Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

UK Team to Study Rainmaking Machines 276

Posted by michael from the messing-with-mother-nature dept.
RobertB-DC writes "The BBC reports that a Edinburgh University team has received a grant to research Wind-Powered Rainmaking Machines. You have to have winds blowing towards a mountainous coastline, but the article says that the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf are well-suited. For a cautionary note, though, the BBC includes a link to the story of a 1952 cloud-seeding experiment gone terribly wrong."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Team to Study Rainmaking Machines More

UK Team to Study Rainmaking Machines

Comments Filter:

  • Scotland needs more rain. After Scotland, France!

  • Cool. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Hawthorne01 ( 575586 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:31AM (#4807801)
    This is good news for my grant application to deploy a sand-making machine in Algeria.

  • So.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by prizzznecious ( 551920 ) <hwky@fre[ ]ell.org ['esh' in gap]> on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:32AM (#4807807) Homepage
    Who wants odds on how long before weather is used as a weapon in war?

    Or how long it takes before everyone but NATO is not allowed to fix their weather, as hurricanes are weapons of mass destruction?

    • Re:So.. (Score:5, Informative)

      by atomicdragon ( 619181 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:43AM (#4807859)
      I guess the US has already tried to use this as a weapon. I came across this article [guardian.co.uk] where rain making was used in Vietnam. The UN has also already banned the use of weather control as a weapon. So much for the weather machine in Command and Conquer.

      • Re:So.. (Score:3, Informative)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 )

        An amusing excerpt from that link:

        Whether or not they work, past experiences tell us to be wary of tampering with the weather. In 1947, meteorologists tried to kill off a dying hurricane out at sea by seeding the clouds. The following day, the hurricane suddenly gathered strength, swung round and hit Savannah, Georgia causing extensive damage. The weather boffins were so rattled by the disaster it was not until August 1969 that they dared try again.

        Yeah, see, these things work on kinetic energy, and by seeding the clouds you gave them more mass and produced more rain. Sure, you (obviously not you you, by the way, unless you are the one responsible for this) could stop it this way, but putting energy into a chaotic system when you don't know what you're doing is nearly always a mistake.

        Cool link, thanks.

      • As if the UN banning anything could keep someone (including the US) from still using it.

    • Re:So.. (Score:5, Funny)

      by coupland ( 160334 ) <dchaseNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:50AM (#4807889) Journal

      Who wants odds on how long before weather is used as a weapon in war?

      It's real, now. No need for speculation. The secretive European Union has been launching tornadoes and hurricanes and floods against the Americans for decades, unfortunately it's only resulted in more sturdy trailer-home designs...

      • Oh yeah! Well we got super-dooper HAARP power, man. Just wait until us Yanks turn this shit loose on those Eurotwits.

        Read about our awesome power here [cuttingedge.org]!

        Derek
      • The secretive European Union has been launching tornadoes and hurricanes and floods against the Americans for decades, unfortunately it's only resulted in more sturdy trailer-home designs...
        Typical Eurocentric. It is axiomatic that all bad weather in the US comes from Canada.

        Pan to Dr. Canuck in his secret hideout atop Tim Hortons:

        Mhahahah, first we beat them at their national game, war, err, I mean hockey, then we destroy the source of all of their great philosophers and leaders, the
        Trailer Park.
    • Who wants odds? Militaries around the world have long been working towards being able to significantly affect the weather conditions of battlefields. Remember, defense funding is behind some cool things - DARPAnet, nuclear energy, radar..
    • It is currently not used as a weapon, but is a very big aid in wars for the U.S especially. The pentagon tracks weather patterns to see when it is ideal for fighters to fly as different types of troops need different kinds of weather. For instance, a covert op. happens when there is no moon, and there is cloud cover everywhere.
  • ...it's a beowulf cluster of Blackfoot indians in some sort of recursive dance.

  • We shouldn't be playing with our environment... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kakos ( 610660 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:37AM (#4807832)
    ...yet. We still don't know much about weather. Meteorology is not a sure science. And these kinds of experience with making rain, while noble, have the potential to cause quite a few deaths. The rain seeding experiment is an example of that.

    We should avoid these sorts of experiments until we have a good understanding about how our weather works.

