Why I Refuse to Panic Over Global Warming: Part 3

The moon has been part of our world since 1969 when man first set foot on it. We operate in the vacuum of space with the international space station, with shuttle flights, with science instruments in space, with probes, and with the Mars rovers. Why not consider space-based approaches to cooling the planet? When such approaches are considered, the conservation of energy equation changes.

I refuse to be fatalistic about exploration of the universe because that science promises new ways of improving life on this planet.  It was 40 years ago that we first stepped on the moon. Had we continued to explore the universe at the pace of the 1960’s, we might have landed a human on Mars by now. Indeed, we might have gone beyond Mars. Instead, whenever someone mentions a trip to Mars, the myopic faction of this world moves to stop it.

The point they miss is that human migration to other parts of the universe would in some ways improve life on earth. Migration would reduce the rate of population growth, and that would reduce the rate of global warming. Instead of being locked into the energy equation within the earth’s atmosphere, the equations would change because of the potential use of the cooling vacuum of space and the ability to partially block sunlight at the poles. Humanity would be freed from the scourge of being ruled according to the conservation of energy equation.

We might try proposing to the United Nations that all of the governments of the world contribute 1% of their respective military budgets to support space-based projects to cool the earth. A bit less spending on military items would probably reduce the likelihood of catastrophic war, as long as government leaders remain calm. Cooperation in space is usually consistent with efforts towards world peace. The international space station is one example. Just as with the Egyptian irrigation canals from the Nile, the space-based projects would be expensive, but there are measures that might mitigate the costs.

Electric vehicles would help on the issue of global warming, again presuming that the atmosphere is in fact warming. Electric vehicles produce less carbon emissions, and that would reduce the greenhouse effect. How to produce those vehicles is the subject of great debate, some favoring a free market approach, others favoring a government led approach.

For these reasons, I avoid the panic over global warming.