Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts

Monday, July 01, 2019

Wireless Technology Consumes Far More Energy Than Wired Connections Such As Fiber


“We have a tsunami of data approaching. Everything which can be is being digitalised. It is a perfect storm. 5G [the fifth generation of mobile technology] is coming, IP [internet protocol] traffic is much higher than estimated, and all cars and machines, robots and artificial intelligence are being digitalised, producing huge amounts of data which is stored in data centres.” Anders Andrae | ‘Tsunami of data’ could consume one fifth of global electricity by 2025 | The Guardian
Our government and the energy industry are revved up about the hoped for energy saving opportunities the IoT and smart grid may provide. ArmedEnergy consumption in production and use of the IoTwith an astronomical amount of data that will be generated by the IoT, industry expects it will be better equipped to 1) reduce peak load on the grid; 2) design new energy saving technologies; and 3) implement energy-saving programs to reduce consumption or shift load to off-peak times. But what these projections fail to include in their analyses is the mega energy footprint of the IoT itself. It is not at all clear that the IoT will ever succeed in offsetting its own fast-growing and unbounded energy consumption. 
According to IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine Editor Peter Corcoran, energy is one of three main determinants of the “longterm sustainability of the Internet of Things” (the other two being privacy and cyber security). In a recent article characterizing Corcoran as a “longterm IoT skeptic,” author Steven Max Patterson reports:
IoT devices are expected to be low-power devices, but the number of IoT devices that Cisco predicts will be 50 billion by 2020, is an order of magnitude larger than the number of smartphones and tablets in use today. If the energy consumed by these devices and the networks and data centers to which they are connected is considered, energy consumption by IoT will impactfully increase the rate of energy consumption growth.
Wireless Technology Consumes Far More Energy Than Wired Connections Such As Fiber
Wireless technologies consume far more energy than do wired technologies.  According to Kris De Decker Why We Need a Speed Limit to the Internet, a wired connection is the most energy-efficient way to communicate digitally. If connection is made through a cellular network, energy use “soars.”  According to a 2015 publication put out by the Centre for Energy Efficient Telecommunications,
“Our energy calculations show that by 2015, wireless cloud will consume up to 43 TWh, compared to only 9.2 TWh in 2012, an increase of 460%. This is an increase in carbon footprint from 6 megatonnes of CO2 in 2012 to up to 30 megatonnes of CO2 in 2015, the equivalent of adding 4.9 million cars to the roads. Up to 90% of this consumption is attributable to wireless access network technologies, data centres account for only 9%.”
and
“… the final link between telecommunications infrastructure and user device is by far the dominant and most concerning drain on energy in the entire cloud system . . . wireless access networks are clearly the biggest and most inefficient consumer of energy in the cloud environment. [Emphasis added]”
De Decker explains that 3G technologies use about 15 times more energy than wired connections, and 4G technologies consume 23 times more energy. There is no data yet on 5G. If the bulk of our Information Communications Technology (ICT) infrastructure and transmissions were wired, such as Fiber to the Home (FTTH), the energy footprint from our “digital world” would be significantly reduced. And although fiber is safer, faster, more reliable, and far more cyber secure and energy efficient than wireless, Telecom is aggressively pushing for 5g everywhere as it’s far cheaper than to lay fiber. to all homes. Unfortunately, this will greatly grow our energy consumption.
(For more information on wireless consuming more energy than wired, please see https://whatis5g.info/microwave-radiation/#wireless)
Energy Efficiency Measures Offset By Usage
Digital technologies are becoming increasingly more energy efficient, and this trend will hopefully continue. But at the same time that we are making great strides in energy efficiency, more and more people are conducting greater portions of their lives online. Furthermore, not all online activities consume energy equally — there is a hierarchy in energy consumption: The written word is the least energy intensive. Images consume more energy. And, to date, by far the most energy-intensive online activity is watching videos and particularly, high definition videos which 5G is promising. Unfortunately, enticed by tech companies which offer ever more and cheaper options, people are watching far more videos than ever before, and this trend is expected to increase. Of course driverless cars and potentially other IoT applications soon to be unveiled will likely far and away trump energy consumption from videos.
