How to deal with Global Warming


BaalChatzaf

Recommended Posts

Please, please look at that.

http://live.wsj.com/video/economics-innovative-solutions-to-global-warming/BB5BBC4F-975B-478A-89C8-B100CFE55B7A.html#!BB5BBC4F-975B-478A-89C8-B100CFE55B7A

A solution to the problem that will not break our bank nor require from us an Oath of Poverty.

S02 very high in the atmosphere that will will raise the albedo of Earth slightly.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A solution to the problem [...].

What problem?

Ellen

The amount of radiation radiate from each square meter of earth surface is net one percent less than what is absorbed.

Yes, CO2 does cut down on heat radiated back to space. However the amount varies over the eons. Sometimes the earth gets colder. Sometimes it get warmer. For the past 8000 - 9000 years we have been living in moderate temperatures. It so happens this is just the period in which agriculture and civilization flourished we we are used to thinking the earth has always be this way. Not so. During the ice age (about 20 - 30 thousand years before present it was much cooler). When the Siberian and Deccan traps blew 200 million ybp it was much hotter.

The difference between heat absorbed and heat re-radiated is of the order of 1 percent. This can be balanced out by increasing the albedo of the earth moderately so our nice temperate era can last for hundreds of thousand of years.

What the fellow in the video proposes is to release SO2 very high in the atmosphere so it stays up there for several years This is like closing the blinds slightly. It is cheap to do. It does not require that we give up industry. It does not require that we take An Oath of Poverty like the eco-phreaks claim. Listen to what he is proposing. I think he has a winner.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This proposal is certainly less scary than an idea floated by George Reisman a few years ago:

There is a case for considering the possible detonation, on uninhabited land north of 70° latitude, say, of a limited number of hydrogen bombs. The detonation of these bombs would operate in the same manner as described above, but the effect would be a belt of particles starting at a latitude of 70° instead of 30°. The presence of those particles would serve to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching most of the Arctic’s surface. The effect would be to maintain the frigid climate of the region and to prevent the further melting of its ice or, if necessary, to increase the amount of its ice.

http://archive.mises.org/006389/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This proposal is certainly less scary than an idea floated by George Reisman a few years ago:

There is a case for considering the possible detonation, on uninhabited land north of 70° latitude, say, of a limited number of hydrogen bombs. The detonation of these bombs would operate in the same manner as described above, but the effect would be a belt of particles starting at a latitude of 70° instead of 30°. The presence of those particles would serve to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching most of the Arctic’s surface. The effect would be to maintain the frigid climate of the region and to prevent the further melting of its ice or, if necessary, to increase the amount of its ice.

http://archive.mises.org/006389/

SO2 in the very high atmosphere above the clouds and weather would have no ill effects on the folks below. And it would do the job, namely reflect back a certain amount of sunlight to cool things off a bit. It would have to be carefully calculated because we do not want to trigger the beginning of a real ice age or even a "little ice age" the plagued the world between 1300 and 1750 a.d.

In any case this propose does no impose an economic disaster on civilization nor suppress technology.

I still think for the very long run we should switch over to using fission to heat our water to make electricity and try to find an economic means of tapping into the geothermal potential of the planet. The folks Iceland live right on the boundary of two tectonic plates and get a free shot at geothermal But they pay for it. Iceland has 30 active volcanoes and they spew about a quarter of the lava that comes out of volcanoes world wide.

Blowing up H bombs is a very bad idea. Fallout is not good for our health.

As for controlled -fusion- it is the energy source of the future and it always will be.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global warming is not a problem. I like it warm. Where I live sometimes it's colder than the nose of a Siberian Husky dog running against the wind.

The winter wind was a whistling

The heaven a howling like hell

The chill like a chisel a chiseling

The cold it made my blood jell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone else see the irony of a bunch of global warming "scientists" going to the antarctic to prove how much ice melt is happening getting trapped in frozen ice that normally is not there at this time of year?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g7_-0sh3bFWtHt0wn77S531COQbQ?docId=939c7b68-faf1-477d-9c36-7fa3db6da365

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A solution to the problem [...].

