Your Questions About Political Impact Of Solar Energy

Sandy asks…

So many times responses to question regarding a link between “Global Warming” and Solar Activity is dismissed as nonsense, that there is no link between the two.

NASA has recognized that this link exists and gives the Sun credit for causing at least 50% of all warming this century.

Do deniers of Solar Global Warming (SGW) deny the existence of the Sun providing warmth as a means to push their own political agenda of placing the blame on man? After all, if it was known that it’s the Sun, not man who is causing “Global Warming”, then carbon taxes wouldn’t be needed, and other taxes and additional laws wouldn’t be needed either.

Do some suffer from the hubris of thinking they know better than NASA scientists? Can some people be so deluded?

Many Solar Physicists believe the Sun is going to start entering into a cooling phase when it ends the current warmer phase this decade.

Wouldn’t it just be better if we just took our time and didn’t rush “Global Warming” decisions, as they might not be needed once the Sun starts to return to normal?

“The Sun and Global Warming
Of the many trends that appear to cause fluctuations in the Sun’s energy, those that last decades to centuries are the most likely to have a measurable impact on the Earth’s climate in the foreseeable future. Many researchers believe the steady rise in sunspots and faculae since the late seventeenth century may be responsible for as much as half of the 0.6 degrees of global warming over the last 110 years (IPCC, 2001). Since pre-industrial times, it’s thought that the Sun has given rise to a global heating similar to that caused by the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If the past is any indication of things to come, solar cycles may play a role in future global warming.”

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/SORCE/sorce_04.php

Robert asks…

The question requires simply “agree” or “disagree” for an answer. I apologize, but I have a stalker (how flattering) and I must chose my words carefully when asking or answering, lest the censor strikes…

I have no political view outside centrist and it then is a non-issue, and I do not speak to any issue were morality may come into question

I also apologize also for length of this question, but it’s essential.

In the middle of the last century I was born into a country called the USA. It was 16 years after my birth that we made it to the moon. It was a time predating personal computers, or decent calculators for that matter, disposable bottles, CFCs, AIDS, and all kinds of other diversions. But, it was history forgotten, now jumping up and demanding its due from all of us.

AUTOMATION! That was the order of the day. I was fascinated. “Automat! Put in a quarter and get a piece of pie? Sign me up!” Assembly lines, robotic welders and painting machines, unmanned vehicles, etc., all promising more “leisure time.” Building the machines, ever better to provide even more “leisure time” kept the factories going and the people manning them employed. And “leisure time” has been delivered as promised. But, even as more daily tasks are being relegated to the automatons, more precise work, the work that was the realm of the artisans, the promised “leisure time” was a bit longer in its full coming, but it is finally here.

The catch is, “leisure time” turned out to be a euphemism for “unemployment.” Who’da thunk it?

Global warming?

Not a surprise. Not new either. Right on schedule, actually… We “hippies” pointed out the shortcomings of denuding thousands of acres of rain forest on a daily basis as far back as the mid sixties. We said, “You know, vegetation breathes in CO2 and exhales O2. We‘re chopping down the earths (and by extension our) filtration system.” Damn the CO2! Full speed ahead! Chop it and sell it as quick as possible.

The oil crisis? Turned out we didn’t learn from that either. Not the one a couple summers ago, but the one in 1973. OPEC tightened up on the choker to remind us who holds the power of the oil. The difference?

Well, the older one drove us into action. Implementation of a 55 mph national speed limit (how come most times when I see a bumper sticker reading “No Blood For Oil” it’s on a on an overpriced bumper doing 80 mph and up?), which saw a corresponding decrease in highway fatalities, year round daylight savings time and whatever else we needed to do. Songs were written. (“There’s only so much oil in the ground” Tower of Power).

“Energy alternatives NOW!”

But that was then.

And point having been made, OPEC turned the spigot back on and we again started sucking up the crude as fast as we could, like greedy suckling pigs. Pedal to the metal and Hallelujah! Crisis over, right? Yeah. That worked out real well, hunh? Gee, golly and gosh, 30 years later, we’re back in the same soup. But the soup is thicker this time around, with contributions from Exxon, BP, and the two other pipelines ruptured in the last few days, threatening lake Michigan and other low wetlands in the already impacted Gulf.

This soup is a very expensive appetizer and the menu is likely to grow longer.

But still the black gold flows. Thanks to BP for the “top kill” (applies to well head, as well as marine life). The final solution?

The side kill. The new relief well drilling, which puts the wheels back in action for the next boo-boo.

So. In the USA, outside a few wind turbines and limited use of solar power, we haven’t done a damned thing since the mid sixties to better our power grid or transport us. The party is over and its time we pay up, but don’t try to tell me this is a problem that cropped up six or eight years ago.

Would you agree or disagree?