Home > The sun brings it to the day: Long ago overdue!
The sun brings it to the day: Long ago overdue!
This is a bablefish translation from german into english, sorry the quality is not supererb... but worth a read...
Energy tax on coal, nest egg Berlin, who knows still? With the one the main energy source in the country should, with which others are supported the city included in the GDR. Which actually happened with the money, extracts itself from my knowledge. Now the government in Berlin plans something something similar. The FAZ were (according to expenditure from 11 July) the corner points "integrated climate and energy program" of the government passed on. Afterwards in the future a "climatic cent" is to be removed from the Federal citizen, as soon as it uses river, gas or oil. Those are not the only meanness, which one invents in Berlin. Houseowners are to be forced to isolate their external walls. Isolation, the "cook crate" of the post-war period, was under given conditions a good thing. A house is however no cook crate. Hauswaende cannot out-steam under the isolation sufficient.
With increasing humidity walls lose more warmth than their isolation hold back and in addition suffer the brick-work. But the chemical industry is to earn. In addition that provides increasingly damper brick-work for a more rapid decay of the buildings and "secures in such a way work places" in the reconstruction - of it the mould still provides for a "population-political Nebennutzen". About force heat coupling (KWK) one would have to talk more in detail. But I know enterprises, which abolished the KWK again, because the tuning brought from requirements of electric current and warming to high losses. Also over a "connection and a use obligation for close and long-distance heating nets" could be argued. Where such heat sources exist, one should use them. In addition, in the summer? And perhaps an upper limit can be specified in this way for housing temperatures. If 18°C are not sufficient for you, you had evenly pitch. Our government is very anxious around us minor ones - see a smoking. Then the truck duty is to be expanded since all roads. That concerns the carriers, thinks petrol ordinary consumer, because he does not know the logistics portion in the prices. Also we do not only drive motorway, if the government wants to know, where we drive and we do not have mobile phone thereby. Appropriate control stations for truck help there inconspicuously also with passenger car traffic. That is all the same whom, feels the costs of these installations starting from January 2008 at the gasoline prices. The CO2-Erzeugung is off then taken into consideration with consumption additionally into the key-field e.g. resting.
With such measures one wants to surely lower the CO2-Ausstoss until 2020 for the disappointment of the plants and without each effects on the "climate" around 40%. Also the oil industry earns to it: it will sell fewer oils, this however with still higher profit. CO2 is to be saved through increase of the "energy productivity" around annually 3%, said the Kanzlerin on the energy summit. But you mean, the today’s plants real are still so inefficient that such increases are possible? And: like for a long time we save already energy - also without "climatic obligation". Or is "energy productivity" called actually "Entmaterialisierung" from economics and consumption? Entmaterialisierung of the economy would be called: Replace the profits from goods production by profits from speculation. That had so far already the free market side effect to increase with shrinking goods offer the prices in such a way that the exploding speculative "capital costs" (box interest charges) remain payable.
On the side of consumption "Entmaterialisierung" means such a thing how: To replace the benefit of a shred by the einfuehlsame support by a chamfering advisor. That can be done so far, until one cannot afford also these because of increased deliveries and economic situation-conditioned labour costs lowering any longer. For these purposes the government presents several "programs", e.g. to 1 billion euro the expensive "climatic protection advancement program" in the Obhut of the secretary of the environment. The "climatic cent is to cover the costs as impact on the current and heating material expensive sets". One thinks of 0,1 cent per a KW/H with river and gas and 1 cent per litre oil takes as a basis one the consumption of the last yearly, would be that 540 millions euro more for river, approximately 1 billion euro more for gas and 318 millions euro more for fuel oil. Further programs, regulations and deliveries are discussed. They run out all on the same: "money ago!" It costs already large troubles to arrange the national economy of an industrious people at the basis. But succeeds - as one sees - after nuclear energy and Transrapid now also still with the remainder. One lures with support promises for those, which want to only purchase now "energy-more efficient devices" or reequip their enterprises accordingly. Until Decembers the massnahmenpaket is to be tied and become then you know, why we have a "large coalition". For justification the high song of the "climatic protection" rings out and: "who comes too late, recompences the Merkel".
This summer becomes probable - if it soon thoroughly does not change - when one the coldest history enter. In the media it - like the latter before it - will be again "one" the warmest. In the high alps one warns Bergwanderer again of avalanches. In Buenos Aires (Argentina) falls for the first time since 89 years snow. The demand for fuel oil snaps there (as also in Chile) highly, because one measures madly low temperatures for there conditions. It is similar in South Africa and New Zealand. It would be to be swung now thus at the time on the "cooling effect" of the CO2. At that even more is to, than at the warming up effect. In order to only suggest it. If a CO2-Molekuel takes up a energiequantum to warm up (photon), it comes into violent thermal motion and pushes, before it has the chance, the photon again to radiate (in order allegedly soil and climate), at 10.000 to 100,000 inert air molecules, which do not have the ability to the absorption and reemission. The molecule does not lose its energy thrust to these and it remains for it anything, in order to emit. The luftpaket warmed up thereby ascends, expands thereby and cools down adiabatically. In large heights, where air is less closely packed, the CO2-Molekuel finds again a photon to opportunity to actually emit. It freezes rigidly and only by the collision with other air molecules again "warms up".
