Elastek can offset 2 yrs of Carbon Dioxide Emissions, According to Study

[JBeukema]

Whitening the world's roofs would offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years, according to a new study from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Overall, installing lighter-colored roofs and pavement can cancel the heat effect of two years of global carbon dioxide emissions, Berkeley Lab says. It's the first roof-cooling study to use a global model to examine the issue.
The study used a global land surface model from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, which contained regional information on surface variables like topography, evaporation, radiation and temperature, as well as on cloud cover, Berkeley Lab says.

Whitening Cities' Roofs Is Environmental Equivalent of Taking 300 Million Cars Off the Road, DoE Study Says | Popular Science

 

[konradv]

Whitening the world's roofs would offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years, according to a new study from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Overall, installing lighter-colored roofs and pavement can cancel the heat effect of two years of global carbon dioxide emissions, Berkeley Lab says. It's the first roof-cooling study to use a global model to examine the issue.
The study used a global land surface model from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, which contained regional information on surface variables like topography, evaporation, radiation and temperature, as well as on cloud cover, Berkeley Lab says.

Whitening Cities' Roofs Is Environmental Equivalent of Taking 300 Million Cars Off the Road, DoE Study Says | Popular Science

It's a start. Replace all that melted ice with white roofs and you should be doing something to reverse the trend.

 

[westwall]

Yeah there's the ticket lets mandate that everyone has to spend bazillions of dollars changing everything for an unnecessary goal. CO2 is not the enemy folks. The only real enemy is your garden variety pollution. Instead of burying trash in landfills burn it to produce energy. Saves the planet and gives one of the cleaner forms of energy. And it doesn't cost everyone a bloody fortune to accomplish not a thing.

 

[JBeukema]

'bazillions of dollars'?

 

[westwall]

'bazillions of dollars'?

Calculate how many black roofs are in the U.S. alone. Then calculate how much it will cost to resurface with the white material. Voila, bazillions of dollars.

As is being reported more and more, CO2 is not an enemy. The weather cycles we are experiencing are natural and relatively predictable. El Nino's bring warm weather for a number of years then give way to la Nina's which has a cooling effect for a number of years.

This has been going on since long before man walked the planet. If a person wants to roof their home in a white material to reduce their energy bill that is up to them. The problem is when you couch terms like "Whitening the world's roofs would offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years" eventually some individual (usually those invested in that particular technology) will want to see it mandated so that they can make a lot of money from their investment. And as is being proven over and over again carbon emissions are irelevant to the climate of the world.

 

[JBeukema]

'bazillions of dollars'?

Calculate how many black roofs are in the U.S. alone. Then calculate how much it will cost to resurface with the white material. Voila, bazillions of dollars.

1) You don't need to bother coating every building everywhere, especially in the North

2) The Fed need do nothing more than offer a tax deduction for businesses that use this material

3) Homeowners and many businesses in the Southwest do this already; it helps reduce cooling bills in addition to sealing the roof. Pays for itself.

As is being reported more and more, CO2 is not an enemy. The weather cycles we are experiencing are natural and relatively predictable. El Nino's bring warm weather for a number of years then give way to la Nina's which has a cooling effect for a number of years.

This has been going on since long before man walked the planet. If a person wants to roof their home in a white material to reduce their energy bill that is up to them. The problem is when you couch terms like "Whitening the world's roofs would offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years" eventually some individual (usually those invested in that particular technology) will want to see it mandated so that they can make a lot of money from their investment. And as is being proven over and over again carbon emissions are irelevant to the climate of the world.[/quote]

 

[PoliticalChic]

Whitening the world's roofs would offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years, according to a new study from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Overall, installing lighter-colored roofs and pavement can cancel the heat effect of two years of global carbon dioxide emissions, Berkeley Lab says. It's the first roof-cooling study to use a global model to examine the issue.
The study used a global land surface model from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, which contained regional information on surface variables like topography, evaporation, radiation and temperature, as well as on cloud cover, Berkeley Lab says.

Whitening Cities' Roofs Is Environmental Equivalent of Taking 300 Million Cars Off the Road, DoE Study Says | Popular Science

How many years can we get, as in "offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years"
if we mandate that every American must wear a white burqa?

It would make it so easy to accessorize...

But, then, what about the law of not wearing white after labor day...

And would it be illegal to be black?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Can I get my incandescent light bulbs back?

 

[westwall]

'bazillions of dollars'?

Calculate how many black roofs are in the U.S. alone. Then calculate how much it will cost to resurface with the white material. Voila, bazillions of dollars.