It is a common occurrence in digital technologies that improvements in energy efficiency of a particular device, bring about accompanying changes in usage of the device that often offset the hoped for benefits from energy savings. This is known as the “rebound effect”. For example, a smart phone uses significantly less energy than does a desktop computer. But due to the size of a smart phone, it can be carried around and used 24/7. This increase in use negates, or significantly reduces, energy savings.
We may presume that as more and more “things” in our world take up residence in the Cloud, people’s time online to connect with this data and their “digital selves” will also increase.  Bryon Walsh, Senior Editor at TIME, writes,
“As our lives migrate to the digital cloud — and as more and more wireless devices of all sorts become part of our lives — the electrons will follow. And that shift underscores how challenging it will be to reduce electricity use and carbon emissions even as we become more efficient.”
Global electricity use is indeed rising across the board. But it isn’t just the sending of data or the cooling of data centers that increases electricity use. Entire lifecycles must be taken into account. In other words, manufacturing contributes: The production of all the stuff, such as robots, smart home devices, wearables and augmented reality/virtual reality gadgets will increase electricity use. So will data center hardware and network hardware production — they’re all accelerating ICT electricity use. Patrick Nelson, Network World
Four Ways the IoT Consumes Energy 
1. Data centers: 
In an IoT world, data collected from billions of machines, appliances, “things,” and devices, as well as from sensors and surveillance cameras integrated into our environment, driverless cars, “enhanced humans”, microchipped humans and animals, and virtual and augmented reality, will be stored and responded to in data centers.
The 2014 paper, Data Center Efficiency Assessment, by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) reports that the 2 million computer servers in close to 3 million data centers that are used in the US for online activities “gulp enough electricity to power all of NYC’s households for 2 years.” 
A recent study in the Journal for Cleaner Production, states,
“We have found that, if unchecked, ICT GHGE relative contribution could grow from roughly 1–1.6% in 2007 to exceed 14% of the 2016-level worldwide GHGE by 2040, accounting for more than half of the current relative contribution of the whole transportation sector.”  (For more on this study, please see How Smart Phones Are Heating Up the Planet.
In a 2012 paper, How Clean is Your Cloud, Greenpeace offers this comparison: “If the Cloud were a country it would have the fifth largest energy demand in the world.”  What number country would the energy demand of the Cloud equal now with the advent of the IoT? How about 5 or 10 years down the road?
Although plans are underway to build future data centers in places where cleaner energy sources are available, the fact remains that data centers already consume mega amounts of energy, and this is only going to increase with the IoT. Ireland and Denmark are slated for becoming the data base for big tech companies are expecting to carry a heavy energy consumption load. According to a 2017 report, All-Island Generation Capacity Statement 2017-2026, the energy load from data centers in Ireland could account for 20% of Ireland’s peak demand. 
2.Energy consumed from machine-to-machine (m2m) communications:Machine-to-machine communication refers to 1) transmission of data from all Internet connected “things,” 2) remote software updates for personal devices, and 3) back-up of data, digital photos, and videos to the Cloud.
Hazas et al note in Are there limits to growth in data traffic?, that although many m2m communications use very little energy, some, such as driverless cars or wearable medical devices, are highly data intensive and require inordinate amounts of energy, both at the source and in the Cloud.
 Hazas et al explain further that while each machine or “thing” may not consume a lot of energy in a given communication, the sheer volume of transmissions could place m2m communications as a top contender in energy consumption – some predicting that m2m communication will reach around 45% of all Internet traffic by 2022:
“This [machine to machine] communication will occur transparently, without observation or interaction, and potentially without limit. At the time of writing, [2015] the existing 6.4bn connected IoT devices is only slightly less than world population (86%), but market predictions suggest this will reach 21bn [billion] devices by 2020— roughly three times world population estimates.
3. Embodied energy:


