On 8/5/2012 11:21 AM, David Roberson wrote:
It seems apparent that the final global consideration is that extra heat
is released into the atmosphere, land, and water of the earth as a
result of us burning fossil fuels.
In other terms, one kilogram of coal results in the net earth heating of
X times the initial heat outlay.
I found part of the picture in Wikipedia: The ratio of all the energy
incident from the Sun, to all the energy mankind used globally (in
2009?) was roughly 6,000 to 1. (I assume this was only the energy that
involved payment, ie, almost all fossil sourced energy).
Unknown to me is the added heat energy from "new" CO2 and methane. If
our present rate of warming is caused by (/really /wild guess) 1% more
retention of solar energy than "before", then that 1% is 60 times more
than our total energy consumption, for x = 60. If you diddle in the all
the renewable and nuclear parts it won't be much different.
Hey, a wild guess is better than none.
So if, if, if, all co2 sources get replaced by LENR, no problem. But
bloody unlikely. Also, there WILL BE a huge increase in total energy
usage, exponential, year after year after year. Might take us all of 200
years to get back in trouble.
Ol' Bab.
I would greatly appreciate it if some of our esteemed members join into
this discussion. Do you consider my thought experiment completely off
base or is there a way to get a handle upon the true X factor I am
suggesting?
Dave
