Avoid Global Warming - Paint the Roofs and Roads White

Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum

Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Wolverine

Uncanny Pompadour
Joined
Sep 22, 2006
Messages
1,689
Reaction score
195
Location
Atlanta GA
Setting aside for a moment the diversally-insensitive argument that white roads are somehow superior to black roads (a position I will boldly declare the majority of Americans do not ascribe to), I would like to propose that the Energy Secretary is perhaps a moron.

[SIZE=12pt]Energy Secretary's White-Paint Proposal Puzzles Climate-Change Experts[/SIZE]

Energy Secretary Steven Chu stunned the audience at a London scientific conference Tuesday with a radical but simple proposal to combat global warming: Paint all the roofs of all the buildings in the world white.

If we did so, the Nobel Prize-winning physicist said, and if we also made sure the world's roads and sidewalks were light-colored, it would have the same effect on global warming as taking all the cars in the world off the world's roads for 11 years.

But at least one science expert thinks Chu is nuts.

"It's past simplistic -- it's ridiculous," says Steven Milloy, publisher of junkscience.com and an avowed climate-change skeptic.

But Dr. Gordon Bonan, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., says there's a kernel of truth in the science behind Chu's idea.

"That's been a pretty standard idea many for many years now," says Bonan. "It's related to the idea of an urban heat island -- that a big city will generate a large amount of heat. In urban planning and urban design, the idea is that painting roofs white will absorb less solar radiation and keep the city cooler."

"You could try to extend this idea to the entire planet, but I've never seen any numbers on how much impact this would have on the Earth's surface temperature," says Bonan. "The urban [surface] area of the world is pretty small.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522411...test=latestnews

Better yet, let's put MIRRORS on all the roofs and roads - that will reflect the heat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are these people that fucking stupid? The heat will be there whether you reflect it or not. All you'll do is diffuse the energy a bit more but the plain and simple fact is that you aren't reducing the amount of energy that the sun is transmitting to the earth. Scary that this dumbass is the Energy Secretary. This fuckwad will probably win a nobel prize for his horseshit theory.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Um, the Nobel Prize is a political prize, not a scientific one.
Yes, but since there is a Nobel prize for science...

I haven't quite figured out if they are that stupid or they think we are. I beginning to think it may be both.
If by 'we' you mean the populace in general, yes, we are that stupid, too.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This f*wad will probably win a nobel prize for his horseshitake theory.
Oops, too late... he's already got one. Did you mean a second one?

Steven Chu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steven Chu, Ph.D (born February 28, 1948),[3] is an American physicist and currently the 12th United States Secretary of Energy. As a scientist, Chu is known for his research in cooling and trapping of atoms with laser light, which won him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1997.[3] At the time of his appointment as Energy Secretary, he was a professor of physics and molecular and cellular biology at the University of California, Berkeley and the director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, where his research was concerned primarily with the study of biological systems at the single molecule level.[1] He is a vocal advocate for more research into alternative energy and nuclear power, arguing that a shift away from fossil fuels is essential to combat global warming.[4][5][6] US Energy Secretary Steven Chu said Tuesday the Obama administration wanted to paint roofs an energy-reflecting white to increase the average global albedo.

I'll take "Scientists So Focused on Minutiae That They Can't See The Forest For the Trees" Alex, for $500.

"Biological systems at the single molecule level" indeed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just an observation: Ever notice that most of the global warming zealots don't have degrees in anything having to do with weather? Most of them seem to be biologists.

 
Just an observation: Ever notice that most of the global warming zealots don't have degrees in anything having to do with weather? Most of them seem to be biologists.
Um, don't forget about the pessimistic politicians like Al Gore, he is making a fortune off of global warming, bring on the heat! LOL

 
Not sure why everyone calls this "idiotic"... I know just enough about large systems that they're a lot more complicated than they might appear. I believe there could be lots of second and third order effects (what does making all that paint due to the system?) but I'm not ready to call it laughable (even if I agree it could be).

 
sometimes I have a hard even time seeing in the winter due to the blaring whiteness of the snow, they start painting everything white and I bet many people will have similar issues.

 
I think there is some credence to painting things white making the temperature cooler. I have no numbers to show, but we all know that dark colors absorb heat, and light colors reflect it. I've used this line of thinking when the kids and I go for walks on a sunny day, and we all wear light clothes to stay cool.

Maybe painting things gray to avoid being blinded by all the white colors. Painting things white may not make a huge impact, but it's a good place to start.

 
Painting things white makes them reflect instead of absorb energy from the sun. The problem with that is two-fold. One, even though heat islands are reduced, a portion of the reflected energy gets trapped in our atmosphere which will raise the temperature of the environment anyway. So instead of there being radiant heat coming off of black surfaces making us feel hotter at ground level, the entire atmosphere will heat up more. Secondly, having a white roof on a building is great in summertime because your utility bills for air conditioning will be lower. However, the utility bills in winter will increase since your building isn't absorbing as much heat from the sun. So in mild to cold climates, where there are more heating days than cooling days, this is actually counter-productive.

 
Not sure why everyone calls this "idiotic"... I know just enough about large systems that they're a lot more complicated than they might appear. I believe there could be lots of second and third order effects (what does making all that paint due to the system?) but I'm not ready to call it laughable (even if I agree it could be).
Maybe not so laughable...

Wikipedia - Albedo

Geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation, Part 2: White roofs are the trillion-dollar solution

 
WARNING: I am not an expert but want to throw in my :2cents:

Painting things white makes them reflect instead of absorb energy from the sun. The problem with that is two-fold. One, even though heat islands are reduced, a portion of the reflected energy gets trapped in our atmosphere which will raise the temperature of the environment anyway. So instead of there being radiant heat coming off of black surfaces making us feel hotter at ground level, the entire atmosphere will heat up more. Secondly, having a white roof on a building is great in summertime because your utility bills for air conditioning will be lower. However, the utility bills in winter will increase since your building isn't absorbing as much heat from the sun. So in mild to cold climates, where there are more heating days than cooling days, this is actually counter-productive.
I see this as being the major pitfall when looking at energy (heat) balances - especially when people grip onto the concept of greenhouse gases being the major culprit for global warming.

The Stones said 'Paint it Black' and that's what I'm gonna do.
:th_rockon:

I am willing to accept that this news 'snippet' has been taken out of context and perhaps conflated to distort some of the meaning.

I think what comes across as laughable is the notion that this broad brushed stroke (pun intended), as presented, is patently absurd because it is not: 1. feasible and 2. aesthetically pleasing in the least, just for starters - forget the science. Keeping in mind that this statement was made from the person RESPONSIBLE for energy policy in this country now.

Before I left my state agency job, I told one of my colleagues who was convinced I was a traitor to my principles of environmental stewardship that "... there are no honest brokers ...." meaning that no matter who you work for (private, public, stakeholder) that somebody has an agenda and isn't putting the issues before their interests.

With the statements I see coming from Dept of Energy, I would say it is STILL true despite statements from the Obama administration that things would change.

JR

 
I think what comes across as laughable is the notion that this broad brushed stroke (pun intended), as presented, is patently absurd because it is not: 1. feasible and 2. aesthetically pleasing in the least, just for starters - forget the science. Keeping in mind that this statement was made from the person RESPONSIBLE for energy policy in this country now.
Regarding aesthetics, I thought the suggestion was only to paint flat roofs - they're mostly seen from space!

When I read the original article the first thought that came to mind was "it's a great think globally, act locally" idea, even if the outcome is uncertain.

 
Back
Top