ago, I was nervous week for a colloquium on the topic of global warming and energy policy at our faculty ....
was a guest Konrad Kleinknecht - The highest German award for an experimenter - multiple winners, including this year, the Stern-Gerlach Medal get!
Why advertise here so here's award for the following reason. I know he is an eminent physicist who is clearly in my head and not a spinner ... what we have already seen by his diagrams ... where each axis denotes skalliert exactly, etc.
presented in the lecture is quite clear and all-self-measurement (explains how and what and all), fact, satellite images, graphics, photos, etc. shows that the anthropogenic greenhouse effect but is to be taken seriously than even I thought.
At the very beginning I would like to make that Germany is not an environmentally friendly country, or even a pioneer, is claimed as always.
Germany is to Australia, USA, (Canada afaik 3), in 4th Site of the largest CO2 emitting per head! Namely, 11 tons per year per capita, and thus largest emitter in Europe. France (80% nuclear), Norway (hydro) and Switzerland (water and nuclear power) have sometimes only 5.5 tonnes!
But where Germany will have produced its energy?
hydroelectric power falls off as the main energy supplier, because we do not have rivers with sufficient slope. (Other than the Rhine, but this is utopian) ... Photovoltaics (solar cells) are in the bucket with 0.3% energy share ... for Germany is just too far north to really make sense to generate electricity.
wind power would be a solution, but the wind speed goes up 3 in the efficiency that is much wind is very important! Unfortunately, there are wind speeds> 5 m / s (if I remember right now the average) only in the low mountain ranges and along the coast. Offshore farms are a solution, but to bring the energy to central Germany would require a correspondingly extensive network you need the 15 years ... (Including approvals, as well as the current bridge to France)
What remains until then?
coal power plants and nuclear power plants .... (Available with special view of the SPD, especially Gabriel, completely pointless and the laws of nature contradictory promises) but our Insane competent government wants our nuclear power plants take in 2020 from the network, which I and almost all physicians in the area of greatest mistake of all is .
This should be replaced by each of two coal-fired power plants, which Germany would be strong storm to pole position in the world rankings ...
Therefore, to run it imperative that nuclear power plants until at least 2020 and then could take part as offshore installations.
But actually would put the solution in the nuclear power. with 20 g CO2 / kWh and is thus, even among all the other energy producers (except merger, but that's in the stars - literally)
The disposal issue is always in the room, but even that has explained Kleinknecht; The salt dome (our previous repository) is the ideal repository, but just before the investigation came to this conclusion, the government has called off the investigation because the concept of fit.
and now I want to explain some of the skeptics arguments (which were also 2 in the room)
it is always spoken of the Little Ice Age around the middle ages.
This "Ice Age" was not really, was about 0.5 ° C below the normal warm period. an ice age are RIGHT, however, more likely 5 ° C!
is also in the film-air heights of RTL always shown on the sun, but as it turned out, the film was a pure, UDN, the producers have also had to realize. the diagrams are sometimes even wrong.
the very clear, the solar constant decreases in recent years, while the temperature is rising! Who solar constant does not say that the amount of energy which comes from the sun on earth dei per m ^ 2 .... also makes this effect, as he has calculated and presented to us in the diagram, only a fraction of what causes the greenhouse effect.
for the last doubters that the man has on climate change not to blame, so you enjoy viewing charts, proving that centuries in the last of the CO2 content increased significantly (abnormally high) and parallel to eg the strength of hurricanes or the melting of glaciers and the melting of permafrost, or Greenland or the Arctic and Westantartiks increase significantly ...
who does not see, is blind and stubborn.
Sun, and most think now I see what I am interested in?
is so said that more and more akkerfläche lost (eg ausstralien is importer instead of exporter since 2006/2007!) And thereby increase food prices,
or much more important, is slowly but completely safe North Africa be uninhabitable (in the next 30 years, which in principle is unstoppable now), which is massive waves of immigration to Europe have to follow.
He also had a statistics of insurance, a clear trend of increasing the amount of damages was umweltkatastopren by (factor x3)
is pretty secure the way, a Mehrespiegelanstieg until the end of the century are about one meter (if everything immediately improved), likely 3 to 5 meters (especially Greenland brings a lot of water into the sea, the Arctic is of little significance because the majority of floats and so is under water.) - goodbye holland north sea coast and Hamburg, northern Germany ... Goodbye flat
also is mined oil since about 1950 solid, but at the turn of the millennium is consumed according to estimates probably half of the inventories. considering that more and more people consume oil (which is their right), as China!, and that is to promote rest petroleum heavy, so he gives the forecasts that are later than 2050 drive grandson pretty sure no cars, and even 2030, there will probably be luxury (the current price explosion confirmed this)
what all have to follow but really still for perhaps more serious is also still uncertain. there are so many processes that act on temperature increase even reinforcing - the thaw Permafrost and therefore release of CO2 and methane, methane hydrate unstable nascent, small albedo because "white" ice melt ...
was also what many critics of climate change-rolled by him and corrected and explained logically. if you still find that, let me know, I try to play his response.
otherwise I recommend it to all his book: Who is on global warming ... [/ URL] the way, he is not such advertisement published in the colloquium ...!!
I read it just by the way, let's see maybe I can still add something.
Sun sees the good man out of the way.
Na did, I at least now have a reasonably encouraged to think, or is the climate change matter to you?
