Climate Policy

[kandrathe]

That's quite a feat, being able to determine human contribution at such accuracy. Not so sure about the 5.53% for water vapor though.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/alternate/pag...ent/appd_d.html

"It is important to remember, however, that it is currently believed that the impact of water vapor produced from surface sources such as fuel combustion on the atmospheric water vapor concentrations is minimal."

Interesting, but I think you might have taken that quote out of context. <blockquote>"However, huge scientific uncertainty exists in defining the extent and importance of this feedback loop. As water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it will eventually also condense into clouds, which are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation (thus allowing less energy to reach the Earth's surface and heat it up). The future monitoring of atmospheric processes involving water vapor will be critical to fully understand the feedbacks in the climate system leading to global climate change. As yet, though the basics of the hydrological cycle are fairly well understood, we have very little comprehension of the complexity of the feedback loops. Also, while we have good atmospheric measurements of other key greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane, we have poor measurements of global water vapor, so it is not certain by how much atmospheric concentrations have risen in recent decades or centuries, though satellite measurements, combined with balloon data and some in-situ ground measurements indicate generally positive trends in global water vapor." from NOAA</blockquote>

I bet they thought they were doing what seemed best for themselves, at that time. Maybe they even thought of themselves as benefactors of society, providing for jobs and materials to build.

Sure. People needed houses, and businesses needed buildings.

It's a good thing then, that you are not seeing the USA they conceived 233 years ago. But it's not their fault, really. How could they know that the summers in Minnesota would become too hot to survive without air conditioning?

I'm not sure where you got that misinformation. The weather in Minnesota changes frequently, in winter and summer. So, it might be 55F one day, and warm up to 90F the next day. Most summer days require zero air conditioning, and in fact we've had the coldest summer this year in a long while.

Let me guess. Nuclear power plants?

I don't care what it is as long as it increases the GDP over time. I would think that nuclear would generate a higher KwH/investment dollar over time, but I'm not biased one way or another. Wind and solar are not ideal solutions in some areas (like New York).