Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems like a good idea for Phoenix or anywhere down south that has mild winters. In northern climates, white paint on roofs and concrete would have a negative effect in the winter heating season, it would slow down snow and ice melt and make it colder. Natural gas & heating oil consumption would go up considerably, outpacing what we could save in the short summer season.
We need everything covered with tiles that can be flipped over twice a year, white on one side for summer, black on the other side for winter.
Painting enough land to supposedly affect the alleged global warming? Ludicrous. But it still gives numbers to show the impact. I've always looked at the nearly black shingles on houses in Georgia and wondered why??? I look at our freshly-paved black asphalt roads and they're pretty, but why not the lighter concrete?
When we redid the roof a few years back, we went with lighter colored shingles for a modest energy conservation boost. We like nice cold AC in Florida summers; not liking a bigger electric bill so much.
AGCC is nonsense. So are "rising averages"- a scam if ever. (Which average are they using? Mean, median, or mode?)
- - - TEMPERATURE DATA - - -
● Earth max : (134.33°F)
● Space station max : (250°F)
● Lunar surface max : (242.33°F)
Earth Albedo : 0.3
Moon Albedo : 0.11
The sun’s energy above the atmosphere is approximately 1,300 W per square meter, whereas at sea level, it’s only 1,000 W per square meter. So the EVIDENCE shows that our atmosphere is not 'trapping heat' but cooling us by at least 116°F.
WHY BE SKEPTICAL?
The proponents of AGCC / AGW are con men or useful idiots.
If "the money" really believed that oceans would rise, they'd be selling off oceanfront property or surrounding it with polders, levees and dikes. Mountain retreats would be selling like hotcakes. Governments would be shifting subsidy from the automobile / petroleum / highway hegemony, to electric traction rail - the most efficient form of land transport (90% fuel savings). All housing would be built with superinsulation, thus minimizing the consumption of resources to maintain comfort. And to minimize the cost from natural disasters, construct disaster resistant resilient structures and homes, as a rule, not an exception.
But.They're.Not.
They're trying to tax air and sequester carbon - a joke if ever.
So is nuclear power. And unlike these harebrained schemes, it actually works and has a proven track record.
But ask the Good Professor how he/she feels about nuclear power and you'll get an endless rant about it. Environazi academics and professional useless people in bureaucracies are not interested in realistic, workable solutions. They're only interested in perpetuating the manufactured problem du jour for money, power and control.
So is nuclear power. And unlike these harebrained schemes, it actually works and has a proven track record.
But ask the Good Professor how he/she feels about nuclear power and you'll get an endless rant about it. Environazi academics and professional useless people in bureaucracies are not interested in realistic, workable solutions. They're only interested in perpetuating the manufactured problem du jour for money, power and control.
I am all for nuclear power.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.