As I stated, the GHG effect of CO2 is debatable, however to the extent it does exist it is still far, far more significant than the heat released by our fossil/nuclear energy supply.
And as I also stated, you will get an urban heat island effect from fossil burning, but that is a trivial portion of the Earth's surface area. Average solar …
As I stated, the GHG effect of CO2 is debatable, however to the extent it does exist it is still far, far more significant than the heat released by our fossil/nuclear energy supply.
And as I also stated, you will get an urban heat island effect from fossil burning, but that is a trivial portion of the Earth's surface area. Average solar power absorbed by the Earth's surface & atmosphere is 120 petawatts. Average human power consumption is 18 terawatts. Or 6700X less than solar.
As I stated, the GHG effect of CO2 is debatable, however to the extent it does exist it is still far, far more significant than the heat released by our fossil/nuclear energy supply.
And as I also stated, you will get an urban heat island effect from fossil burning, but that is a trivial portion of the Earth's surface area. Average solar power absorbed by the Earth's surface & atmosphere is 120 petawatts. Average human power consumption is 18 terawatts. Or 6700X less than solar.
If you guys would like to discuss carbon dioxide and climate, that’s fine, but I’d ask that you do at this thread https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-carbon-dioxide-emissions-change
And leave this one for landification
Thanks!