What problem?

Ellen

With university ninnies, their proposed solutions are worse than their imaginary problems.

The Sun is at record low activity while at the high point of it's cycle. There are record frigid tempratures in the upper latitudes with record drought in the lower latitudes.

This is classic impending ice age weather and yet the ninnies want to cool down the earth?

"Academia is to knowledge what prostitution is to love"

--Nassim Taleb

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the fellow in the video proposes is to release SO2 very high in the atmosphere so it stays up there for several years This is like closing the blinds slightly. It is cheap to do. It does not require that we give up industry. It does not require that we take An Oath of Poverty like the eco-phreaks claim. Listen to what he is proposing. I think he has a winner.

Ba'al Chatzaf

A winner for what? For "solving" a problem which is a figment and possibly causing a real one (as you yourself indicate below)?

[emphasis added]

SO2 in the very high atmosphere above the clouds and weather would have no ill effects on the folks below. And it would do the job, namely reflect back a certain amount of sunlight to cool things off a bit. It would have to be carefully calculated because we do not want to trigger the beginning of a real ice age or even a "little ice age" the plagued the world between 1300 and 1750 a.d.

In any case this propose does no impose an economic disaster on civilization nor suppress technology.

One of the appeals of climate alarm to the religion-of-environment types among its advocates is precisely the desire to curtail economic growth and technology. Folks who want these consequences won't look with favor on a "solution" which would avoid economic and technological curtailment.

I still think for the very long run we should switch over to using fission to heat our water to make electricity and try to find an economic means of tapping into the geothermal potential of the planet.

[....]

As for controlled -fusion- it is the energy source of the future and it always will be.

Ba'al Chatzaf

I'm fully in favor of nuclear - fission for now, and, if possible to develop it, controlled fusion for later.

However, climate alarmists of the religious (as contrasted to the venal, power-and/or-money-seeking) variety tend to be just as much anti-nuclear as they are pro-"environment" ( contra humans).

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone else see the irony of a bunch of global warming "scientists" going to the antarctic to prove how much ice melt is happening getting trapped in frozen ice that normally is not there at this time of year?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g7_-0sh3bFWtHt0wn77S531COQbQ?docId=939c7b68-faf1-477d-9c36-7fa3db6da365

The irony has not escaped the attention of contra-alarmist (a/k/a "denialist") cadres worldwide. Much hilarity has been enjoyed.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello, my fellow earthlings. I am the inventor of the internet and Nobel Prize winning genius Al Goore, and oops, I was dead wrong about made-made global warming. My eyes were opened when the computers at the NSA and The University of East Anglia were hacked into by Wikileaks. The hacking of Wikileaks was done by an extraterrestrial who then gave the information to me. His earth name is Siggi Thordarson and currently lives in Iceland (as mentioned in the January 2014 issue of “Rolling Stone.”) Now ask yourself why is this “Siggi” originally form Alpha Centauri still living in a place called Iceland?

The newest information as I mentioned was stolen from Wikileaks, who stole it from the NSA, and The Center for Thermal Change. Plus, The Climatic Research Unit controversy (also known as "Climategate") spurred me to action. In short, we are headed for another “Ice Age.”

Several weeks before the Copenhagen Conference for “Terraforming the Equator for Global needs,” I came up with the solution for the upcoming, colder temperatures in the United States which I called, “Terraforming Mexico for American needs.” So, Copenhagen stole my idea which is to empower our Progressive Government when the glaciers reach the Great Lakes, to terraform Mexico to suit Americans.

