Scientists in Hong Kong have demonstrated a new ultra-white ceramic material that can drastically cool buildings by reflecting sunlight and heat at record highs. The beetle-inspired material gets its ability from its nanostructure, stays tough to the elements and should be relatively easy to scale…
Ultra-white ceramic cools buildings with record-high 99.6% reflectivity::undefined
And all the greenhouse gases it will heat up as it passes through them? You can’t just ignore these gases…
It’s not that simple, and you claiming it is show you have zero understanding of the potential issues. Your ice age example shows that it can affect the globe at scale. Thank you for part of the answer, I’m surprised you’re still arguing after proving my point.
I’m not arguing it’s not going to affect the globe at scale (even though you would have to cover shitload of building in this to affect it). I’m saying that we know what the effect would be: it would cool it down.
What you fail to understand is that if solar radiation hits a dark surface, like a roof, this energy is transferred to earth. That’s it. It’s here. Now it’s really difficult to get rid of it. Greenhouse gases make this even more difficult.
But if solar radiation hits a white surface SOME of this energy will be reflected back to space. Not ALL of it, some of will still stay here but overall it will LESS energy.
Greenhouse gasses trap the radiation emitted by earth as heat, not the reflected light. Think about it. If greenhouse gases reflected light then we would get less light from the sun, right? Part of it would be reflected. They don’t do that. They let light pass through and stop the heat radiated from earth. If you reflect light instead of trapping it that’s a good thing.
This is so basic I’m starting to suspect you’re just trolling so I will end this conversation here…
Green house gases absorb radiation unlike transparent gases. It directly refutes one of your claims since they exist at the same time. Why are you talking about reflection here…?
You clearly don’t know enough to answer the question correctly. And you completely incorrectly explaining greenhouse gases and how radiation affects it just proves it all the more. Have a great day, I’m sorry you thought you knew more than you thought here. It happens.
You claim it’s basic, yet each of your “basic” points have easily been refuted by going to intermediates, it’s not as simple as you claim it is… and you claiming it is also just shows you have zero credibility understanding of the subject.
So who’s the troll here? The one getting flustered from having their “basic” explanations refuted with just as basic science, or the one contesting with examples that show it’s not actually that basic…?
And all the greenhouse gases it will heat up as it passes through them? You can’t just ignore these gases…
It’s not that simple, and you claiming it is show you have zero understanding of the potential issues. Your ice age example shows that it can affect the globe at scale. Thank you for part of the answer, I’m surprised you’re still arguing after proving my point.
I’m not arguing it’s not going to affect the globe at scale (even though you would have to cover shitload of building in this to affect it). I’m saying that we know what the effect would be: it would cool it down.
What you fail to understand is that if solar radiation hits a dark surface, like a roof, this energy is transferred to earth. That’s it. It’s here. Now it’s really difficult to get rid of it. Greenhouse gases make this even more difficult.
But if solar radiation hits a white surface SOME of this energy will be reflected back to space. Not ALL of it, some of will still stay here but overall it will LESS energy.
Greenhouse gasses trap the radiation emitted by earth as heat, not the reflected light. Think about it. If greenhouse gases reflected light then we would get less light from the sun, right? Part of it would be reflected. They don’t do that. They let light pass through and stop the heat radiated from earth. If you reflect light instead of trapping it that’s a good thing.
This is so basic I’m starting to suspect you’re just trolling so I will end this conversation here…
I understand that fine…
Green house gases absorb radiation unlike transparent gases. It directly refutes one of your claims since they exist at the same time. Why are you talking about reflection here…?
You clearly don’t know enough to answer the question correctly. And you completely incorrectly explaining greenhouse gases and how radiation affects it just proves it all the more. Have a great day, I’m sorry you thought you knew more than you thought here. It happens.
You claim it’s basic, yet each of your “basic” points have easily been refuted by going to intermediates, it’s not as simple as you claim it is… and you claiming it is also just shows you have zero credibility understanding of the subject.
So who’s the troll here? The one getting flustered from having their “basic” explanations refuted with just as basic science, or the one contesting with examples that show it’s not actually that basic…?