Xref: utzoo talk.politics.misc:8697 sci.misc:1231
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!ima!spdcc!eli
From: eli@spdcc.COM (Steve Elias)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.misc
Subject: Re: greenhouse effect / solar power satellites
Message-ID: <763@spdcc.COM>
Date: 31 Mar 88 15:03:06 GMT
References: <22678@bbn.COM> <5564@well.UUCP> <761@spdcc.COM> <4195@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: eli@spdcc.COM (Steve Elias)
Distribution: na
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Lines: 43

In article <4195@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr) writes:
!In article <761@spdcc.COM> eli@spdcc.COM (Steve Elias) writes:

!:     efficiency has nothing to do with the problem of thermal pollution.

!Efficiency has everything to do with thermal pollution.  For a fixed power
!consumption, efficiency determines the amount of heat generated relative to
!useful power.  A system with a 50% efficient converter would produce twice 
!as much heat as a 90% converter (including the rest of the system, and the 
!consumer).

      you are wrong, here.  both the 'useful power' and the 'waste heat'
      end up in the environment as heat.  

!argued for zero growth in consumption, I must assume that you think certain
!power sources are worse than others producing the same useful power.  The 
!only factor determining the waste heat produced by a system is its 
!efficiency.  SPS are among the most efficient power generation systems

      again:  efficiency doesn't matter.  SPS is the only power source
      which uses energy which would not otherwise enter the earth's
      atmosphere.  it is worse than most other power sources in this
      respect.  why do you insist that efficiency is a factor?  all 
      useful energy will turn up as heat in the environment.

!
!If you are arguing that SPS are worse than earth-based systems capable of
!generating the same power you are wrong.  If you are arguing against 
!increasing our generating capacity you should say so.

       i am arguing against increasing our generating capacity by 
       collecting massive amounts of energy from exo-atmospheric sources.  
!
!My conclusions from these: the earth reacts to thermal pollution on a very
!short timescale (days to weeks).  The timescale of the feedback by which 
!an increase in temperature produces a runaway greenhouse effect is millions
!of years.  On the other hand, the timescale for CO2 pollution to produce a
!greenhouse effect is very short.  Adding heat will not raise the temperature
!noticeably until the rate of addition approaches the solar flux on the earth.
!Adding CO2 has already warmed the earth (the articles have numbers).  

      yes!  my point is that hundreds of solar power satellites
      WILL add energy on the order of the present solar flux!