Global Warming Fact Finder

     I’m not sure what to think of this one. It sounds a little wacko – but on the other hand – what if it works? I just hope the government doesn’t think it’s a good idea and want to spend our money on it.

     According to one scientist from Maryland, we could conceivably regulate the temperature of the earth by spraying water into the air. Ron Ace says, “Spray giga tons of seawater into the air, mainly in the Northern Hemisphere, and let Mother Nature do the rest.” He goes on, “The evaporating water would cool the Earth in multiple ways: First, the sprayed droplets would transform into water vapor, a change that absorbs thermal energy near ground level; then the rising vapor would condense into sunlight-reflecting clouds and cooling rain, releasing much of the stored energy into space in the form of infrared radiation.”

     My question is who is going to pay for this? He says we need to spray “giga tons” of water into the atmosphere. The infrastructure to accomplish this would have to be enormous.

     Further, as we have noted before, water vapor contributes to global warming. In our article ”Rising Temperature Causes CO2 to Rise” we pointed out that water vapor composes the largest component of Greenhouse Gases at 96.9% of all of the Greenhouse gases. Other gases are miniscule by comparison.

     Water vapor in the atmosphere is the dominant green house gas effecting temperature on earth. This is most evident when you compare the night to day temperature changes in arid climates to humid climates. The night to day change of temperature in the dry, arid desert can vary as much as 40-50 degrees from night to day. However, the temperatures in humid locations will only vary 15-20 degrees from night to day. It can be further evidenced when you compare the drop in overnight temperature in an average climate area when it is cloudy versus when it is clear. Temperatures will drop to only 65 degrees when it is cloudy but will drop to 40 or 50 degrees when it is clear. Water vapor retains heat.

     At any one time water vapor accounts for 36 to 70 percent of the total greenhouse gas effects. If clouds are included, it jumps to 66 to 86 percent. Carbon Dioxide comes in a distant third for only 9 to 17 percent of the total greenhouse effect. And remember, man’s activities account for less than 3% of all of the carbon dioxide produced, so at the most, man is responsible for less than 1 percent of all of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

     Therefore, I question whether pumping huge amounts of water vapor into the atmosphere is going to help or hinder the supposed Global Warming theory? What if it actually contributes to the warming of the planet? I do recognize that clouds to reflect the sun’s rays away from the earth. But they also trap heat close to the ground. So what would the effect be? Who knows? I just know I don’t want to pay for it through more taxes.

If you wish to read more on this click here. Also, don’t forget to check out the website at Global Warming Fact Finder.com

T. Boone Pickens Abandons His Plan for the Largest Wind Farm

     You may remember the commercials during the 2008 Presidential Campaign that featured Mr. T. Boone Pickens touting his plan to wean us off our dependency of foreign oil. His plan included developing natural gas resources and building more wind mill farms to generate electrical energy in lieu of more coal burning generation plants. One of the largest parts of his plan included building the worlds’ largest wind farms in the heart of Texas capable of generating as much as 1,000 megawatts of electricity. That is comparable to one nuclear energy generating plant.

     Well right from the beginning, there were snags. Financing was not as easy to come by as originally thought. With the current price on natural gas and electricity plunging, the numbers don’t seem to work as well. Plus, as it turns out, you need transmission lines near the wind mills to connect the electricity to the grid, and neither Pickens nor the State has been willing to step up and build those transmission lines. Transmission lines are expensive. According to Pickens, “It was a little more complicated than we thought.”

     While wind driven generators look like a logical alternative to fossil fuels, there are significant costs and tradeoffs that must be considered. For one thing, wind generators don’t necessarily blend into the landscape. They are actually a visual blight that detracts from the view of the land upon which they sit. How willing are people to have wind farms interrupting their view of the Sierras, Rockies, Great Plains or desserts (oh wait, we already have the latter). There was a time when power poles and lines were considered visual pollution. Where are environmentalists’ cries about the visual pollution? They are very vocal about the view of drilling platforms in the ocean, where they don’t even live.

     Wind farms require a great deal more land to produce the same amount of energy as a conventional generation plant. They pose a deadly risk to birds and bats in the area. The spinning blades can and do knock them out of the air.

     And when it comes to making money from the electricity generated, power companies don’t just automatically write you a check for the power you dump into the system. Prior agreement is required, and if the power is not needed they don’t pay for it. They have their own generation sources that they need to pay for first.

     T. Boone Pickens, an oil made multi-billionaire, is recommending that we wean ourselves off of the use of foreign oil - a lofty ideal for sure. But do not think for a minute that if he didn’t think he could make some serious money off of the alternatives, he would still be singing that song. But at least for now, faced with the realization of the costs involved in building wind farms, he is backing off that idea. His original idea to build the world’s largest wind farm, starting with a 1000 megawatt wind farm and expanding that to 4000 megawatts is being scaled way back. He is instead going to build 4 or 5 smaller projects.

     But you have to give him credit. At least he is doing something. Whereas, your normal environmentalist, global warming alarmist offers little more than lip service to their perceived problem – not that Pickens is necessarily one of these. Most environmental alarmists have never had to work at a serious job that requires their effort to produce a marketable product at any time in their lives. They have no idea of the lives they affect or livelihoods they destroy. Pickens though, has worked all of his life, and knows what it takes to do something productive. In spite of the problems before him, he will most likely find a way to succeed at his plan. We can only hope we will all be a little better off for his efforts.