    • Absolutely right. We should develop a complete understanding of weather based entirely on theory and calculation, in which we can place absolute confidence because no experimental data contradicts our model.

      Of course, once we're sure we have a complete understanding, then let the weather modification begin.

      I'm afraid that the early attempts at large-scale weather modification will always be experimental, no matter how much theory we throw at the problem first. Do we start experimenting sooner, or later?

      • We should develop a complete understanding of weather based entirely on theory and calculation

        The understanding and models are already very good. The problem is the size of the (computational) problem: a planet with a 6000 km radius for which there are phenomenons happening on a km scale. Plus, the system is inherently caotic...
        • I've been working at a weather firm for 2 years now and I've been wondering if the theory and calculation approach is the best one. Given the computational problems mentioned above, and the structure of WMO GRIB data, wouldn't a feed forward neural network that was trained for, say, 4 years ultimately work better than the highly complex calculations(Ordinary diff eqs) that, I presume, are used in the ETA, AVN, MRF, etc.

          IANAMeteorologist, and I don't really understand how the models work(hey I just work here), but this is a thought I had once while trying to figure out how to write "my own" weather model.
          • If you do that with a neural net, you're in for a Nobel ;-) but don't count too much on it... BTW, the PDE (partial differential equations, not ODE) already give pretty good results for a system of that complexity. Mostly since the real usefulness of the forecasts are for high altitudes, to make aircrafts save fuel and these are usualy more accurate.

  • How ironic that British scientists are trying to develop ways to make even more rain than the country is blessed with getting (I suppose it gives us more reason to complain about the weather - although as a Brit in CT, I'm finding it bloody cold here).

    I remember hearing years ago about how to stop clouds from raining over certain areas, by planes dropping concrete powder into the rain cloud that might disturb an outdoor event (or something that would be spoilt by rain). Although I can't vouch for the truth of this tale, but the first thing that sprang to mind when hearing this was of concrete clouds falling from the sky.

    But then again, we all know clouds are held up in the sky by string.... all we need is more string and wind machines ;-)

    • I remember hearing years ago about how to stop clouds from raining over certain areas, by planes dropping concrete powder into the rain cloud

      Another option is to seed the rainclouds early so that they "run out" of rain before reaching the desired dry area. Yuri Luscov, the mayor of Russia, tried this back in 1998 when he tried unsucessfuly to keep the rain away from Moscow's 850th Birthday celebrations [weathernotebook.org]. He tried again at the UEFA Cup Final [cnn.com], but not sure how that worked out. I'm sure there are lots of other examples out there.

  • screwing with weather? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by sickmtbnutcase ( 608308 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:39AM (#4807845)
    "People have been trying for many years to modify the weather, from tribal rain dances through to experiments in which small crystals were dropped into clouds to attract moisture."

    I don't know if anyone has noticed, but to me the weather the past few years hasn't seemed quite normal to begin with. Floods and heavy rain where it normally doesn't rain much, tornados in odd parts of the country, lack of snow where there's usually plenty....So why would we want to modify it by adding extra moisture in the air and making it rain in places which normally receive little rain to begin with? What would be the effects a few hundred miles away? Really, what's wrong with normal irrigation? It works, and doesn't affect the weather.

    • Irrigation doesn't affect the weather?
      It certainly does on this planet, boyo.

      Irrigated areas create different wind profiles, put water into the atmosphere (after all, that's how plants get water, it gets pulled up through the roots into the body of the plant by the capillary force of the water that's *already* evaporating off the leaves), and usually correlate with changes in species distribution and surface temperature.
      Are these changes necessarily bad? A messy question. But they certainly take place.
      Facts, ol' son. Start by getting facts.
      Rustin

      • Re:screwing with weather? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Irvu ( 248207 )
        Don't forget that most if not all of the energy used on this planet (to drive irrigation systems) comes from such environmentally friendly sources such as Coal, Petroleum, and Nuclear Fission all of which throw pollution into the air, water, and soil.

        Air pollution causes disease and effects global warming. Water pollution can lead to acid rain, if not the poisoning of plants and eventually, drought. Poisoned soil does the same. And, let's not forget what would happen if radioactive materials get into the air...

        I'd also point out that pumping water for irrigation can lower the water table leading to drought just as pumping a lot of water out of a river can affect areas downstream.