1) You don't need to bother coating every building everywhere, especially in the North

2) The Fed need do nothing more than offer a tax deduction for businesses that use this material

3) Homeowners and many businesses in the Southwest do this already; it helps reduce cooling bills in addition to sealing the roof. Pays for itself.

As is being reported more and more, CO2 is not an enemy. The weather cycles we are experiencing are natural and relatively predictable. El Nino's bring warm weather for a number of years then give way to la Nina's which has a cooling effect for a number of years.

This has been going on since long before man walked the planet. If a person wants to roof their home in a white material to reduce their energy bill that is up to them. The problem is when you couch terms like "Whitening the world's roofs would offset the emissions of the world's cars for 20 years" eventually some individual (usually those invested in that particular technology) will want to see it mandated so that they can make a lot of money from their investment. And as is being proven over and over again carbon emissions are irelevant to the climate of the world.

[/QUOTE]




Please read where I said if the individual wishes to do the process then by all means they should do so. My concern is when the terminology that was used in the article is followed to its logiccal conclusion the process will be mandated for all. Remember governement is not very smart so those in the southwest who would be forced to do the process would howl at the unfairness of those in the north not being forced to do it. Thus in the interest of "fairness" all would be required to do it.

Do you understand the problem with this line of reasoning now?

 

[waltky]

Uncle Ferd says, "Yea - it don't make dat big o' difference...

Computer Models Linking Climate, CO2 ‘Leave No Room For The Sun’
September 17, 2013 – After reviewing thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers, an international team of 47 scientists has concluded that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions caused by human activity had little measurable impact on the Earth’s climate during the 20th century, and that computer models predicting ever-rising temperatures as a result of greenhouse gas emissions are seriously flawed.

“None of them have been validated against actual observations. They have not been able to explain why the climate hasn’t warmed in at least 15 years even though that’s what every model expects,” Dr. S. Fred Singer said during a conference call Tuesday. “Antarctic ice is growing steadily despite the models predicting the opposite.” Professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia, Singer criticized the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose latest report is scheduled to be released on Sept. 27 in Stockholm. Using CO2 “to account for all temperature variations leaves no room for the sun, and is contradicted by every other temperature record,” Singer said.

Singer is the lead author of “Climate Change Reconsidered,” which was released Tuesday. It is the third volume in a series published by the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). The “double peer-reviewed study” was sponsored by the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, and the Heartland Institute. “Some models predict more cloud cover, some less, some no change,” agreed Dr. Willie Soon, a solar expert and co-author of the NIPCC study. “So anything goes. That is not the way science works,” added Soon, chief science advisor at the Science and Public Policy Institute.

Co-author Dr. Craig Idso, chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, said that “claims that temperatures in the polar regions are rising is patently false,” adding that “empirical data for the past 1,000 years” shows no evidence that CO2 levels cause droughts, floods, hurricanes or other severe weather. Nor did storms in the 20th century increase in either intensity or frequency over previous centuries, Idso said. “This new volume provides the scientific balance missing from IPCC,” Idso said. Global temperatures have risen slightly because the Earth is still coming out of the Little Ice Age (800-1100 A.D.), the coldest temperatures recorded in the last 10,000 years, he noted. “But thousands of peer-reviewed scientific articles do not support, and often contradict the IPCC’s view on climate change.”

Contrary to the UN panel, the NIPCC study concludes that “the human effect (from CO2 emissions) is likely to be small relative to natural variability, and whatever small warming is likely to occur will produce benefits as well as costs.”

- See more at: Computer Models Linking Climate, CO2 ?Leave No Room For The Sun? | CNS News

 

[Abraham3]

What do you do when the two years has passed?

I got it. Pour milk into the ocean.

Then we can surround the sun with orbiting Ray-Ban sunglasses.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Yeah there's the ticket lets mandate that everyone has to spend bazillions of dollars changing everything for an unnecessary goal. CO2 is not the enemy folks. The only real enemy is your garden variety pollution. Instead of burying trash in landfills burn it to produce energy. Saves the planet and gives one of the cleaner forms of energy. And it doesn't cost everyone a bloody fortune to accomplish not a thing.

I don't agree with a mandate but since the cost of the roofing is the same whether it is black or a light grey it makes sense to go with the lighter colored material when the roof needs replacing. Over a 20 year period which is the normal lifespan of roofs that would make a huge difference without any additional cost.

On the positive side for homes in the hotter southern states it would reduce cooling bills and that would be a direct saving in the pockets of the homeowners. That makes it a no-brainer in my opinion. Then there are the 50 year roof tiles which only cost about 20% more than regular tiles. Given that the cost of labor exceeds the cost of the tiles eliminating at least one roofing exercise is an even bigger savings.

