Re: Detecting ETI via CO2
- From: Matt Giwer <jull43@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:06:18 GMT
Rob Dekker wrote:
With the increasing success of detecting planets around other star systems, the time is near that we will detect the first Earth-like planets (if they are there) orbiting stars other than the sun.
If, and when we do so, I'm sure that scientists will go the next step, to analyze these planets' atmospheric composition and attempt to find oxygen and water. With increased sensitivity and prolonged observation, they might even find rather accurate readings for gases like CO2 and methane.
Now suppose that an ETI out in the Galaxy has found Earth and observed it for hundreds of years. They know our atmosphere's composition pretty accurately. It might be possible that they have noticed a rapid increase of CO2 in our atmosphere (from about 275ppm a few centuries ago, to almost 400ppm now). Similar steep increase should be noticable for methane.
This should seem like a very uncommon, and artificial, increase in atmospheric composition, since natural effects of changes in atmospheric composition are much, much slower than that. The ETI could thus conclude that there is probably an emerging technology on our planet, burning massive amounts of fossil fuels....
Is this a possible scenario ? Can CO2 levels in our atmosphere be observed by ETI's ? If so, what kind of equipment would they need ? And can a rapid increase in CO2 (30% - 50% increase in 100 years) be explained as natural effects (such as massive change in vulcanic activity) ? It surely did not change so fast in the past million years or so...
Could rapid changes in extra-solar planet atmospheric conditions be an indication of ETI ? And are there maybe other rapid changes (such as global warning) caused by activity of emerging technology civilizations burning fossil fuels, that could be observed from interstellar distances ?
One of the observations of the global warming skeptics is the earth has been much warmer than it is today. Those periods have been for tens of millions of years. It is not clear how to catch a hundred or two year quirk of fossil fuel consumption before fusion or fission replaces it. Keep in mind it is mostly the Jane Fonda school of nuclear physics which keeps us so dependent on oil. As it is if we used fission oil consumption could be about 40% lower oil needed only for some heating and transportation. And with cheap electricity coal could be cheaply liquified for home heating.
Not trying to make it sound peachy as roughly only 1/3rd the cost of electricity is fuel and nuclear is not a free source of heat. But nuke power plants near coal fields results in a price tradeoff with pumped oil. And all kinds of chemicals not wanted in oil have industrial uses so the economics are not based solely on liquifying coal.
And for the cynical skeptic, the we-are-melting and the running-out-of-oil types got together and decided we would run out before we melt so ignore nuclear and there isn't much to watch for.
-- We know Johnson lied about Vietnam. Why is it so hard for people to admit Bush lied about Iraq? Party loyalty? -- The Iron Webmaster, 3476 nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml http://www.giwersworld.org .
- Follow-Ups:
- OT: go nuclear. Was: Detecting ETI via CO2
- From: Rob Dekker
- OT: go nuclear. Was: Detecting ETI via CO2
- References:
- Detecting ETI via CO2
- From: Rob Dekker
- Detecting ETI via CO2
- Prev by Date: Re: Paper - Optical SETI with Imaging Cherenkov Telescopes
- Next by Date: Re: Paper - Optical SETI with Imaging Cherenkov Telescopes
- Previous by thread: Re: Detecting ETI via CO2
- Next by thread: OT: go nuclear. Was: Detecting ETI via CO2
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|