The new American territory of Mexico will be our “bread basket” when it gets too cold to grow wheat and corn north of Missouri. But you know, I kind of like that Copenhagen Summit’s idea. So we’ll take over the whole equatorial zone to grow the crops we need, and to live in the warmth we deserve. By virtue of our being superior, the elite like me are entitled to manage the world. Those pesky tropical people will be relocated to abandoned northern cities.

Signed by the man who should have been President, Al Goore

Notes From Wikipedia:

Terraforming (literally, "Earth-shaping") of a planet, moon, or other body is the theoretical process of deliberately modifying its atmosphere, temperature , surface, topography or ecology to be similar to the biosphere of Earth to make it habitable by Earth-like life. The term "terraforming" is sometimes used more generally as a synonym for planetary engineering, although some consider this more general usage an error. The concept of terraforming developed from both science fiction and actual science. The term was coined by Jack Williamson in a science-fiction story ("Collision Orbit") published during 1942 in Astounding Science Fiction, but the concept may pre-date this work . . . . Other unanswered questions relate to the ethics, logistics, economics, politics, and methodology of altering the environment of an extraterrestrial world.

end quote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one way to deal with the global warming fiasco: change the story.

Forget global warming, worry about the MAGNETOSPHERE: Earth's magnetic field is collapsing and it could affect the climate and wipe out power grids
By Ellie Zolfagharifard
27 January 2014
Mail Online

From the article:

‘This is serious business’, Richard Holme, Professor of Earth, Ocean and Ecological Sciences at Liverpool University told MailOnline. ‘Imagine for a moment your electrical power supply was knocked out for a few months – very little works without electricity these days.’

The Earth's climate would change drastically. In fact, a recent Danish study believes global warming is directly related to the magnetic field rather than CO2 emissions.

The study claimed that the planet is experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere.


First you get global warming back to respectability with something like this. After that settles, you can bring back the CO2 emissions thing. Then finally the cap and trade carbon exchange credits scam.

Don't follow the temperature. Follow the money.

:smile:

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't follow the temperature. Follow the money.

:smile:

Michael

Always follow the money.

The Domestic Domestic Relations/Family Court monolith is a 100 Billion + industry.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global warming is not a problem. I like it warm. Where I live sometimes it's colder than the nose of a Siberian Husky dog running against the wind.

The winter wind was a whistling

The heaven a howling like hell

The chill like a chisel a chiseling

The cold it made my blood jell

If all the ice melted the oceans would rise over 140 feet. Do you you want to travel the Island of Manhattan in a kayak.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one way to deal with the global warming fiasco: change the story.

Forget global warming, worry about the MAGNETOSPHERE: Earth's magnetic field is collapsing and it could affect the climate and wipe out power grids

By Ellie Zolfagharifard

27 January 2014

Mail Online

From the article:

This is serious business, Richard Holme, Professor of Earth, Ocean and Ecological Sciences at Liverpool University told MailOnline. Imagine for a moment your electrical power supply was knocked out for a few months very little works without electricity these days.

The Earth's climate would change drastically. In fact, a recent Danish study believes global warming is directly related to the magnetic field rather than CO2 emissions.

The study claimed that the planet is experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere.

The report has things well mixed up.

The Danish research refers to Svensmark's theory, which pertains to the effect of the sun's magnetic activity. Svensmark's theory has been for some years a pooh-poohed-by-alarmists competing theory to the theory that CO2 (specifically human-produced CO2) drives global warming/"climate change."

Here's a brief description from Climate Depot:

link

Svensmarks cosmic ray theory of clouds and global warming looks to be confirmed

'When there are more cosmic rays, they help create more microscopic cloud nuclei, which in turn form more clouds, which reflect more solar radiation back into space, making Earth cooler than what it normally might be. Conversely, less cosmic rays mean less cloud cover and a warmer planet as indicated here. The suns magnetic field is said to deflect cosmic rays when its solar magnetic dynamo is more active, and right around the last solar max, we were at an 8000 year high, suggesting more deflected cosmic rays, and warmer temperatures. Now the sun has gone into a record slump, and there are predictions of cooler temperatures ahead This new and important paper is published in Physics Letters'

I read the whole set of 325 comments to the Daily Mail article (the article linked to by Michael). Only about four or five of those who posted are still buying any alarmism. A very large percentage of the comments were guffaws at alarmism as a means of increasing taxes.

