Polarized light scattering by aerosols in the marine atmospheric boundary layer

The intensity and polarization of light scattered from marine aerosols affect visibility and contrast in the marine atmospheric boundary layer (MABL). The polarization properties of scattered light in the MABL vary with size, refractive index, number distributions, and environmental conditions. Laboratory measurements were used to determine the characteristics and variability of the polarization of light scattered by aerosols similar to those in the MABL. Scattering from laboratory-generated sea-salt-containing (SSC) [NaCl, (NH4)2SO4, and seawater] components of marine aerosols was measured with a scanning polarization-modulated nephelometer. Mie theory with Gaussian and log normal size distributions of spheres was used to calculate the polarized light scattering from various aerosol composition models and from experimentally determined distributions of aerosols in the marine boundary layer. The modeling was verified by comparison with scattering from distilled water aerosols. The study suggests that polarimetric techniques can be used to enhance techniques for improving visibility and remote imaging for various aerosol types, Sun angles, and viewing conditions

Scoping meeting summary, Wailuku, Maui, March 9, 1992, 2 PM Session

OSTI ID: 883152.The meeting began with presentations by the facilitator, Mr. Spiegel, and Dr. Lewis, the program director from DOE. The facilitator introduced those on the podium. He then described the general structure of the meeting and its purpose: to hear the issues and concerns of those present regarding the proposed Hawaiian Geothermal Project. He described his role in ensuring the impartiality and fairness of the meeting. Dr. Lewis further defined the scope of the project, introduced members of the EIS team, briefly described the EIS process, and answered several process questions, noting that cable feasibility would be examined and that Native Hawaiian concerns would be addressed. Ms. Borgstrom stated that the ISIS Implementation Plan will be continuously refined and that impacts of reasonably foreseeable future activities would be examined. During the meeting, more than 90% of the commenters requested that the EIS identify and assess the relative merits and impacts of energy alternatives to the proposed action. Nearly 80% requested that the EIS investigate conservation and renewable forms of energy, such as wind, solar, and biomass. They suggested that integrated resource planning should be used, noting that the State is initiating such a process. More than 30% of the commenters asked that the EIS examine geothermal alternatives to the action including developing geothermal resources on Maui and using geothermal power on Hawai'i only on that island. One commenter proposed an alternative cable route that proceeds from Hawai'i to Lana'i and from Lana'i to Oahu with spur lines to Moloka'i and Maui as needed. Nearly 70% of the commenters made general statements concerning potential short- and long-term environmental costs and impacts of the HGP (particularly on pristine environments). Others were concerned about environmental costs to Maui, particularly the impacts of a land-based cable route on the south side of Maui and on Hawaiian homestead lands. More than half the commenters were concerned about the potential impacts of the HGP to cultural resources. They stated that the BIS should respect and address Native Hawaiian religious and cultural concerns noting that the lands from Ulupalakua to Kaupo are Native Hawaiian homelands replete with archeological sites and endangered plants used for rituals. Many (>30%) were concerned about impacts of the HGP on the life styles of the general population, in particular, on life styles of Native Hawaiians. Another 30% mentioned aesthetic impacts of HGP on pristine environments.U.S. Department of Energ

Scoping Meeting Summary, Honolulu, Oahu, March 14, 1992, 2 PM Session

The meeting began with presentations by the facilitator, Mr. Spiegel, and Dr. Lewis, the representative from DOE. The facilitator introduced those on the podium. He then described the general structure of the meeting and its purpose: to hear the issues and concerns of those present regarding the proposed Hawaiian Geothermal Project. He described his role as assuring the impartiality and fairness of the meeting. Dr. Lewis of DOE further defined the scope of the project, introduced members of the EIS team, and briefly described the EIS process. Ninety percent of those presenting expressed concern about the potential impacts of the HGP to the environment. They asked that the EIS investigate the impacts of 1.he HGP on quality of air, water and soils, flora and fauna, land, socioeconomics, religion and culture. Seventy percent of the commenters want the EIS to investigate the impacts of all components of the HGP (eg. generation facilities, pipes, roads, drill pads, transmission corridors, and cable) on terrestrial ecosystems (e.g. the rainforest), threatened and endangered species, species diversity, species used for ritual or medicinal purposes, and climate stability. The EIS should address the effects of segmentation of habitat, introduction of exotic species, acid rain, herbicides, and enhanced fire danger. It should consider the entire Kilauea East Rift Zone when studying the impacts of HGP on the ecology of the Puna District. Of importance is the interrelationship between the lava, the biota of the region, and the regeneration that occurs following an eruption. DOE should examine the impacts of the network of roads that would be constructed for the HGP. Roads may serve as barriers that segment habitats, prevent regeneration and natural spread of biota, or serve as conduits for introduction of exotic species or for mobilization of herbicides. They may enhance the potential for logging or collecting of endangered native species. The EIS should determine the impacts of the HGP on marine life, particularly threatened and endangered species such as the humpback whale. It should address the effects of emf. In particular, the EIS should establish whether the clearing of land for HGP increase the problems of silting in the near-shore ocean. Ninety percent of the presenters requested that the EIS address long- and short-term socioeconomic impacts of the HGP. Sixty percent want the EIS to provide a detailed economic analysis of the costs (to the Consumer, rate payer and non-user) of the HGP, including the cable, from inception (planning) through decommissioning, to determine both feasibility and impacts to economic systems. The EIS should investigate the effects of the presence of transmission lines making large regions of the State: less desirable for living in terms of property values, cost of living, etc . b.b. This impact would affect all residents of Hawai'i, not just those on Hawai'i, Maui, Moloka'i and Oahu. The EIS should analyze the economic impacts of failures once geothermal energy provides a significant proportion of Hawai'i's energy needs, including the costs of developing backup power supply on Oahu. One commenter asked who would be responsible for the consequences of lower property values or property condemnation associated with the HGP and suggested that the developer(s) should be bonded. Fifty percent want the EIS to identify what the benefits of HGP are and who would benefit from development of the HGP