That is called in the reason, the greenhouse gases in such a way specified is a thermostat, in order to become again loose the warmth (energy) of air taken up by contact e.g. with the earth’s surface in large height. Greenhouse gases are therefore the opposite of what into believing us the Klimahysteriker with obscure Modelrechnungen wants to fool. (contributes, are missing scientific vouchers for the thesis, CO2 to the climatic heating up so far. Apart from attempts over the absorption and emission behavior of CO2 in the laboratory the model Platonisten of the climatic guild has so far only "models" and "bungled" correlations). Who changes the climate? If it were the sun, one could take for it no money. Now Danish researchers had many good arguments for the main participation of the sun in the climatic change.
These arguments, so for a long time it went, hushed up. Now Mike Lockwood and Claus’s merry in "Recent reports oppositely directed trends into solarly climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature in: Proceedings often the Royal Society A doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1880, which heating up of the atmosphere has on a way increased, which does not agree with changes solar activity. The Greens are jubilant up, "thereby separate them as possible reason for that heating up of the terrestrial atmosphere out". The solar activity shows up in a broad spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. Parts of it may have increased since 1900 and decrease now again. Crucial are however only the electrical particles of the solar wind, which change the magnetism in the heliosphaere, above all however the magnetism of the earth. Loockwood and refer merry ignore this characteristic skillfully and only to fluctuations of the sunlight generally and over larger periods. From this then already missing correlations could be calculated and the Green and the Abzocker needed "arguments" to supply. Differently saw it Haigh, J.D. & manufacturing costs Roscoe, "solar effects to on climate: the left between the stratosphere and troposphere ", in: "meteorological magazine" (2006). Its index, the "solar cycle x QBO", summarizes all sun effects with reference to the different terrestrial atmosphere layers, and a quite good correlation with the fluctuations of the average temperatures already shows up. Whom is the little interested a layman to follow? Naturally the loudest, i.e. the medium megaphone. However even the summary should give to think from Loockwood and merry to: "there is substantial proof for the sun influence on the preindustrial climate of the earth, and the sun can have been well a factor with the post office postindustriellen change of climate in the first half last century.
Here we show that in the past 20 years all sun trends, which could have an influence on the earth climate developed in the opposite direction, when would have been necessary, in order to explain the observed increase of the global middle temperatures. The data show that the sun intended the climate of the earth for many decades, but in the last two decades apparently no more the trace does not keep ". The increase of the average temperature came around 1998 to a halt. Since 2002/2003 it decreases again. Your media did not say that to you so far yet - or? Before that becomes noticeable, the lucrative climatic rescue under roof and subject must be. If these measurements are correct, then the cooling follows the sun trend in the blown form of a Loockwood and a colleague - only even with a delay of approximately ten years. If the hypothesis of the infrared moving mission became by CO2, which tunes so-called greenhouse thesis, the heating up would have to follow the rise of the CO2 directly in each case.
That did not do it however. The delay is generally explained by the pufferwirkung by air and ocean heating up and other one. To itself oceans warm up last themselves it one while, to them again to cooling perhaps still longer. At the climatic fluctuations the sun (according to the sun hypothesis) is only indirectly involved. The actual drivers are high energy-rich, cosmic rays, which are responsible for the wolkenbildung in relatively small heights (up to 3.000 m). The sun can affect only their supply on earth something. That is done via the so-called solar wind of the charged particles. That works again particularly to Poland, where he changes among other things the circulation of the terrestrial atmosphere (e.g. the migration of polar hochdruckgebiete). The normal sun cycle, on which Loockwood and merry take off, has thereby a smaller meaning (around the 3%), it arrives particularly on the sun magnetism, which among other things by the work of the massive planets (Jupiter, Saturn) at the sun is affected, and on its effect on solar wind and geomagnetism. Here plays the most important role beside a number of other periods not the eleven -, but the 22-Jahres-Rhythmus. Loockwood & CO should know, conceal it however, because the solvent client wishes itself other results and "scientifically" can be deduced only in such a way. But, if the citizen it lets itself be pleased, because "one can make nevertheless nothing", he will pay. Comfort has its price. By the way, in Switzerland there is already a "Klimarappen"(www.stiftungklimarappen.ch). "brought the climatic black horses to today nothing, because the thermodynamic regulations are just as wrong in Switzerland (SIA standards) as the appropriate DIN standards in the FRG" meant Swiss architect Bossert and has anyhow regarding the house isolation right.