A few posters talked a bit about the science, with varying degrees of accuracy.

Only one of those who replied noted that the report has it backward as to Svensmark's theory and the current situation:

T Rex, Jurassic Park, United Kingdom, 3 days ago

Wait a minute.....are we in a period of less cloud cover due to less cosmic radiation entering the atmosphere, or more....? Someone's go things around the wrong way I think...

The comment's about a third of the way down on the third page of comments. I couldn't get a direct link to work.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all the ice melted the oceans would rise over 140 feet.

If all of which ice melted? And from what source do you get the 140-feet figure?

Ellen

From liberals.

That would pretty well reshape the Atlantic Coast of the U.S.

I do not think -all- of the ice is going to melt. I suspect that the ice in Antarctica will remain 90 percent intact. But things look kind of grim for the Greenland cap. In years past the Greenland cap was much smaller and grass grew in the coastal areas. The Vikings managed to have a good living in Greenland before the ice returned.

If the Green Land cap goes we can expect a 20 - 40 -foot- rise in sea level which will either finish New York off or cost a bundle to build flood gates around New York harbor. In any case Coney Island will be doomed. You will notice in the last big storm (Hurricane Sandy) a combination of the wind and the tide flooded the Battery out. That is likely to happen more and more if the Greenland ice cap degrades.

The very long term outlook IS grim. The great Ice Age is going to return. Not soon, perhaps but eventually. The earth has been more cold that hot since the end of the Siberian and Deccan Traps. It just so happened that human civilization flourished in the interglacial period and we are spoiled rotten. We are used to moderate climate. Wait until it -really- gets cold.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ba'al Chatzaf wrote, “Wait until it -really- gets cold.”

I don’t think anything will happen in a rapid fashion as occurred in the Dennis Quaid movie, “The Day After Tomorrow.” The worst thing that could “quickly happen” might be an ice sheet, or undersea, continental sea bed sliding into the ocean creating a tidal wave. But in the next hundred years . . . more cosmic rays, more sun spots?

Instead, climate cooling will necessitate creating more efficiently heated homes, more enclosed malls and parking, better sealed barns, enclosed milk and pig farms as is done with chickens. Homes will need to be better prepared to handle snow on the roof, so I envision Canadian and Minnesota roof styles moving south over time.

I remember the building to building walkways in Minneapolis about twenty stories up. Each tall building was considered a “mall.” And of course there is “The Mall of America mega-plex. I think it had six levels. On level five or six, there were waitresses standing outside Hooters inviting you in. Domes and underground cities have made it to the pages of Scifi.

There will be research to find a way to have “man-made warming” of the planet. Dropping coal dust onto Siberia was a Russian plan for man made global warming back when physical geologists predicted another “Ice Age.” Lands of ice and snow were discussed in Analog Magazine back in the 1970’s.

Buy stocks in natural gas, cement, asphalt producing facilities, and even tropical resorts for long term profit. And as ALWAYS happens when there is a large population existing in an area not able to feed it, there will be territorial disputes, and wars. Nuclear proliferation creates a terrible scenario if people huddle together in cities for warmth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ba'al Chatzaf wrote, “Wait until it -really- gets cold.”

I don’t think anything will happen in a rapid fashion as occurred in the Dennis Quaid movie, “The Day After Tomorrow.” The worst thing that could “quickly happen” might be an ice sheet, or undersea, continental sea bed sliding into the ocean creating a tidal wave. But in the next hundred years . . . more cosmic rays, more sun spots?

