco-disaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ok, as much as hurricanes hurt and destroy peoples homes, lives, and regions economies, I can tell you right now that to suppress them is A BAD IDEA.

    Hurricane season and storm activity represent a huge portion of the rainfall/water collection/water renewal in the Caribbean, and is still a significant water contributor in the southern U.S.A., a region that is still experiencing drought conditions, even if its not as severe as last year. What, is this a plot to dry up an important freshwater source for a large region, then sell expensive desalination plants?! Desertification of a whole region to put up solar plants or harvest silicon?

    Plus the hurricanes help to suck up all the warm water that's killing the the coral reefs - you know, one of the bastions against the waves pounding coastlines?

    Oh wait, the Caribbean is full of small islands and a few unnecessary Central American countries that act as the hurricane buffer for the U.S.A., and absorb the majority of the insurance hikes when Florida/Louisiana/Texas gets hit. Shafting us and destroying our ecology is business as usual.

  14. It's apropos that Gates should be the one doing it by jra · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Cause the most prominent argument regularly put forth as to why weather control is bad is:

    Do *you* want to be the one who causes lots of insurance companies to have to pay out because someone can make a reasonable case that where the hurricane landed was no longer an Act Of God?

    Gates is used to playing God.

  15. Easy by mlush · · Score: 3, Funny

    He just declares flooding as the new international standard

  16. Oh, I don't know, but by Shivetya · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I figure it will probably be the same pseudo science employed by Gore.

    In other words, claims of consensus, its for the children, we're smarter than you, and such should suffice.

    Any reduction in storms proves their process works, any increase proves it wasn't executed properly and would work with more money and adherence to their process.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Oh, I don't know, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sounds exactly like the ideas used behind global warming and Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth. Very good dissection and dismantling of the global warming alarmists beliefs/'evidence'

      Yes it was very good. I have a few questions about the modelling, which peer reviewed publication should I direct my questions to? Oh wait, it was self published by the author who as detailed on the website, " has considerable policy experience in climate change science, mercury science, energy and mining, forests and resources, clean air and the environment." and to boot, unnamed undergraduate and advanced degrees from the mecca of science, wait, its coming....Brigham Young University! I wouldn't wipe my dogs ass with this tripe.

    2. Re:Oh, I don't know, but by nizo · · Score: 4, Informative

      So people are just imagining the ice that is melting?

      http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=7738

      Now I'm not saying humans are 100% responsible, but you can't deny that ice all over the world that has existed for thousands of years is melting (well I guess you can, if you ignore the sheets of ice turning into water).

      How about the animals arriving in the north that have never been seen there before?

      http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-and-unfamiliar-species-leave-inuit-lost-for-words-534866.html

      Yeah you can deny it all you want, and we can argue all day about the causes (until it is too late for us to do anything about them), but it is indeed happening. Wouldn't it be a real bummer if this was part of a "normal" warming cycle and because of our stupidity we tipped things too far and made the earth uninhabitable?

      --
      I Am My Own Worst Enemy
    3. Re:Oh, I don't know, but by nizo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So if the rate that the ice is melting is rapidly increasing, including the melting of ice that has been frozen for thousands of years, you aren't concerned at all?

      --
      I Am My Own Worst Enemy
    4. Re:Oh, I don't know, but by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, dismissing claims you don't support for reasons other then the claims seems to be the logical path to take "when you can't invalidate the claims".

      I have to offer kudos, you did assassinate this guys legitimacy pretty well. I mean an AC on a public internet forum with no reference to qualifications shooting the messenger instead of the message and then commenting on how much you respect the paper he wrote by saying it was to good to wipe your dog's ass. And you do all this with less legitimacy then a guy who actually put his name on a paper while using the same tactics that you just decried.

      Yes, if we can assassinate the credibility of all deniers like this, we won't have to fix the science or follow/address the questions presented by the denier and we can have our global warming the way we want it regardless of any truths. Perhaps we can even start a religion out of it. Many people already act as if it is one and refuse to answer critiques that point out potential flaws in the theories. We could be more blind then the catholic church when it demanded the sun revolved around the earth. Hell, yea, this new science is awesome because it still resembles science but we don't have to be accurate. All hail the convinced at all costs.

    5. Re:Oh, I don't know, but by 2obvious4u · · Score: 2, Informative

      I counter your ice melting with this Antarctic ice increasing:
      Sea Ice May Be On Increase In The Antarctic
      Late 20th Century increase in South Pole snow accumulation
      South Pole: Ice Core and Snow Accumulation Studies

      I'm not worried about global warming. I do however enjoy having clean air to breath. Those of you who have been to China in the last decade know what I'm talking about.

