I wrote:
The difference between a hypothesis and a theory is a matter of opinion,
but I think most people in the climatology business would agree with that
global warming is a highly likely hypothesis.
I meant to say ". . . if not a robust theory."
Recent actual changes in the weather are not a bit hypothetical. I do not
think many serious climatologists doubts that hurricanes have become
stronger, ocean temperatures are rising, and icepacks are melting. The
cause is disputed, and the likely future course of events is questioned. It
is easier to see present trends than to explain them.
Elsewhere, I wrote:
"With existing technology, North Sea wind turbines could produce four times
more energy than all of northern Europe consumes. This is not debatable; it
is an engineering matter of fact."
I am not suggesting we should do this! That would be crazy. Europeans would
pay far more for electricity. A large fraction of the world's GDP would
have to be diverted to this project, so more people elsewhere might starve.
It would be more sensible to produce ~20% of electricity from wind, which
is the present EU goal. In ideal locations such as Denmark and Ireland, 50%
might be a reasonable goal, if load balancing can be ensured. See:
http://www.iwea.com/offshore/index.html#resource
- Jed
