Click to edit Master text styles
Second level
Third level
Fourth level
Fifth level
Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen,
I’m Chairman for this session.
I’m a Mechanical Engineer by training.  I was educated at the University of Alberta and New Mexico State University. I was employed by Atomic Energy of Canada for some 26 years before retiring from full time work in 2000. I did continue to represent the nuclear industry on the Technology Issue Table and Integrative Group of the National Climate Change Process till that came to an end about 2003. I found that very  interesting and gained much insight to the role and interests of many industries and environmental groups.
Increases in  atmospheric greenhouse gases  have been measured. Evidence  suggests  climate has changed during the 20th century and will continue to change.
Climate change could  affect  humans and natural ecosystems.
Due  prudence implies that possible remedial action be reviewed, despite uncertainties.
In anticipation of policy development  we postulate that  climate  must be controlled. Lets make that assumption  and move forward to consider how that might be done.
Some diffidently propose that we limit greenhouse gas emissions by improving energy efficiency and conserving fossil fuel resources. That is a good thing, but experience tells us this approach will not  work.
 It is a fundamental creed of engineers to improve the efficiency of their processes and machines. Efficiency has improved immensely since our use of fossil fuel  began in earnest some 200 years ago. Indeed heat engines have gone from some 1% efficiency then to the near perfection of combined cycle power plants today.
The resultant expanded use of energy has escalated overall emissions. Jevons documented this aspect of energy use in a free society back in 1865 and it is sometimes referred to as Jevons paradox..
This phenomena is so well known that it is hard to understand the emphasis placed on efficiency and conservation in plans to manage greenhouse gases.
Others suggest we address more directly  the problem of global warning and propose solutions on a more fundamental basis.
Some address greenhouse gas management  through a broader focus on the carbon cycle. That opens up more opportunities for control than simply reducing emissions from fossil fuels.
Others bypass greenhouse gas mangement altogether, and seek to modify heat transfer to or from earth’s  surface. These solutions also offer the promise of climate control should it turn out greenhouse gases do not have as much effect as currently  thought by many.
This session will consider some of those proposed solutions. It seems many will require engineering on a global scale.
As one example of such proposals, we do know we can make clouds. I’ve noticed when flying across the prairies these vapor trails cast strong shadows on the ground. Clouds  are an important component of climate change models – particularly those that attempt to evaluate the role of greenhouse gases.
Professor Stephen Salter proposed a related paper for this session. Unfortunately he could not attend. I see it is now posted on a website in the UK.
The system he is working on proposes  to spray salt water into the atmosphere to increase cloud formation and reflect solar energy.
We have four papers in this session.
The carbon cycle which uses solar energy to circulate carbon dioxide and methane through the atmosphere provides many ideas for greenhouse gas mangement. I will present a review.
William Mills of Tetra Tech will review the rationale and approach for some mega- engineered systems which can adapt to  global warming or cooling.
Mark Jaccard will tell us how engineered systems can mange fossil fuel greenhouse gases.
Doug Lightfoot will explain how sufficient nuclear fission energy can be made available  to supply our needs indefinitely.