(Embodied energy, also known as “emergy,” refers to energy consumed in the production of goods.This includes the mining, manufacturing, transporting, and delivery of a product.)
Digital technology requires far more energy in the manufacturing process than do other products. Kris De Decker explains in The Monster Footprint of Digital Technology, that machines such as cars or refrigerators use far more energy during their “lifetime” than the amount used to manufacture them. According to De Decker, advanced digital technology has turned this relationship “upside down.” As counterintuitive as this may sound, he explains:
“A handful of microchips can have as much embodied energy as a car. And since digital technology has brought about a plethora of new products, and has also infiltrated almost all existing products, this change has vast consequences.”
Our new IoT technology will require billions of sensor nodes, and microchips each of which will require thousands of semiconductors. According to De Decker, the energy needed to produce one semiconductor is “up to 6 orders of magnitude [emphasis added] above those of conventional manufacturing processes.” 
In addition to the billions of Internet connected “things,” FCC Chair Wheeler projects that in a “5G world”, each person will own about 5-6 wireless devices. Add to that the millions of new small cells being deployed to accommodate all the digital “traffic” of the IoT, and it becomes evident that it will take an inordinate amount of energy just to produce the IoT.
4. Obsolescence of digital technologies
Perhaps the largest player in energy consumption of the IoT is that of (planned) obsolescence of all our technologies. Digital technologies generally need to be replaced every 1-3 years as Information and Communication Technologies evolve at an exceedingly fast pace.The fact that our digital devices have such a short lifespan, exacerbates the problem of the excessive amount of energy used in their production. The all too familiar need to “upgrade” will become yet more of a drain on our energy as literally billions of connected devices, machines, and “things“ will recurrently become obsolete and be discarded.
DeDecker maintains that, “Addressing technological obsolescence would be the most powerful approach to lower the ecological footprint of digital technology.”
Will Our Grid Be Able to Absorb the IoT Energy Footprint? 
Our energy grid was built over the course of the last century and is based on a business model that generates and delivers energy from burning fossil fuel. Local renewable energy, such as rooftop solar, is becoming more affordable and therefore increasingly able to replace coal and other polluting sources of energy. Utilities are trying desperately to stay afloat while integrating unprecedented amounts of local renewable energy into our saturated and failing energy grid. In The Grid, The Fraying Wires Between Americans and our Energy Future, Gretchen Bakke explains how challenging it is for our energy industry to integrate decentralized renewables into the grid, while still providing reliable energy delivery and service to customers. Bakke offers the analogy of trying to rebuild an entire airplane fleet while keeping all the airplanes in flight. Faced with the voracious appetite of the wireless industry, our utilities will have an even greater challenge navigating the tenuous, but necessary path forward to a truly sustainable energy future.
Will the Increased Energy Consumption From 5G and the IoT Impact Climate Change?
An even stronger reason that energy consumption of wireless, 5G, and the IoT must be considered, is that our energy grid is still run primarily on fossil fuels – coal, natural gas and petroleum.  So the exorbitant amount of energy that will be needed to support the IoT and its highly energy-intensive footprint will necessarily result in a huge increase in carbon emissions, thereby adversely impacting our climate.  Will the energy footprint of 5G and the IoT be offset by improvements in energy efficiency and innovations businesses may come up with? Not certain at all.
For more on energy consumption and the IoT, please see,Tsunami of data’ could consume one fifth of global electricity by 2025

DATA MINING/HARVESTING WILL CONSUME 20% OF THE WORLD'S POWER BY 2025

Thanks to Kate Kheel for putting these together.


