Re: [Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate

[Jed Rothwell]

I have read that waste heat causes urban heat islands in major cities, but
otherwise it is not a threat. It does not contribute to global warming.
Most heat at the earth's surface escapes into space in about a half hour.
In the desert, after the sun goes down, the surroundings are cool after
about a half hour, and pretty cold late at night.

If worldwide energy use increases a great deal, waste heat might become a
problem. One solution would be to install gigantic orbiting thin film
parasols to reduce the sunlight that reaches earth. This has been proposed
to combat global warming. Another solution is paint the roofs of all
building white, or to use white or light-colored building material, instead
of black.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate

[H LV]

Bob,

That would be equivalent to cooling the Earth by increasing the
reflectivity of the Earth.

The advantage of "renewable" energy sources is that they don't add
more energy to the environment so a global excess heat problem could
not arise from their expanded use.

The quest for "the holy grail of energy" is a quest for an energy
source that is completely independent of the Sun. However, it is
possible to achieve energy security without living independently of
the Sun.  Therefore the belief that some sort of ultimate energy
source exists is emblematic of the dream to leave the Earth and to
travel to the Stars. It is not emblematic of the pressing need to
build a better life on Earth. It is important to have dreams but the
pursuit of a dream should not serve as a substitute for the
satisfaction of a pressing need.

Harry


On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Harry--
>
> If the use of non-polluting energy becomes too great and causes additional
> warming and ocean rises, then energy production may need to be controlled on
> a global basis.  Maybe a device to harvest infra-red EM and shoot it to
> space to avoid warming the atmosphere is the next earth saving invention.  I
> think such a device may already exist in the form of a gamma ray laser.
>
> Think about the mechanism for sending gamma ray bursts across the universe.
>
> Bob Cook
>
> -Original Message- From: H LV
> Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 4:10 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: [Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate
>
> In defence of AGW, this link argues that heat fluctuations from within
> the Earth are far too small to contribute to global warming.
>
> http://www.skepticalscience.com/heatflow.html
>
> The interesting thing is that according to fig. 4 energy produced by
> fossil and nuclear sources is already 1/3 of the energy flow from
> within the Earth. If LENR can really replace all other energy sources
> and if the demand for energy grows a hundred times then the "holy
> grail of energy" could bring about a global heat pollution problem.
>
> Harry
>

Re: [Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate

[Bob Cook]

Harry--

If the use of non-polluting energy becomes too great and causes additional 
warming and ocean rises, then energy production may need to be controlled on 
a global basis.  Maybe a device to harvest infra-red EM and shoot it to 
space to avoid warming the atmosphere is the next earth saving invention.  I 
think such a device may already exist in the form of a gamma ray laser.


Think about the mechanism for sending gamma ray bursts across the universe.

Bob Cook

-Original Message- 
From: H LV

Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 4:10 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate

In defence of AGW, this link argues that heat fluctuations from within
the Earth are far too small to contribute to global warming.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/heatflow.html

The interesting thing is that according to fig. 4 energy produced by
fossil and nuclear sources is already 1/3 of the energy flow from
within the Earth. If LENR can really replace all other energy sources
and if the demand for energy grows a hundred times then the "holy
grail of energy" could bring about a global heat pollution problem.

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate

[Che]

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 7:10 PM, H LV  wrote:

> In defence of AGW, this link argues that heat fluctuations from within
> the Earth are far too small to contribute to global warming.
>
> http://www.skepticalscience.com/heatflow.html
>
> The interesting thing is that according to fig. 4 energy produced by
> fossil and nuclear sources is already 1/3 of the energy flow from
> within the Earth. If LENR can really replace all other energy sources
> and if the demand for energy grows a hundred times then the "holy
> grail of energy" could bring about a global heat pollution problem.
>
> Harry
>
>
In an advanced and rational Human society, any 'waste heat' issues
threatening the Planet WILL be systematically addressed.

Thank you for raising the alarm.

[Vo]:Comparison of energy inputs to Earth climate

[H LV]

In defence of AGW, this link argues that heat fluctuations from within
the Earth are far too small to contribute to global warming.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/heatflow.html

The interesting thing is that according to fig. 4 energy produced by
fossil and nuclear sources is already 1/3 of the energy flow from
within the Earth. If LENR can really replace all other energy sources
and if the demand for energy grows a hundred times then the "holy
grail of energy" could bring about a global heat pollution problem.

Harry