Page 229 - James Rodger Fleming - Fixing the sky

This is indeed geoengineering. The experiment effectively created an artificial
ionosphere, “better” than the original since it would not be disrupted by mag-
netic storms or solar flares. Wexler, however, was concerned that the environmen-
tal effects of the cloud of needles had not been fully considered, including their
effect on the Earth’s heat budget, magnetic field, and ozone levels. Astronomers
protested bitterly, since the layer of needles interfered with their observations,
especially in the new field of radio astronomy. Although the cloud of needles
58
behaved broadly as designed and mostly dispersed after about three years, render-
ing it useless for radio communication, as of 2010 some copper “needles” are still
in orbit. occasionally, one of them reenters the Earth’s atmosphere and flashes
briefly as it burns up as an artificial meteor. Astronomers soon will be forced to
oppose proposals for solar radiation management, since any attempt to attenuate
sunlight will also attenuate starlight (chapter 8).
In February 1962, Wexler was informed of a review by an ad hoc panel at
NASA convened to consider the “High Water Experiment,” the upcoming
release of almost 100 tons of water into the ionosphere. The delivery vehicle was
a Saturn test rocket to be launched from Cape Canaveral to an altitude of 65
miles and then destroyed. The panel, chaired by atmospheric scientist William
W. Kellogg of the RAND Corporation, concluded, on the basis of some back-of-
the-envelope calculations, that “it was unable to predict exactly what would hap-
59
pen following the rupture of the Saturn tanks.” They supposed that the water
would boil instantly in the vacuum of space and then form ice crystals in a cloud
about 6 miles wide and up to 20 miles long that would gradually fall out and
dissipate downrange (figure 7.5). Some of the water would also dissociate, form-
ing atomic o and H. Noctilucent clouds should form, and the radio properties
of the ionosphere might be affected, with possible disruption to stratospheric
ozone. The members of the panel knew that “introducing more H would change
something” (4), but they could not say what. Nevertheless, they considered the
scale of this test, literally a “drop in the bucket,” and predicted that “no major
change in the atmosphere will take place that will hinder human activities” (1).
They also predicted, correctly, that “in fact it may turn out to be hard to detect
any effects at all (alas!), after the first few minutes” (1).
Kellogg and the panel were not completely confident that they understood
all the factors involved in this experiment and readily admitted to “a good deal
of uncertainty.” At the time, atmospheric scientists were used to the idea “that
on occasion small changes can ‘trigger’ larger ones, if the conditions in the atmo-
sphere are in a kind of metastable state.” Kellogg asked, “Is there such a condition
in the upper atmosphere?” (6). He was unable to identify any, and the panel sug-
gested no contingency plans for any “trigger” effects.

212 | fearS, fantaSieS, and PoSSibilitieS of Control