Data Centres Will Consume 20% of the World’s Power By 2025  Feb. 2018 | Data Center Market News
"The rapid adoption of data-hungry machines and services is driving the need for more power to keep the lights on in the data centres of the world.
As analysts estimate as many as 50 billion devices to be connected by 2020, with some statistics pointing to more than 100 billion a further five years down the line, new alarming research suggests that data centres will be one of the biggest energy consumers on the planet, beating many countries’ energy consumption levels.
According to a paper to be published by US researchers before the end of the year, the ICT industry is posed to be responsible for up to 3.5% of global emissions by 2020, with this value potentially escalating to 14% by 2040, according to Climate Change News." 
https://www.gvaworldwide.com/media/1194/datasource-february-2018.pdf

Data Centres Of The World Will Consume 1/5 Of Earth’s Power By 2025  Dec. 2017 | João Marques Lima
"Alarming new research suggests that failure to source renewable energy could make data centres one of the biggest polluters in just seven years.
The rapid adoption of data-hungry machines and services is driving the need for more power to keep the lights on in the data centres of the world."

https://data-economy.com/data-centres-world-will-consume-1-5-earths-power-2025/

‘Tsunami of data’ could consume one fifth of global electricity by 2025  Nov. 12th, 2017 | John Vidal | Climate Home News
"The communications industry could use 20% of all the world’s electricity by 2025, hampering global attempts to meet climate change targets and straining grids as demand by power-hungry server farms storing digital data from billions of smartphones, tablets and internet-connected devices grows exponentially.”
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/12/11/tsunami-data-consume-one-fifth-global-electricity-2025/

Also see, 

‘Tsunami of data’ could consume one fifth of global electricity by 2025  Dec. 2017 | The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/11/tsunami-of-data-could-consume-fifth-global-electricity-by-2025



Bitcoin mining consumes more energy than 159 countries  Nov. 27th, 2017 | Peter Martinez | CBS News
"The rise in its currency value has given way to a spike in electrical consumption for the powerful computers used to "mine" more bitcoins, according to a new report. Consumption in the last month increased by nearly 30 percent.
In other words, it takes a whopping 29.05 TWh (terawatt hours, equal to one million megawatt hours) annually to operate the energy-hungry computers and networks that power bitcoin transactions. That's about 0.13 percent of total global electricity consumption, according to Digiconomist. That would rank bitcoin as 61st if it were its own country."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bitcoin-mining-energy-consumption/





Tuesday, May 28, 2019

World Leaders, Media Ignore Biodiversity Report Detailing Mass Extinction Event Now Underway

By Julia Conley

Scientists at the United Nations' intergovernmental body focusing on biodiversity sounded alarms earlier this month with its report on the looming potential extinction of one million species — but few heard their calls, according to a German newspaper report.

Deutsche Welle reported Thursday that partially because the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) released its report on what it called nature's "unprecedented" decline on the same day that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had their first child, news reports on the study's grave implications were few and far between.

While some international and progressive outlets — including Common Dreams — published high-profile stories on the report when it was released, just two of Britain's national newspapers included any reporting about biodiversity on their front pages on May 7, the day after the royal baby was born to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.




Deutsche Welle's report was mirrored by revelations in a Media Matters report published earlier this week which showed that ABC News devoted more time to covering the royal baby's birth in the week after the child was born than it had to stories about the climate crisis in all of 2018 — even as organizers like 16-year-old Greta Thunberg led worldwide climate strikes.

"Where [is] the breaking news?" tweeted Thunberg the day after IPBES released its report. "The extra news broadcasts? The front pages? Where are the emergency meetings? The crisis summits? What could be more important?"




IPBES's report detailed how "The health of ecosystems on which we and all other species depend is deteriorating more rapidly than ever," the panel's chairman, Sir Robert Watson said in a statement.

By rapidly expanding livestock and crop production, degrading land, concentrating activity in urban areas at more than double the rate than two decades ago, and increasing pollution by tenfold since 1980, humans are "eroding the very foundations of our economies, livelihoods, food security, health and quality of life worldwide," Watson said.

In addition to the potential loss of one million species, the biodiversity crisis carries substantial risks for world economies, food security and the spread of disease, scientists warn.

