A concept regarding Climate Change

So, uhm - actually ... the idea of using science to control the weather is not an unrealistic idea I think. Though, one doesn't necessarily need to control it, in order to use it.

Like ... if we knew which way the wind blew, it would be possible to transport water via the air. I mean - hypothetically. Like, saturate a layer of the atmosphere with water and clouds begin to form, they get moved by the wind until conditions are met that make them fall again.
So, a question begins to form: Can we control the wind enough to maybe make this a reality?

So - speaking of - one aspect of wind are pressure zones. The rotation of the ball probably adds a little to it, the "viscosity" of the air, and a little bit of terrain. Things such as humidity, temperature, etc. . But the landscape may also add something. I don't know.

If so - there would be limits, I suppose. Initially for sure. Like, ever so slightly shifting or tuning the global balance. Maybe this way we can also move around exhaust.

Technically ... so, point A is to create a high pressure field, one that may be even used as some kind of wind-shield. How could that work? Well. In the idea, if we here had a factory, it would just spread it's fumes more effectively. But if we so had a way to produce low pressure areas - well.
I guess it depends on how the different particles we're concerned about behave.


Another concern would be clean water. Desalination may be an option - purification is definitely one - but ... it might be wise to upscale our 'effective water supply'. Maybe adding additional filtration - [shrugs].

Anyhow.
I suppose that there are places where this would be more and others where it's less realistic. I suppose in some places that's already pretty much how things work anyway.
But ... I also suppose that we're ... talking about magnitudes like ... 'the whole of germany' would need to create a high pressure area "so big" for there to even be a blip on the map.

Or ... drying the North Sea to create a Low pressure area of some noticable size.
So, going further, we're talking about Architecture at a scale where Plate Tectonics come into play. Like, it would be interesting to know how our abilities compare to the real time growth and changes - were we able to even point to anything in particular. This is ultimately a question of how stable which place is - or so, how much of a 'place' a place is.


So, it would be logical - ultimately - on the one side perhaps, to build something like boats ... that swim on the rock and soil.

But ... I think ... until then, we have other things to figure out.


But at some point, such kinds of undertakings become the next logical step. Like - if we stop and think for a moment, counting things up - scoping out how much we could get done in what amount of time ... well, we could approach this like a videogame. We might even make one to accompany us along the way. I mean, I'm sure someone could hack something together while elsewhere someone works on a way to manage the data-soup so we can jump to a more stable data-base - some kind of Google-Earth esque VR where we can log in different layers of projects and link up. What do we want to do? What do we need? Can we get there?

So, with that on mind - we can see ourselves, individually, as always at the end of some supply chain. So, we can start there - and look at what's trickling in and what options that gives us.

Thinking money is small, thinking actual resources is big.

We start small, I suppose, but we want to become big.


The individual, in that sense, would have choices between different forms of supply. We can expand on that - and max out efficiency around such models, which should also increase the reliability of the individual ... "nodes"/gates/fronts thereof.

Like, depending on where you live, you need different kinds of things. That may also come with cultural sides, but is mostly practical. Here - stockpiling is small, production is big.


Anyhow. Dealing with Resources effectively - well. I mean. I just have this image on mind. On the one hand we have a "meat factory". Imagined like in a Videogame. Trucks with cattle come driving in - then "[buzzsaw sound]" - and packaged meat comes out. Perhaps have some spiked cylinder contraption symbolically rotating to show what's going on. So, blood and fat also come out. That's one side. On the other we have pastures where some amount of cattle is slaughtered "ethically" - and processed in nearby facilities - well, in a more traditional way.
By 'efficient' or 'effective' I don't mean one way or the other. But so - let's say ... there's 'Industrial' and there's 'Wholesome'. Through the industrial, we get a more direct conversion between input and end-product. And there's certainly also more than just one way about it. In the Wholesome version - well. It would for once be more labor intensive. There would also be a broader range in qualities and products.
If we're looking at it from an 'input' perspective, we should get roughly the same yield. The waste from the Wholesome version comes in a variety of form ranging from snackable meat products to - well, ... . I couldn't tell where 'more' goes down the sink, but within the serialized nature of industrialized processing I would imagine that more meat can be kept within the production cycle overall.

Guessing so, that the majority of the waste ultimately falls upon the end-user.

So, we're here also speaking of an input we have - which is ultimately the primary position now. How much is there? how much can be taken? Ultimately we can still speak of an output. On the Industrial end we can assume a much higher "input:output" conversion rate - because, demand-wise I suppose the Wholesome output is more so a 'rest' or an 'extra' to other 'gates' through which it satisfies demands.

So, on the one end the supply chain is like ... "target focused" while on the other it's "economically emergent". Or ... . How to. It's like playing a Tycoon game (Industry) versus Dwarf Fortress (Colony Building).

So, ultimately there's the Wholesome Product and there's the Industrial Product. Both would somehow enter the general supply chain, somehow, let's think of it like that, and this is now geared towards ... a more centralized economy.

One side of it leads out - and the other side of it is ... there.
Sure. So ... where am I going with this ???


So yea - based on that principle, if wanted to dry out the North Sea perhaps, Or to be more practical: Fortify and Future-Proof - just overall - there's stuff we want and need. Resources, Gear and Manpower. So, I once wrote of a Global Construction Force and a Local One - basically linked around Colony Nodes. So - what ought to emerge is a logistical network that is ... "dominant" ... in a way ... as it is how we get all the big stuff around the globe.

Not sure.

But yes. If we were to globally look at one thing, the same thing, there's a first layer of "what do we want/need where?".


If we can't fix climate change anymore, it would still be a goal to get to the point where we like ... 'could have'. To find some ways to stabilize, which would also be about levelling the playing field. Comparing Haves and Haven'ts - and making shit up as we go.