
Cloud-whitening could have unknown side-effects including, changes to regional weather patterns and ocean currents.
Related Articles
- This week's changes to the Ecologist.org
- Climate change 'will wreak havoc on Britain's coastline by 2050'
- Huhne accused of 'hypocrisy' for promoting offshore oil in Scotland and Arctic
- Tanzania urged to accept World Bank funding of alternative Serengeti highway route
- UK's 'fracking' gas-extraction is not unconventional says industry
Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'
Tom Levitt
11th May, 2010
Microsoft founder Bill Gates providing funding for geoegineering experiment to increase whiteness of clouds, reflect more sunlight back into space and reduce global warming
Campaigners have criticised plans for a sea trial of cloud-whitening technology, funded by Microsoft founder Bill Gates.
A US-based research body, Silver Lining, which has received $300,000 from Mr Gates, is developing machines to convert seawater into microscopic particles to be sprayed into clouds. Scientists believe this will increase the whiteness, or albedo, of clouds and increase their ability to reflect more sunlight back into space, reducing global warming.
The Gates-backed sea trial would be the largest known attempt to geoengineer the climate so far, reported to be conducted over an area of 10,000km2.
However, campaigners say such a large-scale trial is 'risky' and that a global ban on geoengineering experiments should be put in place until regulations governing the sector can be introduced.
'We knew Microsoft was developing cloud applications for computers but we didn’t expect this. Bill Gates and his cloud-wrenching cronies have no right to unilaterally change our seas and skies in this way,' said Jim Thomas from Canadian environmental campaigners, ETC Group.
In March, MPs from the Science and Technology Committee back such calls and said countries should not be allowed to take unilateral action on geoengineering without consulting the UN.
A major report on the subject by The Royal Society last year also warned of the unknown side-effects of cloud-whitening, including, changes to regional weather patterns and ocean currents.
However, the report said it had advantages over other forms of geoengineering because it could be stopped immediately, and within ten days nearly all of the salt paricles would rain or settle out of the atmosphere.
It could also be used over Arctic to reduce summer ice melt, the scientists said.
| READ MORE... | |
![]() |
COMMENT Join our campaign to halt geoengineering It's time to say no to scientists and politicians considering geoengineering as a way of tackling climate change, says Jim Thomas |
![]() |
NEWS Regulate geoengineering before it's too late, say MPs Climate manipulation must be regulated at the UN level to avoid countries taking matters into their own hands, says a committee of MPs |
![]() |
NEWS Geo-engineering: climate solution or dangerous distraction? The launch of the Royal Society's report on geo-engineering raises the spectre of a quick-fix solution to climate change. But is it that simple? |
![]() |
NEWS Governments 'eager' to divert climate funding to geoengineering Governments that are considering funding geoengineering experiments are the same ones that have failed to pay for conventional mitigation or adaptation to climate change |
![]() |
COMMENT Dumping iron sulphate into the ocean, or, how to 'geo-engineer' the climate Climate change due to human interference with fragile ecosystems? No problem - we can just dump 20 tonnes of iron sulphate into the ocean |
Previous Articles...
Users Comments
Re: Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'This article makes it sound like they haven't really tested the idea much, but plan on a very large scale test for the initial one. i think this is a bad idea because if they have not tested it how can they know there will not be terrible side effects. also i think it is unrealistic to try to rely on whiter clouds to stop global warming, it is not the clouds that are the problem it is our excessive use of fossil fuels and coal that have warmed the earth and it is up to us to change our ways to correct it. the global governments need to get together and come to an agreement to stop killing our planet so maybe we can still be living here after 60 years. | |
Re: Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'This article is kind of confused and bizarre... this is a dangerous experiment because, among others, "unknown side-effects of cloud-whitening". What? How are you going to assess the side-effects without doing the experiment first? How any regulations can be put in place when is not very clear what should be regulated? We build black tarmac roads and nobody seems to need approval from the UN for that. Waiting for an international body to come together before doing any experiments is just plain stupid. Is not how science works.
As for the "cloud applications for computers" thing is not clear if that was meant as a joke or the guy saying it is completely clueless. From the aggressive style of his comment I'm inclined to believe the latter. | |
Re: Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'YOU BETTER BELIEVE I WILL COMMENT! This is supposed to be NEWS? Cloud seeding has been escalating here for years! There are thousands of us out there screaming all over the world about Bill Gates and his facist cronies. They are taking over the food - Doomsday Seed Vault - the climate and whatever else they can lay their greedy hands. Advocating DE-POPULATION, what does he care if aluminum and barium are sprayed into our heads? Here he is talking about his "favorite methods" of depopulation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WQtRI7A064
He and the Powers that Rule are criminals. If they are not stopped we will all be in the Doomsday vault - only we won't be the ones eating. | |
Re: Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'I cannot believe that these people do not know their basic physics. Water as a gas is invisible water vapour and water vapour is the most abundant greenhouse gas already in the atmosphere. Spraying water droplets that will become vapour would make matters worse. Glass greeenhouses work but polytunnels only work when the condensation means the sun has to travel through water on the polythene and it can't get out. Polytunnels in dry regions only act as wind shields. | |
Re: Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'Just in case someone here may not be educated in CHEMTRAILS they are not CONTRAILS - the military is already doing a heavy duty experiments with spraying chemicals into the air that contain lethal levels of barium and aluminum. Please take a moment to view this information about what is happening RIGHT NOW:
Environmental part trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtlOXhSnNw8
Environmental Deception chemtrail video
http://www.blip.tv/file/3043645
Congressional Candidate Mark Reed Discusses chemtrails
http://www.blip.tv/file/3193380/
California Governor Candidate Chelene Nightingale discusses chemtrails
http://www.blip.tv/file/3445755/
This is a full length movie coming out about the poisoning and manipulation of our climate - intentionally - that is happening before our very eyes! "Cloud-whitening" - it sounds happy - so clean and bright - like a toothpaste. But as we all know toothpaste has fluoride - the drug the Nazi's used to make the prisoners docile. Don't be fooled folks by this - don't be fooled. LOOK UP IN THE SKY. | |
Re: Bill Gates' cloud-whitening trials 'a dangerous experiment'"campaigners say such a large-scale trial is 'risky' ".
Why ? Do they have evidence ? Or good theoretical grounds.
There is plenty of salt in clouds already
If extra sea-water spraying produced bad effects they could just stop doing it, and the effects will just die away. How do we know ? Because the levels of salt fluctuate naturally (depending on weather etc.) and no disasters ensue.
There is actually no more risk in doing the trial than in any other intervention, and mankind intervenes - including NOT doing it.
The fact something can be described as geo-engineering is not evidence of harmfulness.
The most likely outcome - so far as we know without trying it - is the intended effect of reducing global warming.
This kind of knee-jerk response is not a rational reaction to a real risk.
Presumably both the spokesman and the journalist thought it didn't matter if they responded without a proper evaluation.
Quite wrong. It matters a lot.
By responding in this ill-considered way the "campaigners" undermine the credibility of well-informed thoughtful commentators on other ecological issues.
By reporting the response without some distancing comment, the reporter associates 'The Ecologist' with stereotyped sloppy thinking.
If you care about the credibility of ecologically aware thought, it is necessary to write in a way that commands respect. |