      • Re:screwing with weather? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Selanit ( 192811 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @02:45AM (#4808328)
        There are other consequences to irrigation as well. Take, for example, the state of the Great Plains aquifer, which underlies Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, and in fact most of the middle of the country. Aquifers are a resource in a delicate balance between the amount of water withdrawn and the amount of water recharged from streams and precipitation soaking into the ground.

        Currently we are withdrawing water from the Great Plains aquifer about twice as fast as it is being replenished. My geology book from last year claimed it'll be used up in another 10-15 years. If that happens, some MAJOR changes are going to result. We'll have to decrease agricultural production to about 25% of current levels -- not enough water to plant the crops as densely as we hvae been. Cattle ranching will suffer, too -- not enough water to maintain the current herds.

        This process is only being exacerbated by the prolonged drought throughout the western half of the country. Remember the Hayman fire in Colorado last summer? And the literally hundreds of other fires? That's because the entire region is as dry as a bone: we haven't been getting normal precipitation levels. Colorado (which is my home state) lost about three quarters of the crops that were planted this year due to the drought. Mandatory watering restrictions were in place all summer, and have already been announced for next year.

        Then, of course, there are going to be some pretty severe economic repercussions. For a state whose primary industry is agriculture, a 75% decrease in crop yields, be it because of unusual drought or a depleted aquifer, is HUGE. Food prices -- especially for energy-intensive products like beef -- will go up. People will not be happy.

        It's a mess. :-(
    • I don't know if anyone has noticed, but to me the weather the past few years hasn't seemed quite normal to begin with. Floods and heavy rain where it normally doesn't rain much, tornados in odd parts of the country, lack of snow where there's usually plenty...
      Very possibly due in part to global warming. I've read in a few places that global warming doesn't just lead to hotter climates, but also to increasingly tempestuous weather. Somewhere somebody explained it to me like this: "Don't think of it like the planet getting hotter overall. Think of it like a lot more energy being dumped into the ecosystem in the form of heat. That ecosystem has to do what it can to seek equilibrium, and with more energy around, the extremes are going to be more pronounced."

      So you could theoretically get global warming leading not just to the obvious stuff (floods) but also other extreme weather conditions: Hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, etc. I don't think this is necessarily considered a hard scientific fact, yet, though. Just a strong theory.

    • I've always assumed the crazy weather was just a test of my own agnostic beliefs when all signs point towards the coming of the apocalypse..

  • Is Rainwater a Public Good? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by USC-MBA ( 629057 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:44AM (#4807864) Homepage
    Who should control the rains? Given the evident costs of developing and implementing this plan, it would appear that this project should be one of those huge government-funded public boons, like a hydropower dam or a freeway.

    But hold on, do we really want the weather to be run in a manner similar to such public services as the US Post Office or (shudder) the British Dental Service? I can see it now: some impoverished nation will be saddled with a National Department of Rain, complete with overpaid, slovenly employees and mounds of red tape, which will manage to get the rainclouds set up two days after the crops have all died, or right in the middle of a soccer game.

    It is hoped that a private interest who might benefit from this technology, say a responsible, efficient agricultural conglomerate like Archer-Daniels-Midland, will be able to fund and deploy these rain-making devices, ensuring that plenty of water is available for all on an efficient market-driven basis. This would be a prime example of the kind of benefits globalization can bring to both the developed and developing countries of the planet.

    • a responsible, efficient agricultural conglomerate like Archer-Daniels-Midland
      You are kidding, right?
      Are we talking about the same ADM that had multiple senior executives convicted of fraud and price fixing? You know, the one case where their behavior was so bad that they're serving jail time. The same one that is considered a willful and determined sabotager of the family farm? The company that pushed for and got mandatory government support of gasahol based on their crops that cost two to three times the cost of petroleum?
      No, maybe you're talking about the ADM that has used massive political contributions to cripple the production, pricing and availability of sugar in the United States, thereby not only leavng us with food products made with high fructose corn syrup (purchased from them, of course) that makes our food taste worse here and sell worse overseas, but also provides a major source of income for hard-core right-wing Cuban emigres for them to use to fund Iran-Contra and Latin American death squads.
      No, perhaps you were thinking about their key role in funding Bob Dole's crushing of John McCain's push for campaign finance reform.
      Impossible. You were probably thinking of this [post-gazette.com] ADM, the one that has spread consistent misinformation about genetically modified crops, thereby making it much harder for those who are honestly trying to use genetic engineering to help their fellows.
      Unless, of course, you're talking about the company whose role in the use of bovine growth hormone puts them on the top of the list for reasons that many American teenagers are now on a constant course of drugs just from the stuff they absorb from eating at places like McDonald's.
      Sure, perhaps the worst company in America this side of Waste Management and Microsoft for ubiquitious and culturally supported corruption. A place that considers undermining of efficient government and an honest media right up there with price fixing and destructive competition as daily goals. Definitely the people *I* want running a crucial new social function.

