Lets paint it white!

[Wulfran]

Also, the issue of the up-north-thing: they did an experiment at Kangerlussuaq, the biggest airport in Greenland. They painted a large white square on the tarmac and measured by radar how deep the permafrost was under the white square and under the dark tarmac right next to it. In August, the permafrost was 3 meters underneath the white and 4 meters underneath the dark. Significant difference...

Finally, there's also a lot of money to be saved in energy bills as far as road lighting. The brighter the paving, the less energy needed to light the roads.

Drol, I have nothing but the utmost respect for you and your input but I'm still not entirely onside with this.

a) AC units and fuel consumption - point made
b) icy winter roads, sorry but I'm sticking with the need for darker pavement. I see it as a more immediate safety issue: if that ice melts its safer than if it doesn't. Even experienced drivers can lose control and crash on icy roads and in this part of the world, as spread out as things are, not driving isn't an option.
c) the permafrost under the tarmac thing, I'm a little confused. If I read it correctly, there was more melted permafrost under the balck tarmac than the white square? Well, in more extreme latitudes, thats what you want: its not an issue of cooling, but of staying warm. You WANT that extra energy from the sun helping to mitigate winter. Seriously, even in Calgary which is pretty mild in Canadian terms, my furnace runs 8-9 months out of the year and I don't own an A/C unit (just a couple portable fans) for those beastly 30-35C summer days.

Now, I understand in more temperate locales the situation is reversed but thats my point: this type of thing isn't a universal solution, even for the US. I'm not saying it should be discarded but I think it needs to be approached in a logical, thought out manner. Too often in the environmental sphere, people want universal solutions to apply where I don't think they exist.

[Sylvus]

I find that black roads can also lead to more dangerous situations in the winter, when they are warm enough to melt snow but not warm enough to make the water evaporate, leading to it re-freezing. Snow's easier to drive through than ice, imo.

But yeah, a lot of what has been talked about in this thread made me think it wouldn't be ideal for Michigan winters. They should make roofs and roads that can reverse polarity with a very slight electrical current, so you can flip it to white in the summer and black in the winter...

[Drolgin Steingrinder]

b) icy winter roads, sorry but I'm sticking with the need for darker pavement. I see it as a more immediate safety issue: if that ice melts its safer than if it doesn't. Even experienced drivers can lose control and crash on icy roads and in this part of the world, as spread out as things are, not driving isn't an option.
c) the permafrost under the tarmac thing, I'm a little confused. If I read it correctly, there was more melted permafrost under the balck tarmac than the white square? Well, in more extreme latitudes, thats what you want: its not an issue of cooling, but of staying warm. You WANT that extra energy from the sun helping to mitigate winter. Seriously, even in Calgary which is pretty mild in Canadian terms, my furnace runs 8-9 months out of the year and I don't own an A/C unit (just a couple portable fans) for those beastly 30-35C summer days.

Now, I understand in more temperate locales the situation is reversed but thats my point: this type of thing isn't a universal solution, even for the US. I'm not saying it should be discarded but I think it needs to be approached in a logical, thought out manner. Too often in the environmental sphere, people want universal solutions to apply where I don't think they exist.

Oh, I completely understand and agree with you. I was in no way suggesting that every road in the world should be chalk white. I was just underlining the impact that dark tarmac has on the temperature. In Sissimiuut (also Greenland) they actually run cooling ducts under some roads because the road surfaces are placed on top of the permafrost, and if this melts, the ground goes soggy and the roads become even more unsafe. There are a few buildings that now sit a good foot lower than where they were during the cold war because, when the locals took them over, they disabled the huge cooling systems underneath. Result: gloop, splat, mud.

[masteen]

I've been on the forefront of this environmentalist trend since college. White cars are way, way cooler in the Florida heat. They also have the added bonus of looking like fleet vehicles, which is the very best urban camouflage available.

[Nick]

People are still trying to derail climate change and turn it into a political football?


That's a bit sad.

[Fash]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06 ... ge-report/
This report would not go along with our current legal efforts... so, let's bury it!

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

...


"The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision," he wrote, according to the e-mails released by CEI. "I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

He later wrote an e-mail urging Carlin to "move on to other issues and subjects."

"I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research, etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with climate," McGartland wrote.

Inhofe is one Senator I actually like.. he seems to have a brain in his head.

They better kill that fucking cap & trade pork bill in the Senate...

[Aardor]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06 ... ge-report/
This report would not go along with our current legal efforts... so, let's bury it!

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

...


"The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision," he wrote, according to the e-mails released by CEI. "I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

He later wrote an e-mail urging Carlin to "move on to other issues and subjects."

"I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research, etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with climate," McGartland wrote.

Inhofe is one Senator I actually like.. he seems to have a brain in his head.

They better kill that fucking cap & trade pork bill in the Senate...

Yes, lets follow the "scientist" who has a BS as physics as his only credentials. Good work, keep it up.

[Xouqoa]

b) Roofs, again in cooler climes, you are going to want that black roof attracting the sun's energy. Its not as big of a deal because attics are all insulated up here and that also means the heat retention issues aren't as bad either because the insulation acts both ways.

Have you ever seen those billboards that are set up like vertical blinds, and they flip sides periodically to display a new ad? Maybe somebody should come up with a mechanized roof that does that. Flip it to white in the summer, black in the winter.

Easier said that done, but it could work!

[Xatrei]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06 ... ge-report/
This report would not go along with our current legal efforts... so, let's bury it!

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

...


"The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision," he wrote, according to the e-mails released by CEI. "I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

He later wrote an e-mail urging Carlin to "move on to other issues and subjects."

"I don't want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research, etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with climate," McGartland wrote.

Inhofe is one Senator I actually like.. he seems to have a brain in his head.

They better kill that fucking cap & trade pork bill in the Senate...

Yes, lets follow the "scientist" who has a BS as physics as his only credentials. Good work, keep it up.

Alan Carlin is an **ECONOMIST** working as an analyst for the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE). He's not a scientist, although he does have an undergrad degree in phsyics in addition to his PhD in economics. He has no advanced degree, training or work experience in any field of scientific endeavor. He's a climate change skeptic who has been "researching" climate change as a hobby. His "report" is described as being chock full of non-peer reviewed, discredited and debunked nonsense. It was not commissioned by the EPA and was therefore not "suppressed" any more than any other unsolicited garbage submitted by unaffiliated, non-experts would be. Maybe a janitor in some tangential EPA branch can submit his "report" to bolster the skeptic's argument further! It will have about as much credibility as this horseshit.