The report calls on policymakers to take immediate concrete action to protect nature by promoting sustainable agricultural practices, inclusive and equitable water management, renewable energy sources and other reforms.

On Wednesday, Democrats in the U.S. House attempted to call attention to the ecological crisis which is causing the rapid loss of life among millions of species, with a House Natural Resources Subcommittee holding a hearing on the issue, including testimony from Watson and other IPBES officials.

Biodiversity, Watson told the subcommittee, "is the substance behind food security, water security, it does control our climate in part, it does control pollination, it does control storm surges. These are things that affect everyday Americans. If we continue to lose biodiversity, if we continue to fragment our ecosystems, then human well-being will indeed suffer."

"This is something the average American should care about," he added.

But as The Guardian reported, lawmakers at the hearing also heard from climate science denierswho had been invited to testify by Republican committee members, diluting the urgency of IPBES's message.

Scientists have published more than 20,000 articles in 45 languages on the subject of biodiversity loss in recent years, Deutsche Welle reported.

Without the media reporting on and lawmakers expressing the urgency of the biodiversity crisis, the public has found little reason to become interested in the issue. The same day most news outlets devoted their coverage to the royal baby, Google searches for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle outnumbered those for biodiversity by 14 and 31 to one, respectively.

Deutsche Welle reported that while politicians and the news media have slightly increased the attention they've given to the climate crisis recently, under pressure from campaigners, the same consideration has not been given to biodiversity.

"Nature's unprecedented decline, which has quietly sped up, is, in isolation, less dramatic than extreme weather events brought by global warming — such as flash floods and wildfires. Its contributions to humans are also hard to grasp," reported Ajit Niranjan in the newspaper. "An obscure earthworm may form part of an ecosystem that keeps soil fertile and helps put food on our plates. But its death rarely stirs hearts the way a polar bear on melting ice does."

With its latest report, IPBES aimed to change that perception.

"One of the great things about the report is that it highlights ... the different ways we value nature," environmental scientist Kathryn Williams told the outlet. "Not just tangible ways like food and clear air, but also the ways that we relate on a more emotional level."



Friday, May 10, 2019

One Million Species on the Brink of Extinction, Finds U.N. Report

A United Nations report described as the most authoritative and comprehensive assessment of global biodiversity ever published found that human exploitation of the natural world has pushed a million plant and animal species to the brink of extinction—with potentially devastating implications for the future of civilization.

Conducted by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and released Monday, the report warned that species extinction rates are “accelerating” at an “unprecedented” rate due to the human-caused climate crisis and economic activity.

“The overwhelming evidence of the IPBES Global Assessment, from a wide range of different fields of knowledge, presents an ominous picture,” Sir Robert Watson, chair of the IPBES, said in a statement. “The health of ecosystems on which we and all other species depend is deteriorating more rapidly than ever. We are eroding the very foundations of our economies, livelihoods, food security, health, and quality of life worldwide.”

While the report’s findings—compiled by a team of hundreds of experts from 50 nations—are dire and cause for serious alarm, Watson said, there is still a window for action.
“It is not too late to make a difference, but only if we start now at every level from local to global,” said Watson. “Through ‘transformative change,’ nature can still be conserved, restored, and used sustainably—this is also key to meeting most other global goals. By transformative change, we mean a fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic, and social factors, including paradigms, goals, and values.”

Eduardo Brondizio, co-chair of the IPBES, echoed Watson, saying “business as usual has to end.”

The IPBES report comes as youth-led movements across the globe are organizing and taking to the streets en masse to pressure political leaders to take climate action in line with the urgency demanded by the scientific evidence.

Andrew Wetzler, managing director of the nature program for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), told the Washington Post that the IPBES assessment shows “that nature is collapsing around us and it’s a real wake-up call to humanity.”