      Better go back and take some of those M.B.A. classes again. Sounds like you missed a few bits here and there.
      Rustin
    • I can see it now: some impoverished nation will be saddled with a National Department of Rain, complete with overpaid, slovenly employees and mounds of red tape, which will manage to get the rainclouds set up two days after the crops have all died, or right in the middle of a soccer game.

      Opposed to impoverished nations saddled with Red Cross famine relief agents?

  • Cautionary Note... (Score:3, Funny)

    by thesophist ( 630380 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:45AM (#4807866)
    Ever the diplomat, I'll gladly offer 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond,WA 98052, as a testing site.

    Professor Salter told the BBC: "We are trying to break through the layer of rather stagnant, humid air...

    Fitting, non?

    • I love the concept, but have you ever visited the Seattle area? Unless they can *start out* with huge floods, nobody would notice. They'ld just button up their Patagonia jackets a little higher.
      How about the new MS facility in India that they're so smug about? The one trying to get the Indian educational system locked into Windoze? I'm sure that any Indian LUG would be happy to provide the coordinates.
      Now *that* would be nice.
      Rustin

  • More rain for you probably means less rain for some or all of your neighbors. Sorta like the USA frequently using up the entire Colorado River before it reaches Mexico, Saudia Arabia might just suck up a lot of the rain headed towards Iran. Bu you know, I doubt that that would cause any problems :)
    • Read the article. This system uses seawater, not fresh. No loss of fresh water at all. In fact, if, as they claim, they would recover a bit of the sea salts, they would actually create a net *increase* in the overall supply of water.
      I don't know about you folks, but I'm pretty bullish on this one. It looks like a good approach (other then nastying up coastal areas and creating surface turbulence) to me and I wish them the best.
      Rustin

  • I dunno (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Reality Master 101 ( 179095 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <101retsaMytilaeR>> on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:49AM (#4807882) Homepage Journal

    North Devon experienced 250 times the normal August rainfall in 1952. [...] She recalls: "Mum identified her by this huge wart on her back because she hadn't got no head, or arms, or legs when they found her".

    I hate to be skeptical, but... the article seems to imply that this rain making experiment caused all this water to suddenly fall out of the sky. But what makes my "bullshit" meter go off is whether there is that much water in the air in the first place. I mean, 250 times the normal rainfall? I could see if you had some natural storm system come in that just happened to have a ton of moisture, but just to create out of "thin air" (so to speak) that much water out of normal conditions just doesn't sound plausible.

    Particularly since if it were that easy, we would never have droughts.

    Something isn't adding up here.

    • My understanding is that the difference is rain falls gently, due to the nature of its formation. However seeding causes all the moisture in the atmosphere to condense at once, not gradually. Hence you get a massive rainfall that is completely unnatural and potentially dangerous. I don't think seeding creates water, it just causes it to precipitate at unnatural rates...
      • You can get a brutal drenching downpour that is completely natural, too. They are potentially dangerous primarily in areas prone to flash flooding, or near rivers that like to jump their banks.

        Yes, seeding does cause unnatural rates of precipitation, in the sense that it is rain that otherwise likely would not have fallen. But there are physical processes at work that limit the size of raindrops and the speed at which they fall. Large, fast raindrops literally get blown apart by air resistance as they fall.

        And of course, seeding often doesn't work, or it doesn't work well--you get a gentle rainfall, or a little bit of drizzle.

    • I have to agree. I'm highly skeptical of this story.
      Sounds like something out of the Weekly World News.

