More on global warming, etc

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

Since several respondents have said that I don't know what I am talking about 

(an interesting statement in a RADSAFE discussion), perhaps these 

knowledgable people can answer the following questions:


On the Kyoto accords:

From the world Almanac 2000:  China uses 36.64 quadrillion BTU per year and 

Japan uses 21.38.  If CO2 emission is proportional to total (not per capita) 

energy use, Japan produces 58% as much CO2 as China.  If the concern is about 

TOTAL CO2 production and not PER CAPITA CO2 production, why is Japan (by the 

Kyoto accords) a "developed nation" and China (a country that produces 

MIG-type fighter planes and high-quality commercial electronics) an 

"underdeveloped nation"?

Again the World Almanac: North America apparently emits 27.7% of the world's 

CO2 and the Far East and Oceania, 30.3%, yet the only Far Eastern nation 

considered "developed" and required to reduce CO2 is Japan.  How is this 

going to reduce "global CO2"?


On global warming and CO2:  (and since there is roughly 10 times as much CO2 

in the atmosphere as  methane, ignorant as I am, I'll just use CO2)

CO2 absorbs heat by vibrational and rotational absorption in the infra-red 

(from any spectroscopy or physical chemistry text like Glasstone or Moore).  

CO2 in the air behaves like an ideal gas and moves freely in space and 

radiates (and absorbs) isotropically.  Is the "global warming" effect 

preferential re-radiation back to the earth's surface, and if so, why?  Or is 

there more CO2 lower in the atmosphere because its mass is about 1 1/2 that 

of the average mass of air?  Since we can measure CO2 concentration in the 

atmosphere, know the approximate specific heat of air, and know the IR 

absorption frequencies of CO2, has someone calculated the heat absorption and 

radiation by atmospheric CO2?  Can you direct me to a reference?


On heat:

OK the waste heat produced is about 4-5 orders of magnitude less than the 

heat re-radiated into space (about 2% of the solar heat), so in theory the 

waste heat would be negligible for global climate change.  Yet waste heat is 

very instrumental in local climate change (e.g., "heat island" cities).  What 

impact does local climate temperature increase, as for example in South 

Florida, have on "mean global temperature"?  What is "mean global 

temperature" and how is it measured?


On cutting back CO2:

Since global climate change is a slow process, that may not even be totally 

anthropogenic, what are these predicted disasters?  At the rate of global 

climate change, isn't it possible to prepare for them?  How do the predicted 

resulting "disasters" compare with, for example, World War I? or with the 

global climate change wrought by practicing settled agriculture, which has 

been considerable?  Why are only "disasters" predicted?

A week has 168 hours in it.  Nukes, hydro, wind and solar provide 8.5% of U. 

S. TOTAL energy use, so decreasing fossil fuel energy use here by 5% means 

7.7 hours per week, spread over  the range of energy use hours, with no 

energy use at all, and no increase in energy use during the other 160.3 hours 

to "prepare".  Given the fact that a number of emergency operations will need 

to keep going, this is probably around 8.5 hours for every other use.  Given 

the screaming in California about a few "rolling blackout" hours per week, 

can you knowledgeable people tell me how this cutback can be accomplished 

without either massive socio-economic disruption or a decade or more of 

planning and preparation (and even then...)?  Can you tell me what the 

tradeoff is between this and the future "disasters" everyone is predicting?


And about those horrible toxic emissions from coal plants, I will refer 

readers to the Journal of Air and Waste Management, any text on air pollution 

(e,g. Stern, et al or Wark and Warner), EPA regulations on air pollution 

control, the EPA Background Information Document on emissions from industrial 

boilers (I wrote the chapter on radioactive emissions).  In other words, just 

like some of you tell me, go read the literature.


"Future generations will have to go out and find their own natural resources. 

After all, we found ours." -- Art Buchwald


Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com