  17. 1000 level by slashdime · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I took a 1000 level Earth and Atmospheric Sciences class a few years ago and one of the first things we touched upon was this idea. And why it wouldn't work. Before we even ask the question of why Bill Gates is doing this, let's ask the question of why he's patenting it?

  18. After the disaster that was Vista... by kulakovich · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... he owes us one.

    kulakovich

  19. Hurricane BSOD by mc1138 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I guess Bill is taking what he learned from Windows and applying it to the weather...

    --
    The musings of just another geek and his junk.
  20. Uhhh oooh by azav · · Score: 4, Funny

    GPF in Rainfall.exe. Abort, retry or ignore?

    --
    - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
  21. Re:So... by MindKata · · Score: 5, Funny

    "wait for the first service pack"

    Yes but what other "features" would be in that service pack?
    (1) Clouds reformatted into Microsoft friendly format to show advertising for new products.
    (2) Rains on Google offices 24/7
    (3) Strong winds blows everyone toward huge advertising signs they cannot ignore.
    (4) DRM infested sunshine we have to buy from Microsoft.
    (5) Thunder storms raining chairs on Linux offices.
    (6) Snow flakes spy on us all and then tell Microsoft what we like.
    (7) Apple offices found 6 weeks later under mountain of huge hail stones.
    (8) Profit.

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
  22. Having worked in the weather community... by joedoc · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...for a number of years (though I'm an IT guy, not a meteorologist), I learned enough to know that not only is this doomed to failure, they should already know that it's not scientifically possible.

    How in the name of God are they going to generate the energy needed to cool the water at "greater" ocean depths? The would have to launch a fleet of ships far greater then they can possibly imagine.

    Not only does this appear to be scientifically and logistically improbable, but have they ever considered the issues with screwing with global weather patterns? Stopping hurricanes (or, in reality, stopping their potential capability for damage to humans and land structures) is a noble dream, but every weather even had both positive and negative affects on other weather patterns, events that we actually may want to occur.

    He would be better off taking all the money he'd invest in this silliness and hand it over to people in hurricane-damaged areas so they can rebuild. Or move.

    --
    Joe Dougherty, Florida, USA
    The words I thought I brought, I left behind. So, never mind.
  23. Re:Truly Gates now thinks he is God by Aladrin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Didn't bother to RTFA, eh? He isn't trying to make warm water cold. He's moving cold water into the warm water via pumps. That's a hell of a lot easier.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  24. Obvious? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've been thinking about this for some time. A network of floating pumps across the belt where hurricanes form, solar powered, to pump cool water from a few tens of meters down up to the surface. When a depression is spotted, just turn on the pumps in its path to reduce the amount of surface heat to feed it. My oceanographer friend tells me I'm talking nonsense.

  25. Error in logic by denzacar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. Why would you pump cold water up? It is a heat sink. You pump the heat down.
    2. Well THAT is the point. Do you put ice in your drink so it would just drop to the bottom or perhaps to cool the drink by absorbing the heat?

    Anyway... Give Gates a LITTLE credit. The guy is NOT a moron after all.
    RTFA - his idea is quite simple and rather carbon neutral (once you build a huge fleet of ships).
    Basically, the idea is to use pressure and temperature differences to "pump" the warm surface water to the bottom.

    Now...
    What ecological and climate consequences might pumping huge amounts of warm water to the bottom of the ocean and disrupting natural air and water currents might have... that is a matter of FAR more research and calculation.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  26. Re:So... by Demena · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yep. Better do just that. We already have enough problems, heating up the bottom of the oceans as well as the top will really screw things up. Stuff up conveyor currents and half the world dies.

  27. Anyone who thinks they can change the weather.. by WCMI92 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Anyone who thinks they can change the weather is either absorbed in hubris or insane.

    A Hurricane can't be stopped or prevented. Or influenced in any way by anything human beings could do to it. You could detonate the largest nuclear bomb ever made in the middle of a hurricane and it wouldn't even dent it. A hurricane has so much energy that it releases more energy than all explosives ever detonated by humans every MINUTE...

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  28. Re:No, gates can't, because Bush flooded New Orlea by Lord+Ender · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The president doesn't write the budget. Congress does. Unless he told Congress he would veto any budget that doesn't cut SELA funding by 75%, you're blaming the wrong person.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  29. Re:So... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft seems to have taken "cloud computing" a bit too literal.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  30. Worse idea than rampant CO2 by Skull_Leader · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As soon as someone thinks that can control or SHOULD control the weather we are doomed. Despite the losses seen in violent storms and other weather events, those events keep our world in balance and in check. There are more factors involved than we can comprehend or yet understand. Changes in humidity, movement of seeds/soils... so many things. The problem is, not to sound too greenie, is that we treat the earth like we own it, not like we are part of it. The more we influence it (actively or passively) the more likely it is to get messed up and for things to get worse for us. We need the Earth... it doesn't need us. I think Gates, the meglomaniac/idiot savant, should stick to giving his billions to those less fortunate and leave mother nature alone.

