SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Noel de Leon who wrote (182307)2/22/2006 12:34:52 PM
From: neolib  Respond to of 281500
 
You have to answer the following:
Is the earth gaining, losing, or neutral with respect to total energy?


On the surface, we lose energy. That is a very simple deduction from heat transfer and realising the core is hotter than the surface. So despite the Sun's hard work, we net lose energy to space. Some of the cores energy is no doubt attributable to tidal heating from the Sun, so...

The total energy contribution from fossil fuel consumption is not significant as far as the planet goes. It amounts to about 1 hour of solar energy input per year. What is much more of a factor is what the atmosphere, land surface, and ocean surface do in capturing or reflecting solar energy. So the effect of burning all those fossil fuels is more important as a secondary effect than a primary effect.



To: Noel de Leon who wrote (182307)2/22/2006 12:54:33 PM
From: michael97123  Respond to of 281500
 
"By that time we'll be back in the stone age so it won't matter too much."

Or by that time human beings will have long ago fixed the problem. However it is disturbing to think of you in the Stone Age, Leon, but it would be kind of fitting. (gg)



To: Noel de Leon who wrote (182307)2/28/2006 4:50:44 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
D.C. Denmark Rally Photos

outsidethebeltway.com