The math makes sense to me. If the government wants to see this done then offer an incentive to purchase the lighter colored tiles instead of the black ones. Why would anyone refuse that kind of offer when they are looking at the expense of redoing their roof?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Here's what we do...

1. Drill large hole into Yellowstone...About 10 miles deep.
2. Built 4 20 megaton nukes and lower them into the whole in a chain,
3. Get away
4. Set it off

This will reverse global warming

 

[Old Rocks]

Yeah there's the ticket lets mandate that everyone has to spend bazillions of dollars changing everything for an unnecessary goal. CO2 is not the enemy folks. The only real enemy is your garden variety pollution. Instead of burying trash in landfills burn it to produce energy. Saves the planet and gives one of the cleaner forms of energy. And it doesn't cost everyone a bloody fortune to accomplish not a thing.

So says you. But the vast majority of real scientists state otherwise. Simply read the many, many policy statements by the Scientific Societies in all the nations of this world. Go to the videos of the lectures at the American Geophysical Union's site for the last five years. See what the scientists that actually study the climate and it's effects on the world are stating.

 

[Old Rocks]

CO2 and all the GHGs are the enemy. Were we still at 280 ppm of CO2 and about 750 ppb of CH4, we would not be experiancing the warming of the atmosphere and the oceans. The issue of whether GHGs cause warming was settled in 1858. That this is still being argued simply points out how easily some people are corrupted by the money of the energy corperations.

Using a product like Snowroof is a plus for the homeowner. Not only does it reduce cooling costs in the summer, but it also ties down composition roofing, making it far more durable in serious storms.

 

[flacaltenn]

I have 4 govt mandated toilets that don't flush..

I have a govt designed heat pump that stops working below 40degF.

I can only spray govt designed pesticides and herbicides that just makes the pests angry.

And you want me to put this WHITE material on palacial Hillibilly Hollywood home?
In one season, the MOLD, POLLEN, BIRD CRAP, SOOT, and DEBRIS would make my place look like a dump..

Kinda tired of working around all the Govt designed FUBARS in my life..
Let's do Washington DC FIRST and take some data for a few years..

 

[flacaltenn]

Uncle Ferd says, "Yea - it don't make dat big o' difference...

Computer Models Linking Climate, CO2 ‘Leave No Room For The Sun’
September 17, 2013 – After reviewing thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers, an international team of 47 scientists has concluded that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions caused by human activity had little measurable impact on the Earth’s climate during the 20th century, and that computer models predicting ever-rising temperatures as a result of greenhouse gas emissions are seriously flawed.

“None of them have been validated against actual observations. They have not been able to explain why the climate hasn’t warmed in at least 15 years even though that’s what every model expects,” Dr. S. Fred Singer said during a conference call Tuesday. “Antarctic ice is growing steadily despite the models predicting the opposite.” Professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia, Singer criticized the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose latest report is scheduled to be released on Sept. 27 in Stockholm. Using CO2 “to account for all temperature variations leaves no room for the sun, and is contradicted by every other temperature record,” Singer said.

Singer is the lead author of “Climate Change Reconsidered,” which was released Tuesday. It is the third volume in a series published by the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). The “double peer-reviewed study” was sponsored by the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, and the Heartland Institute. “Some models predict more cloud cover, some less, some no change,” agreed Dr. Willie Soon, a solar expert and co-author of the NIPCC study. “So anything goes. That is not the way science works,” added Soon, chief science advisor at the Science and Public Policy Institute.

Co-author Dr. Craig Idso, chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, said that “claims that temperatures in the polar regions are rising is patently false,” adding that “empirical data for the past 1,000 years” shows no evidence that CO2 levels cause droughts, floods, hurricanes or other severe weather. Nor did storms in the 20th century increase in either intensity or frequency over previous centuries, Idso said. “This new volume provides the scientific balance missing from IPCC,” Idso said. Global temperatures have risen slightly because the Earth is still coming out of the Little Ice Age (800-1100 A.D.), the coldest temperatures recorded in the last 10,000 years, he noted. “But thousands of peer-reviewed scientific articles do not support, and often contradict the IPCC’s view on climate change.”

Contrary to the UN panel, the NIPCC study concludes that “the human effect (from CO2 emissions) is likely to be small relative to natural variability, and whatever small warming is likely to occur will produce benefits as well as costs.”

- See more at: Computer Models Linking Climate, CO2 ?Leave No Room For The Sun? | CNS News

Might be worth a read Uncle Ferd --- but this ain't gonna get no traction because of the ties to Heartland and other biases in the panel.. Doesn't mean it doesn't deserve a refutation. That's what is supposed to happen before you dismiss a source in science.