    • Re:I dunno (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Bishop923 ( 109840 )
      I would have to agree, based on the numbers...

      Assume that the average august rainfall in North Devon is around 2 inches (5.08 cm). That would mean that 500 inches(1270 cm) of rain fell in that storm... almost 42 FEET(12.7 m) of rain fell in that single day.

      I have a feeling they meant 250% of normal, 5 inches(12.7 cm) of rain falling in a farily short amt of time(say an hour or two) can have devastating effects, especially in flood plains where local rivers are already close to flood level. Far more likely than having enough rain to submerge a 5 storey building...

  • Stealing rain? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stefanlasiewski ( 63134 ) <(moc.ocnafets) (ta) (todhsals)> on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:54AM (#4807911) Homepage Journal
    Hrm...

    If you force the rain to come down, NOW, RIGHT HERE, aren't you preventing the rain from falling on your neighbors? What if there is a drought and the neighbors need the rain?

    • There actually is an interesting fantasy/sci-fi novel that deal with this concept. L.E. Modesitt's The Magic of Recluce features Creslin, a magician who can control the weather.

      The problem is that when Creslin causes rain over his lands (or attempts to "freeze" his enemy, as he does a few times in the book), he takes away rains from other lands. Furthermore, when he causes a significant change in the weather (such as turning summer into winter), that change sticks around for several days to come, causing a significant impact on local events.

      I won't go into the book too much, but the Recluce series in general is excellent and has a very belivable magic system. Its definitely worthy of a look.

    • If you force the rain to come down, NOW, RIGHT HERE, aren't you preventing the rain from falling on your neighbors? What if there is a drought and the neighbors need the rain?

      1) What you speculate is akin to a well known phenomena called rain shadow deserts [blm.gov] .

      2) "stealing" is a strong word implying ownership. AFAIK issues of water distribution are murky in international law.
      indeed, diverting a river can be considered casus-beli.

      This certainly means that a country must consider international consequences of using such methods.

    • Creating is not theft. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by twitter ( 104583 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @01:11PM (#4811066) Homepage Journal
      The zero sum game always amazes me. Why is it that people just can't see beyond it. The article says:

      Professor Salter told the BBC: "We are trying to break through the layer of rather stagnant, humid air that's at the very, very bottom of the atmosphere, in contact with the sea surface, and lift large volumes of water through this and squirt them out from 10 metres up in the air as a very fine spray, with a very big surface area."

      This is creation, not theft. They are taking moisture from the sea and putting it in the air. As all that water will end up back in the sea and the chances that this project will lower sea level are nil, no one has lost anything. Those who feel the rain will have gained much.

      If ten meters is all you need, I would try chimneys to suck the moist air up. No moving parts, cheap to prefabricate, easy to errect.

    • If you can't tell the difference between "falling on you alone, NOW, RIGHT HERE" and "falling on you and all of your neighbors over quite some time", I can't help you.
  • If this cloud seeding really does work, and it's possible to generate up to 250 times the average rainfall for an area (as was the case according to the BBC report), then why the hell don't they test it in a place that wont kill anyone. You know, like, say the Australian outback, where 250 times the average rainfall won't pose a risk to population centres, and the scientists can test away to their hearts content 'till they figure out how to control the process.
    • Australia experimented with cloud seeding in the past, with mixed success. Basically, if there ain't no moisture in the atmosphere, you can dump as much silver iodide into the atmosphere as you want, but you still won't get rain.

      That's why this new idea is interesting - it's an attempt to actually add moisture to the atmosphere.

    • 250 times normal rain would be enormously
      dangerous in desert areas, (albeit for small
      numbers of people). In the Southwestern US
      people die in flash floods all the time.

  • 250 times the normal rainfall... (Score:4, Informative)

    by dagg ( 153577 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @12:55AM (#4807920) Journal
    North Devon experienced 250 times the normal August rainfall in 1952.

    Why haven't we heard of this ever happening again? It seems that these types of experiments were kept for the public for good reason. Those in the know were afraid of bad people finding out about it.

    • Re:250 times the normal rainfall... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Idarubicin ( 579475 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @01:37AM (#4808080) Journal
      Why haven't we heard of this ever happening again?