Scoping Meeting Summary, Waimea, Hawai'i, March 16, 1992, 2 PM Session

The meeting began with presentations by the facilitator and the representative from DOE. The facilitator introduced those on the podium. He then described the general structure of the meeting and its purpose: to hear the issues and concerns of those present regarding the proposed Hawaiian Geothermal Project. He described his role as assuring the impartiality and fairness of the meeting. Dr. Lewis of DOE further defined the scope of the project, introduced those of the EIS team present and briefly described the EIS process. A number of process issues were covered, including the current State dependence on imported petroleum (>90%), the public nature of the DOE EIS process, DOE's responsibility to consider general impacts to the global situation, and database availability. Dr. Lewis assured those present that the EIS would examine transmission system/cable-related impacts and alternatives to the proposed action, within geothermal and outside it (including coal), including different mixes of supply- or demand-side options on each island using an integrated resource planning approach. With respect to prior and on-going geothermal developments in Puna, Dr. Lewis explained that although DOE will not conduct new environmental reviews of the HGP(A) and other federal geothermal development in Puna, these and the present developments will be considered (including medical records) from the perspective of cumulative impacts

Scoping Meeting Summary, Kaunakakai, Moloka'i, March 12, 1992, 2 PM Session

The meeting began with presentations by the facilitator, Mr. Spiegel, and Dr. Lewis, the program manager from DOE. The facilitator introduced those on the podium. He then described the general structure of the meeting and its purpose: to hear the issues and concerns of those present regarding the proposed Hawaiian Geothermal Project. He described his role as assuring the impartiality and fairness of the meeting. Dr. Lewis of DOE further defined the scope of the project, introduced members of the EIS team, and briefly described.the EIS process. The overwhelming concerns of the meeting were Native Hawaiian issues. The presenters [more than 70%, most of whom addressed no other issue] want the EIS to respect Native Hawaiian religion, race, rights, language, and culture, noting that they believe that geothermal development is a desecration of Pele [{approx}60% of all presenters]. They expressed concern that their ancestors and burials should not be desecrated. The EIS should address Native Hawaiian concerns that the HGP would negatively impact Native Hawaiian fisheries, subsistence lifestyles, and religious practices. Virtually all the speakers expressed frustration with government. Most (> 70%) of the speakers voiced concern and frustration regarding lack of consideration for Native Hawaiians by government and lack of trust in government. One commenter requested that the EIS should consider the international implications of the U.S allowing their rainforests to be cleared, when the U.S. government asks other nations to preserve theirs. Nearly 30% of the commenters want the EIS to address the concern that people on Moloka'i will bear major environmental consequences of the HGP, but not gain from it. The commenters question whether it is right for Moloka'i to pay for benefits to Oahu, particularly using an unproven technology. After questioning the reliability and feasibility of the marine cable:, nearly 30% of the presenters were concerned about the impacts of the submarine cable. In specific, they suggested that the EIS investigate the impacts the cable would have on fisheries and marine life due to electromagnetic fields, dredging, and oil-release. The EIS should study the impacts of the HGP on the humpback whale and other marine species, particularly their birthing grounds, noting whales' hypersensitivity to emf and sound. One commenter suggested that the EIS examine the economics of the cable, including the need to build specialized ships to lay it, harbour(s), and the cable itself. One commenter was concerned about the future uses of the cable suggesting that the EIS should address the impacts that would result if the cable connecting Moloka'i to Oahu is used to transmit power from large coal or other types of power generation facilities constructed on Moloka'i. Commenters questioned the reliability of geothermal development in a region that is both seismically and volcanically active. One suggested that the EIS examine the merits of projects that conserve energy. With respect to land use, commenters asked that the EIS examine the propriety of using Native Hawaiian homelands and ceded lands for the HGP, questioning specifically the land exchange in Puna [Campbell Estate for Wao Kele o Puna]. The commenters want the EIS to address the issue of air, water and sail quality preservation. More than 20% of the commenters asked that the EIS examine concerns about the environmental consequences of the HGP to the rainforest, including possible species extinction. In particular, the EIS should address the impacts of roads associated with the HGP in the rainforest, including the resulting importation of exotic species (for example banana poko), which successfully compete against native species; and the effects of noise and fumes which negatively impact plants, birds, animals, and insects

Scoping Meeting Summary , Pahoa, Hawai'i, March 1992, 2 PM Session

The meeting began with presentations by the facilitator, Mr. Spiegel, and the representative from DOE, Dr. Lewis. The facilitator introduced those on the podium. He then described the general structure of the meeting and its purpose: to hear the issues and concerns of those present regarding the proposed Hawaiian Geothermal Project. He described his role as assuring the impartiality and fairness of the meeting. Dr. Lewis of DOE further defined the scope of the project, introduced those of the EIS team present and briefly described the EIS process