Fighting Harbor Fog With “Electric Mist” (Jan, 1933)

Fighting Harbor Fog With “Electric Mist”

A NEW way to get rid of fog has been recently proposed. Experts long have believed that the chief cause of fog is electrification of the tiny, individual water droplets, so that these repel each other and will not combine to form ordinary raindrops. By electric tests, a German professor has confirmed the fact that fog always is electrified and can be dispersed if electrification is removed or neutralized.

His process for doing this is to test the fog to see if it is electrified positively or negatively, and then to blow into it from nozzles streams of artificial fog the water particles of which have been electrified artificially with the opposite polarity. Artificial fog containing positive electricity for example, combines with a natural one that is negatively electrified, so that water particles of both fogs cluster and fall as rain.

8 comments
  1. Avner Kashtan says: November 10, 20108:49 am

    Excellent! Fight fire with fire, fight water with positively-charged water.
    And I didn’t even know we were at war with the fog.

  2. Toronto says: November 10, 201011:23 am

    Oh, heavens, yes, we’ve been at war with Fog for a long time. You should see the “FIDO” systems they used at bomber bases in England during the war – pipelines along both sides of the runways that would be set on fire to burn off the fog.

    http://www.stelzriede.c…

  3. Kosher Ham says: November 10, 201011:24 am

    London got rid of it’s legendary fogs by sharply reducing the amount of coal being burnt.

    It is illegal to burn coal in California.

  4. Toronto says: November 10, 201011:31 am

    Better link – Popular Science, August 1945 (one of my favorite all time issues) – pages 64-65.

    http://books.google.ca/…

  5. Toronto says: November 10, 20102:48 pm

    Kosher Ham: But, like your name, California koshifies coal based electricity brought in from other places, does it not?

    We’re “trying” to convert coal-based generation plants to natural gas here. There’s a certain amount of political inertia, possibly made worse by privatized nuke plants and their political contributions.

  6. Kosher Ham says: November 11, 201011:23 am

    It is quite true that California imports power from other states that can use coal. Nuclear power would be the best as there would be no carbon dioxide or other environmental impacts; hydroelectric kills fish; windmills kill birds.

  7. Jabberwocky says: November 14, 20109:15 am

    @Kosher Ham – Problem with nuclear power is the waste products. What can you do to safely get rid of radioactive material that won’t decay for what, hundreds of thousands of years? And of course the public is still wary about the possibility of disasters at a nuclear plant.

    Solar power is one of the greener options out there, just limited by the fact that solar plants are rather difficult to set up.

  8. whizzle whoozle says: November 15, 20101:36 pm

    @Jabberwocky

    But then the river will have 3 eyed fishes…lol

Submit comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.