      Maybe there is no conspiracy. Maybe it was just a fluke. They accidentally succeeded wildly, but they haven't been able to reproduce the freak conditions that led to their unprecedented downpour. You know, chaotic system and all.

      Or maybe there is a conspiracy to conceal this powerful weapon, and I'm in on it. On that note, and IIRC, there was an Isaac Asimov story in which the world was controlled by a Weather Bureau. Countries that opposed the Bureau's control were punished with drought and famine. Unfortunately, I can't remember the title.

  • herding cats (Score:3, Funny)

    by FrenZon ( 65408 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @01:10AM (#4807991) Homepage
    Making weather without even being able to accurately predict it is like throwing knives at the kitchen in the hope you'll get a nice slice of brie.

    mm.. brie.

    It's still a cool idea however, and I wish these guys the best of luck.

  • I share another posters scepticism - spraying as much silver iodide or ice as a plane can carry into the air created 250x normal rainfall out of nothing? Sure...

    Australia has far more need of enhanced rainfall than Britain. There have been extensive trials by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) and overall cloud seeding does not work.

    To quote from a summary [csiro.au] of CSIRO's findings: "CSIRO has shown that in Australia cloud seeding is effective only in a limited number of weather conditions. Cloud seeding will never break droughts; cloudless skies will never produce rain."

    CSIRO have also produced guidelines [csiro.au] for water managers considering trying cloud seeding. My take on their conclusion is: it won't work, save your money.

  • READ THE ARTICLE (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mike3411 ( 558976 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @02:20AM (#4808237) Homepage
    I was just going through these posts to spend some of my mod points, and I was astounded at how few people had even given a cursory glance at the article. Unlike other experiments, which involve forcing existing atmospheric moisture (clouds) to precipitate into rain, the equipment proposed would actually add and create clouds from seawater. This is very different in effect, as it won't be taking moisture away from anyone else, but will rather just add a great deal of moisture to the whole region, which of course could have serious effects, both positive & negative.

    I wonder what they're doing with all the salt.... it would build up wherever the water evaoporates, mebbe at the misting site? Seems like introducing that much salt into an area would be a problem.

  • Seeding the rain (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nadaou ( 535365 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @02:23AM (#4808247) Homepage
    In regards to the great flood of '52, I've got to repeat the old mantra.. "correlation does not predicate causality." (eg, "everyone who goes to the dentist dies")

    It is very very hard to seed clouds. You've got to get the silver iodide (or whatever) concentration just right- too many condensation nuclei and all you get is suspended fog. Too few, and the dropplets grow too slowly (collision is a major growth process). There've been many attempts over the years, but it is really really hard to prove correlation in the wild.. (send refs if you know otherwise!)

    Even if you can make clouds, it doesn't mean you make rain. At all.

    Now if they could only figure out the upper reflection vs greenhouse effect balance, more clouds might help solve our global warming problem. Or make it much worse.

    ..if even just 5% of our research science budget went to blue sky research, it would be a good thing (and IMO would pay back ++). If only our 'philosopher king' were less of a king and more of a philosopher...

    • Re:Seeding the rain (Score:5, Informative)

      by Ektanoor ( 9949 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @04:42AM (#4808690) Journal
      It is very very hard to seed clouds. You've got to get the silver iodide (or whatever) concentration just right- too many condensation nuclei and all you get is suspended fog. Too few, and the dropplets grow too slowly (collision is a major growth process). There've been many attempts over the years, but it is really really hard to prove correlation in the wild.. (send refs if you know otherwise!)

      You seem quite scheptyc about rainmaking. Well, Russian government disclosed that it used several technologies for local weather control. There was even a program on TV about this. That confirmed the old suspicions people had about the strange weather changes during holidays in Soviet Union. For several years, people noted that if rain was about to come to Moscow in 1st of May, then as magic, clouds would disappear. However there was a side effect, as, somewhere around Moscow rain would fall like in the tropics. This was always considered as popular fantasy. However, this summer, a TV program showed one of the crews specially prepared for those missions. They showed nearly everything, from preparing the ingredients up to seeding the clouds. In an interview, one guy told that they were doing it since the 50's and there was already a whole science behind it, from how to stop rain up to how to make it fall. There were side effects dangers and whole models to avoid certain critical situations. There were several types of ingredients on use. Silver iodide occurred to be one of the least used. The most popular was... concrete powder.They say it is tremendously effective.

