[extropy-chat] FWD [PvT] Re: Anti-hurricane engineering

[Kevin Freels]

Somehow, I think it is easier to simply increase insurance rates to make
that money back. In the end, it is the policy holders that live in FL that
bear the expense. If someone doesn;t like that idea, all they have to do is
move to an area where risk is lower and rates are cheaper.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] FWD [PvT] Re: Anti-hurricane engineering


> --- Hara Ra <harara at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Not quite.... The cold water is denser than the warm
> > and must be lifted
> > before dilution. The volumes needed are substantial.
> > (If the surface
> > temperature is 25deg C {78.5 degF) and the
> > temperature at 100 meters is 5
> > deg C (41 degF) the needed lift is about a meter,
> > assuming a linear
> > temperature gradient. If you do a 10x dilution, the
> > energy cost is about 27
> > Kwh per square kilometer. 1 million km^2 is probably
> > needed. This is a
> > negligible heat load but a significant ($2.7 million
> > at $100 /Mwh) power
> > cost for the lifting alone. I doubt that air bubbles
> > would be even 10%
> > efficient, and the numbers I selected are
> > deliberately low - surface
> > temperatures of 90 degF are common.)
>
> So...would another way to accurately state the problem
> be, this might become practical if energy became a
> lot cheaper than it currently is?
>
> (Although, merely $2.7 million is less than some
> insurance companies pay in claims for a hurricane's
> damage, so this might be worth it to them to stop or
> seriously reduce a hurricane if the non-energy costs
> are not significantly more than that.)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>