The average abundance of native species in most major land-based habitats has fallen by at least 20 percent, mostly since 1900;
      
More than 40 percent of amphibian species, almost 33 percent of reef forming corals, and more than a third of all marine mammals are threatened;
      
The picture is less clear for insect species, but available evidence supports a tentative estimate of 10 percent being threatened;
      
At least 680 vertebrate species had been driven to extinction since the 16th century and more than 9 percent of all domesticated breeds of mammals used for food and agriculture had become extinct by 2016, with at least 1,000 more breeds still threatened.

Andy Purvis, professor at the Natural History Museum in London and one of the report’s main authors, said the findings show that the “society we would like our children and grandchildren to live in is in real jeopardy.”


“This is the most thorough, the most detailed and most extensive planetary health check. The take home message is that we should have gone to the doctor sooner. We are in a bad way,” Purvis said. “I cannot overstate it. If we leave it to later generations to clear up the mess, I don’t think they will forgive us.”

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

MICROWAVE RADIO FREQUENCIES AND EARTH ORBITING SATELLITES ARE CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING OR CLIMATE CHANGE

Several companies are now competing to provide not just cell phone service, but Wi-Fi and the equivalent of 5G, to every square inch of the earth from satellites in space in low earth orbit. Their target dates are 2019 or 2020. They are planning tens of thousands of satellites. There isn’t much time to prevent a global ecological catastrophe.


Planned Global WIFI from Space Will Distroy Ozone Layer, Worsen Climate Change, and Threaten Life on Earth.

Welcome to Global Climate Change and Microwaves

This web site is dedicated to the alternative “Global Warming or Climate Change” theory that microwave radio frequencies are polluting our atmosphere and Earth. Another similar theory to this is the “Broadcast Theory.” The basis of the “Microwave” theory is that microwave radio frequency communications a direct relationship with global warming and climate change. The “Climate Change” and “Global Warming” problem can be a result of the use of radio waves on a global level. Here we will learn briefly about “Global Warming” or “Climate Change,” how satellites work, the principles behind the microwave radio frequency, and how orbiting satellites and Earth antennas can cause Global RF Heating and erratic weather patterns.
Some say that microwaves used by wireless, radar, mobile, and satellites are so weak that they could not affect the world. This is somewhat true. The “Broadcast” or “Global Microwave” theories are not trying to fool you into thinking the world is melting because of intense heat generated by the waves.
The theory in a nutshell is that the constant wave bombardment effects the natural pattern and flow of the earths atmosphere. The heating and molecular friction caused by RF and microwave frequencies cause erratic weather patterns. The “Broadcast” and “Global Microwave” theories introduce many different concepts that most “Global Warming ” and “Climate Change” advocates do not consider. The Depth of the theory involves the use of all microwaves in general across the world from cell phone towers, radar systems, GPS, weather stations, HAARP, and more. The impact ranges from personal health, the pollution of the earth, global weather to the entire aspect of life on earth. It is worth while to consider this view of “Climate Change” and “Global Warming.”

Microwave Radio Frequencies and Earth orbiting Satellites are causing Global Warming or Climate Change!

Microwave Radio Frequencies dominate the Earth with millions of subscribers. Since the late 1950’s, Microwave Radio Frequencies have become the dominant form of communication for TV’s, Cell Phones, Weather Stations, and a host of others uses. Each of these companies having MILLIONS OF SUBSCRIBERS! Satellite transmitters and Earth antennas transmit UHF and higher microwave frequencies all over the planet. Just like a Vacuum tube in old electronic technology, microwaves are insulated by the vacuum of space. Because the vacuum of space acts as an insulator, microwave radio frequencies are scattered through our atmosphere at an accelerated rate. The Earth is a rotating electromagnetic field containing a dielectric material called water. Sending oscillating microwave radio frequencies through an electromagnetic field into a dielectric material, such as water, creates radio frequency heating (also called RF heating) at the molecular level of water.
Because Earth’s electromagnetic field points directly towards the North Pole and the Earth’s atmosphere is circulating through ordinary convection towards the North pole, the RF and Microwave transmissions are guided directly towards the Polar Ice Caps. This is causing erratic weather patterns which in turn effect the Polar Ice caps.
Since our atmosphere is made of water and the Earth is covered with water and ice, microwave radio frequencies pass through our atmosphere, oceans, and ice caps. Because the wattage levels are minimal, weather change is caused by a constant flow of waves that are never turned off. “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” is exacerbated by the mass use of artificial satellites and the use of microwave radio frequencies. The industrial Revolution happened at the beginning of the 1800’s. Yet, in the late 1950’s is when Global Warming or Climate Change became an issue. We can see that “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” only became an issue with the mass use of radio and microwave frequencies.