  • I thought this was just something they did in the cartoons, but seriously - can you make it rain? If this shit happened like they say in the UK in the 50s, why dont they do this in Texas in the summer?

  • Possible solution to the water wars? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by core plexus ( 599119 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @02:36AM (#4808291) Homepage
    This could be a possible solution to the "Water Wars" of the American southwest and Texas. Might also have applications to desert regions, and places that would like more snow. Some people say messing with the climate is a bad thing, but the climate is dynamic, and has changed drastically over time. On occasion, in a very short time. And spare me the proposal that people ought to move, or not move there in the first place; they're there and they won't leave until they are forced to, green lawns and swimming pools in tow.

    I have to say it: after we're gone, the roaches will still rule.

  • Rapid City 1972 (Score:3, Informative)

    by MarkofT ( 130856 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @02:55AM (#4808379)
    Oddly enough something similar occurred in Rapid City on June 9m 1972. Stories from the NWS [noaa.gov] and MPR. [mpr.org]

  • please (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lord Omlette ( 124579 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @03:47AM (#4808561) Homepage
    Someone explain to me why every member of the British group wasn't round up and shot for gross negligence?

    Also, I read that in order to use laser guided bombs in Kosovo, they had to use cloud dispersing techniques that resulted in horrific hailstorms in other parts of the Balkans. Unfortunately I read this three years ago and can't find any references to it... anyone?

  • Bad idea? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by skintigh2 ( 456496 )
    Wouldn't that increase the salinity of the water, which might be bad for sea life, but could also alter currents if the denser water sank?
  • I noticed that it usually rains right after I wash my car or start planning a golf game. Thus, simply have 1000 people wash their car or plan a golf game right before the desired rain.
  • It's a nice idea. Not enough water comes from the oceans to the air in many parts of the world. The air a few meters above the sea has a potential of a few kilovolts when the waves have white caps. People have theorized that this stops a lot of mass and momentum transfer between the sea and the air. This is the first mechanical solution I have heard about. But there are bugs like Legionnaire's disease that like sprays of warm, damp air. Expect the unexpected, folks...
  • Actually cloud seeding does work in Australia. Hydro Tasmania has been undertaking cloud seeding trials since 1964.
    Check out the faq at

    http://www.hydro.com.au/renewableenergy/cloudsee di ng/faqs.html

    The purpose of the cloud seeding is to increase rainfall in the catchment areas of hydro electric dams. Increased rainfall in these areas reduces the need to use supplementary energy sources, i.e. conventional oil fired power stations which tend to be rather expensive.

    Needless to say farmers are less than impressed with these trials. They attribute unusually dry conditions experienced in the last few years on the east coast of Tasmania to these trials, claiming that Hydro Tasmania is stealing their water.

  • In the US as well (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Wyatt Earp ( 1029 )
    Many think the Rapid City flood in 1972 was triggered by a cloud making experiment gone wrong.

    http://www.crh.noaa.gov/unr/iwe/1972/

    "In a 6-hour time frame on June 9, 1972, a rush of water poured through Rapid City and canyons in the surrounding area, destroying homes, vehicles, businesses, bridges, and claiming 238 lives."

    http://www.rbs2.com/weather.htm

    "Lunsford v. U.S., 418 F.Supp. 1045 (D.S.Dak. 1976), aff'd, 570 F.2d 221 (8thCir.1977).

    There was a flood in Rapid City, South Dakota on 9 June 1972 that killed 283people and caused extensive property damage. Plaintiffs alleged that the flood was caused by an experimental cloud seeding program operated by the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, under contract to the U.S.Government."

    http://www.sciencescene.com/suckley/evs105/05Atm os phere&Climate/05c-Lecture.htm

  • Didn't I hear.... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Muad'Dave ( 255648 ) on Wednesday December 04, 2002 @11:23AM (#4810222) Homepage

    that the Chinese are planning to use rain/anti-rain making technology for the Olympics? I remember hearing that in the mainstream media. Here's a link [colorado.edu]

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember, UNIX spelled backwards is XINU. -- Mt.

Close