Politics of Energy Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: RetiredNow who wrote (10055)	6/27/2009 2:06:37 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) of 86355

So what we need to worry about are the runaway GHGs like CO2, not the self-correcting ones like water vapor. I hardly see where water vapor is "self-correcting" if temperatures continue to rise (from whatever cause). Whatever precipitates from the skies will only be re-vaporized. It's also clear from the paleoclimatic record that current desert areas like the Sahara used to be lush savannah 10,000 years ago. Which suggests that the planet was warmer and there was more rainfall at that time. Again, the question is this.. How far are we willing to go to engage in geo-engineering to preserve the current climatic state, even if it means attempting to thwart all the forces of nature? The past 9 years of relatively even global temperatures might only be a respite from warmer (or colder) climates to come in future years. Right NOW, however, I think we're at an inflection point and we're not sure which way the climate is going to go. Thus, we need to collect more data and attempt to fully understand the natural mechanisms at work that shape that climate change. But there's nothing wrong with having a RATIONAL AND REALISTIC PLAN in mind to deal with dramatic climate change in either direction. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next