jesereL
Rookie
That was something interesting.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That was something interesting.
Bender, old ass, you ain't posted a thing that shows that you are capable of discussing anything with reasonable intelligiance. Why re-invent the wheel? Post what people that have spent a life time studying the subjects involved here.
But then, that is the problem, isn't it. Those people all disagree with your version of "the way things oughter be". If I want real information and evidence, I surely will not ask someone that has already proven themselves to be a dumb ass.
I dont think konradv understands that air gets lighter with more water vapour either. he just refuses to believe that H2O drives the vast majority of heat transport away from the surface towards space.
You know what's going to be REALLY intersting? When these developing industrial nations have had enough filth and pollution and start instituting their own clean air/clean water acts. Thanks to prosperity which they got from the improved industrial based, they will be able to afford it too.I hate to link, especially when common sense should mean one understands the worlds largest solar farm makes the worlds largest pile of shit somewhere in the world.
I guess these people can thank Old Crock and Chris, they can thank me after the government takes my money to clean the mess and compensate the people, they have a case in world court.
Solar Energy Firms Leave Waste Behind in China - washingtonpost.com
In China, a country buckling with the breakneck pace of its industrial growth, such stories of environmental pollution are not uncommon. But the Luoyang Zhonggui High-Technology Co., here in the central plains of Henan Province near the Yellow River, stands out for one reason: It's a green energy company, producing polysilicon destined for solar energy panels sold around the world. But the byproduct of polysilicon production -- silicon tetrachloride -- is a highly toxic substance that poses environmental hazards.
"The land where you dump or bury it will be infertile. No grass or trees will grow in the place. . . . It is like dynamite -- it is poisonous, it is polluting. Human beings can never touch it," said Ren Bingyan, a professor at the School of Material Sciences at Hebei Industrial University.
The situation in Li's village points to the environmental trade-offs the world is making as it races to head off a dwindling supply of fossil fuels.
Forests are being cleared to grow biofuels like palm oil, but scientists argue that the disappearance of such huge swaths of forests is contributing to climate change. Hydropower dams are being constructed to replace coal-fired power plants, but they are submerging whole ecosystems under water.
Likewise in China, the push to get into the solar energy market is having unexpected consequences.
With the prices of oil and coal soaring, policymakers around the world are looking at massive solar farms to heat water and generate electricity. For the past four years, however, the world has been suffering from a shortage of polysilicon -- the key component of sunlight-capturing wafers -- driving up prices of solar energy technology and creating a barrier to its adoption.
I dont think konradv understands that air gets lighter with more water vapour either. he just refuses to believe that H2O drives the vast majority of heat transport away from the surface towards space.
Your analysis only works if water drove off ALL extra heat. Since you have said it doesn't, what happens when CO2 continues to build up? Wouldn't that "not quite all" part continue to build up, too? If you want to help us out in this thread, explain to Wirebender about energy absorption due to quatum changes in the electron cloud. He seems to think it's all about physical phase change!
Your analysis only works if water drove off ALL extra heat. Since you have said it doesn't, what happens when CO2 continues to build up?
"The emission spectrum is evidence that all energy absorbed by CO2 is immediately released." True Statement, however the energy is released in all direction some of which returns to the earth, adding energy that would have escape to space. As you add CO2 to the system more of the energy is absorbed and released. This extra energy is what adds to the warming of the earth.
QED
This is not free energy it is the retention of some of the energy emitted by the sun.
To use your analogy the heater 1000watts per meter2 is in the middle of my uninsulated house, net increase to the warmth of my house minimal, but add insulation to my house presto an increase in the warmth of my house.
No free energy just better utilization of available energy.
This is not free energy it is the retention of some of the energy emitted by the sun.
To use your analogy the heater 1000watts per meter2 is in the middle of my uninsulated house, net increase to the warmth of my house minimal, but add insulation to my house presto an increase in the warmth of my house.
No free energy just better utilization of available energy.
parkinson1963 said:This extra energy is what adds to the warming of the earth.
wrong.
There is not more energy in the system just more retention of the energy.
The sun warms the earth.
The warm earth emits infrared radiation (heat) cooling the earth.
Some of that emitted IR is absorbed by CO2 and re-emitted in all directions some which hit the earth, adding heat back into the system.
While not a perfect analogy the CO2 in the atmosphere acts like insulation slowing down the leakage of heat into space. So more CO2 more insulation more heat retained by the earth.
I dont think konradv understands that air gets lighter with more water vapour either. he just refuses to believe that H2O drives the vast majority of heat transport away from the surface towards space.
Your analysis only works if water drove off ALL extra heat. Since you have said it doesn't, what happens when CO2 continues to build up? Wouldn't that "not quite all" part continue to build up, too? If you want to help us out in this thread, explain to Wirebender about energy absorption due to quatum changes in the electron cloud. He seems to think it's all about physical phase change!
THE HOT WATER BOTTLE EFFECT by Stephen Wilde | Climate Realists1. Greenhouses and the planetary greenhouse effect
I think we have all heard enough about this subject but Ive got to deal with it first before I go on to explain how misleading I believe the concept to have been ever since it was first used in connection with planetary climates.
Its quite clear that overall planetary temperatures are a fine balance between solar energy coming in and that same energy being radiated away into space. Planets with atmospheres stabilise their surface temperatures at a level dependent upon the density of the atmosphere leaving the main variation in planetary temperature dependent on variations in the energy coming in from the local star. I have seen a suggestion that it is density of an atmosphere that matters, not composition, so CO2 may be an irrelevance unless it affects overall density but being such a small proportion of our atmosphere it could not do so. The density proposition certainly fits the observed surface temperature differences between Venus, Earth and Mars.
The question currently concerning us all is whether additional CO2 being added by man to the Earths atmosphere is sufficient to destabilise the system and introduce a dangerous level of extra warming.
Ive made comments on the issues of scale and causation in relation to Earths CO2 levels in previous articles but in this article I will consider entirely different and somewhat novel issues.
A planets atmosphere is entirely different from a greenhouse. The latter accumulates heat inside by physically preventing escape of hot air thereby concentrating it in a confined space. The atmosphere is nothing like that because there is nothing to prevent hot air rising via convection from the ground to a substantial height.
The role of convection and the subsequent condensation out of water vapour into clouds and then rainfall is currently incapable of quantification as a means of slowing or offsetting any atmospheric greenhouse effect but it certainly does those things.
In general, the warmer the Earths atmosphere gets at the lower levels the more vigorous and widespread convection will become because the temperature differential between the surface and space increases thereby invigorating the global convective process. This is why it is often said that a warmer Earth may have more violent storms. However, that is a two edged scenario. If convection increases in an attempt to regain the previous equilibrium then it will stabilise the temperature increase and reduce it back to what it was before. Convection is therefore a negative feedback process that could well be capable of preventing dangerous warming from proportionately miniscule extra anthropogenic CO2.
Extra convection would occur immediately in response to extra warmth (you can see from your local weather how quickly it starts every day as a result of changing solar power as each day progresses) and if the speed of response is quick enough and global it could well prevent any significant warming at all from any warming influences other than the main solar/oceanic driver.
The extra convection would not necessarily result in significantly more damaging storms because it would be spread across the globe and the increase in temperature between the surface and space would not need to become large before the process begins to take effect. We might even not be able to notice or measure it.