Instead, climate cooling will necessitate creating more efficiently heated homes, more enclosed malls and parking, better sealed barns, enclosed milk and pig farms as is done with chickens. Homes will need to be better prepared to handle snow on the roof, so I envision Canadian and Minnesota roof styles moving south over time.

I remember the building to building walkways in Minneapolis about twenty stories up. Each tall building was considered a “mall.” And of course there is “The Mall of America mega-plex. I think it had six levels. On level five or six, there were waitresses standing outside Hooters inviting you in. Domes and underground cities have made it to the pages of Scifi.

There will be research to find a way to have “man-made warming” of the planet. Dropping coal dust onto Siberia was a Russian plan for man made global warming back when physical geologists predicted another “Ice Age.” Lands of ice and snow were discussed in Analog Magazine back in the 1970’s.

Buy stocks in natural gas, cement, asphalt producing facilities, and even tropical resorts for long term profit. And as ALWAYS happens when there is a large population existing in an area not able to feed it, there will be territorial disputes, and wars. Nuclear proliferation creates a terrible scenario if people huddle together in cities for warmth.

If the Atlantic conveyor stopped the climate in Europe especially on the west coast of Europe could change within a decade or two. It is the warm gulf stream waters flowing north on the conveyor that keeps Britain reasonably warm in the winter.

Written records on the Little Ice Age indicate that the freeze of 1300 c.e. became permanent within a decade. The snows of winter would not melt and the summers were cool. Eventually the glaciers built up in the Alps and the rest is history.

No, we won't see an ice age in a month, but it could happen as quickly as a decade or two.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ba'al Chatzaf wrote:

. . . . Written records on the Little Ice Age indicate that the freeze of 1300 c.e. became permanent within a decade . . . . No, we won't see an ice age in a month, but it could happen as quickly as a decade or two.

end quote

Ba’al wrote, “1300 c.e.” Ba’al is that different from A.D.? I have heard of “BP” which is before the present.

I must admit I am already reconsidering next winter when I will be better prepared. I will have a light on in the watershed for most of the winter and I have pushed a half a roll of pink insulation around my water pump. Next Fall I will check the insulation for dampness and put more down. A decade. Gulp. Two days ago, it got to minus nine in Ocean City, Maryland, way below the old record. When I first heard that number I thought it was an error but it was not. My wife just ordered a double paned “guaranteed” replacement window which I will pick up soon. The old one started getting a small amount of condensation near the bottom between the panes. I have base board, electric heat and I got my electric bill today for last month which was $440! That is a huge amount. I wonder if solar panels will soon become cost affective? I may re-insulate my attic.

Anybody have any ideas? What are New Jersey-ites and those living further north going to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ba'al Chatzaf wrote:

. . . . Written records on the Little Ice Age indicate that the freeze of 1300 c.e. became permanent within a decade . . . . No, we won't see an ice age in a month, but it could happen as quickly as a decade or two.

end quote

Ba’al wrote, “1300 c.e.” Ba’al is that different from A.D.? I have heard of “BP” which is before the present.

I must admit I am already reconsidering next winter when I will be better prepared. I will have a light on in the watershed for most of the winter and I have pushed a half a roll of pink insulation around my water pump. Next Fall I will check the insulation for dampness and put more down. A decade. Gulp. Two days ago, it got to minus nine in Ocean City, Maryland, way below the old record. When I first heard that number I thought it was an error but it was not. My wife just ordered a double paned “guaranteed” replacement window which I will pick up soon. The old one started getting a small amount of condensation near the bottom between the panes. I have base board, electric heat and I got my electric bill today for last month which was $440! That is a huge amount. I wonder if solar panels will soon become cost affective? I may re-insulate my attic.

Anybody have any ideas? What are New Jersey-ites and those living further north going to do?

1300 c.e. is 714 years bp.

c.e. means common era which translates to AD. For people who do not have a Lord, c.e. is the better indicator. b.c.e. is before the common era which translates to BC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now