    --



    "This technology stuff is just plum crazy!"
    1. Re:Worse idea than rampant CO2 by Swisssushi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are these people just plain insane? Hurricanes are a vital part of the atmospheric and oceanic environments. They are gigantic engines that help drive both systems. True that they are destructive and lethal, however the bone headed humans can actually mitigate both by not building in areas that are decimated by hurricanes. Hey, I have a brilliant idea, how about humans develop strategies and technologies that help them cope with hurricanes rather than trying to short circuit the very natural systems that preserve our planet. And yes, I know about hurricanes. I live in Houston and am very familiar with the destruction that was delivered to the Bolivar peninsula and upper bay. I am also a proponent of not rebuilding human habitations on the peninsula. As much as I love that area and have fond memories of going there on vacation, I understand that there are some things you should not mess with and mother nature is on the top of my list.

      --
      Swisssushi - When the going gets tough, get some tenderizer
  31. NOT A TROLL by an.echte.trilingue · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I must call attention to this!

    Parent is making a valid point that every location comes with the risk of a natural disaster in response to the absurd assertion that we should never put population centers in a place that can have a storm. People in Kansas have tornadoes, people in California have earth quakes. The solution is not to smugly deny that people live in areas that are victim to the phenomenon du jour, it is to find ways to mitigate those risks.

    The danger that hurricanes pose is easily mitigated, just as tornado or earthquake dangers are easily mitigated. Most of those who lost their homes in New Orleans wouldn't have if the government had been doing its job and maintaining the dikes. People in Kansas are safe when the government puts tornado-warning infrastructure in place. People in California are safe when the highways and bridges are built to withstand shock. This is what we have government for.

    If we only put population centers in places with no risk of natural disaster, the habitable surface of the earth would be small indeed.

    --
    weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
  32. Re:So... by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 4, Informative

    I thought the same thing. Mixing up the ocean's thermal layers will help to slow the conveyor currents that warm the higher latitudes and cool the lower latitudes. Lose the currents and areas near the equator bake while countries like England and others that depend on the currents to moderate their climate freeze.

    Besides, pumping massive amounts of water will be a huge energy pig causing even more warming.

    Hurricanes are like pressure relief valves. All of that excess energy gets sucked out of the ocean during a hurricane and helps to cool them. Mixing up the oceans allows higher average temperatures and it is hard to say what will happen to deep marine life as the heating gets propagated to the lower depths.

    I like the idea by Steve Chu - painting roofs white. It's easy, distributed, and can be done on a huge scale. Plus, the roof paints help to seal as well and will protect the roof materials that are now exposed to the sun.

  33. The Mad Scientist Stuff is the Point! by StCredZero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And he will laugh maniacally, when the change in nature's cycles creates huge storms that wipe out entire Europe and half of Africa.

    If you've been paying attention to history, weather and climate have huge geopolitical and strategic consequences. North Atlantic storms stopped both the Spanish Armada and Nazi Germany from invading England. Weather almost stopped the D-Day invasions. Japan is still a nation because of such a storm: the Kamikaze.

    Climactic shifts sparked the movements of barbarian tribes and may have contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire, prevented the early Nordic colonization of North America, and paved the way for the Renaissance.

    The ability to prevent or to create a storm would have huge strategic implications. Nations with the resources to wield this sort of weapon could wreak economic devastation on their enemies and be immune to invasion. (And save on the huge cost incurred from such storms.)

    I also suspect that global warming is actually desired by some strategic thinkers in the industrialized nations. (But not all. Not conspiracy. Just a part of the oligarchy pushing to exploit coincidence.) Some of the greatest suffering will be visited on up and coming economic powers (India) while the established ones will be able to cope more easily. I think this may be part of the reason why China is building the largest river dam system in the world -- to buffer themselves against shifts in water availability.

  34. Re:So... by Golddess · · Score: 2, Informative

    I (and others too it would seem) am fairly certain you're making a joke since the sky is already blue, but in the past "blue sky" could also refer to the notion that, were there to be a major radioactive contamination event from, say, atomic bomb testing, those without the means to detect the radiation would not realize they were in danger until it was too late, since you'd still have the gorgeous blue sky.

    IIRC, it's how they came up with the name for the movie Blue Sky, and I believe it was also mentioned in the movie itself, but I do not recall.

    --
    "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-