Using Pykrete to slow global warming?

[abskebabs]

Hi everybody, perhaps I've chosen a slightly controversial title for this thread, but this is a thought that's been bubbling in my head for a little while. I remember watching a documentary a while back on Pykrete ice, as a a material of about 14% sawdust and 86% water ice as being much stronger and melting much more slowly than ice. Indeed I almost chose it as the subject of a materials presentation I did back in my physics class at high school.

 

I chose not to however as I couldn't find much information on it however...

 

I still can't, which is why I'm making this thread as I hoped others would perhaps have some more information on it. One thing I'd like to ask: What is the melting point of this material? Indeed I'm so intrigued to find it out I'm tempted to try and make it myself. I've heard you can use milk as well to make it, got plenty of that, need to find sawdust!

 

If it melts significantly higher than ice, then could it be feasible that if(regardless of the financial burdens of such a project, as well as assuming it is somehow powered in such a way, that it is carbon neutral): Perhaps sheets of Pykrete were placed at or around the receding polar icecaps, we could slow down the rate of temperature change by a significant amount?

 

I came up with this idea thinking perhaps it buy time, before the changes become absolutely irreversible. I remember watching the news about how the rate of warming is accelerating due to the ocean expanding in the polar areas, and thereby absorbing the heat that the polar caps were previously reflecting.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Is the goal to increase the albedo of the polar regions then?

 

From what I understand, the melting point isn't all that different -- it's just that the thermal conductivity of the stuff is so low that it takes ages for it to melt. The question is whether the effect is any greater than the energy expended on creating it.

[abskebabs]

Is the goal to increase the albedo of the polar regions then?

 

From what I understand, the melting point isn't all that different -- it's just that the thermal conductivity of the stuff is so low that it takes ages for it to melt. The question is whether the effect is any greater than the energy expended on creating it.

 

Yes, essentially the goal would be to increase the albedo/reflectivity of the polar regions.

 

On your second point, I think perhaps it's effect would be positive if it was powered only by carbon neutral sources. I guess the question is of how long exactly it takes to melt, and how much longer in comparison with ordinary ice. I think the exact amount would determine the calculation of whether such a project would be worth it on different levels.

 

Also it could only make a short term difference.