Green House Gasses are not the cause

The evidence that is provided by scientists is not pointing to “Global Warming” but “Climate Change.” The Global ice is decreasing; however, the Antarctic Ice is increasing. According to NASA,
Sea ice increases in Antarctica do not make up for the accelerated Arctic sea ice loss of the last decades, a new NASA study finds. As a whole, the planet has been shedding sea ice at an average annual rate of 13,500 square miles (35,000 square kilometers) since 1979, the equivalent of losing an area of sea ice larger than the state of Maryland every year.
This fact has caused great alarm all over the world. In an attempt to solve the issue of the disappearing ice, some Scientists have developed different “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” theories. The most popular theory is the “Green house Gas” theory. According to the theory, gases emitted from “fossil fuel” burning vehicles are blocking outgoing radiation. Greenhouse gases block radiation from leaving the earth and also block radiation from entering into the Earth’s atmosphere. It stands to reason that if radiation is being blocked from leaving the Earth’s atmosphere, then it is also being blocked from entering in. This creates an equilibrium between escaping radiation and entering radiation called “The Radiation Budget” or “The Earth’s Energy Balance.”
Danish Solar Energy Int. says, 
“Trying to relate calculations made for the top of the atmosphere to the surface is a problem because up to 70% of incoming radiation can be blocked by the atmosphere and cloud cover.” (Solcell ltd. – Danish Solar Energy Int. )
As gasses increase in the Atmosphere, less of the Suns Radiation can enter into the Earth’s atmosphere, which in turn, causes less radiation to be trapped by the Earth’s atmosphere. The “Greenhouse Gas theory” proponents counter this argument by saying the Sun radiation wavelength is shorter than the wavelength of the radiation reflecting back from earth. (Radiation wavelength and greenhouse effect) The problem is that the “Greenhouse effect” of the Earth is a normal process. The Earth will naturally process the suns rays, greenhouse gasses, and other climate occurrences and balance them out.
The Earth having a Greenhouse effect does not necessitate that the Polar ice caps melting. In fact is that while the Polar or global Ice is decreasing the Antarctic Ice is increasing. What is happening is a realignment of the weather patterns or “Climate Change” and not a “Global Warming.”

The Radiation Budget

The below illustration demonstrates how Ultraviolet radiation from space is actually blocked by our clouds and atmosphere. (Information and Statistics from UDEL) As more gasses are emitted into our atmosphere, less radiation can enter to the earth surface. This is a Geographical fact. (See UDEL and NASA) This is why the “Greenhouse gas Theory” has some big holes in it. The Earth is not warming in the way the proponents of the the “Greenhouse Gas Theory” claim. The below illustration demonstrates how the atmosphere the Earth’s surface absorbs and reflects the suns rays. The reception of the suns rays from space has a percentage of absorption and reflection that is dependent on the Earth’s atmosphere and surface.
The illustration shows that 65% is absorbed and 35% is reflected. Of the 35% that is reflected, only 4% is actually reflected from the surface of the Earth. This also can decrease with the emission more particles into the atmosphere. What does this mean? It means the amount of gasses in the atmosphere creates less sun rays from entering to the surface, in turn creating less reflection of those rays from the Earth. The Greenhouse Effect is normal behavior for the Earth.

Climate Change and not Global Warming

The weather is changing more than it is warming. This shows that the “Green House Gas Theory” falls short of an adequate explanation of what is happening in our climate. Global average temperature is one of the most-cited indicators of global climate change, and shows an increase of approximately 1.4°F since the early 20th Century. NOAA – Global Climate Change Indicators
According to the actual evidence, the Earth has warmed 1.4°F from over 100 years. There is not enough evidence to show that this is abnormal. The timeline that is presented by the “Greenhouse Gas” proponents starts in 1880. What the actual temperature fluctuation was in the thousands of years prior to 1880 is pure speculation. The percentage of warmth globally is insignificant and there is not enough actual data from years prior to 1880 to support the “Green House Gas Theory.” We also don’t have enough actual data of the fluctuation of the size and formation of the Polar Ice caps. We only have the recent images from satellite and aerial photography.
…

Video on “The Earth’s Energy Balance”

 TOP

The Microwave Field

The below image demonstrates how microwave transmissions work with the environment. Microwaves scatter THROUGH the atmosphere whereas solar radiation does not. As the microwaves penetrate to the surface, the water, ice, and atmosphere have microwave frequencies passing through them. This causes friction in the ice and water at the molecular level. This friction causes heat which is called Radio Frequency Heating. This is the basic principle behind the Microwave Oven. Click here for a great explanation of Radio Frequency Heating.

The microwave budget
MICROWAVE TRANSMITTERS SHOOT CONICALLY IN A LARGE DIRECTION! THE WAVES ARE HITTING EVERYTHING NOT JUST ANTENNAS.
It was not until UHF Frequencies in 1952 and the “Space Race” began did Global Warming or Climate Change become an issue. Since the late 1950’s, there have been thousands of satellites launched into outer space and even more antennas built that transmit to those satellites on Earth. These Satellites orbit Earth in “Polar” and “Geo Stationary” orbits. One satellite covers an area the size of North America! With the overlapping of each satellite footprint, it is clear that as we increase the amount of satellite transmissions and the use of microwave transmissions on earth, the Global Warming or Climate Change of the Earth increases. Global Warming or Climate Change becomes a greater issue with the increase of communications on earth and with satellites and the use of microwave frequencies. Today there are Satellite TV, Internet, GPS trackers, Cell phones, radar, HAARP and a host of other uses that are increasing by the day with each of these products having millions of subscribers. Direct TV alone has 16.8 Million customers. The amount of microwave transmissions entering in and out of our atmosphere is staggering. It is not just a few hundred; but, millions of waves. 
The Solution to Global Warming or Climate Change
Global Warming or Climate Change is caused by the use of UHF and higher microwave frequencies at an enormous rate. The use of these frequencies must be restricted. “Greenhouse gases” are not the cause of global warming and cutting Greenhouse gasses will NEVER stop Global Warming or Climate Change. The use of Microwave Radio Frequencies has a direct link with Global Warming or Climate Change. Microwave transmissions are causing RF heating on a global level. Trash satellites litter space, there are many active satellites in orbit, and wireless companies are perpetuating their products by the millions, and everything is inclined to go Wireless. Cleaning up the trash in space and restricting the use of Microwave radio transmissions are the solution to Global Warming or Climate Change.

Worse Than Global Warming: Wave Technology

95 pages , Safe Goods , 2007-10-01 
There exists today a distinct threat to all of civilization as we know it. The unchecked proliferation of electromagnetic technology worldwide can wipe out all that we rely upon. Frequency saturation of the precious envelope of air surrounding our planet may today be affecting her stability. All our efforts to rectify global warming may be in vain should our new weapons and technology cause a major axis shift to Earth. • Are the ancient prophecies warning us not to repeat their mistakes? • Can electromagnetic pulse weapons wipe out our electricity-based infrastructure? • Will we trigger a pole shift? • Is weather modification technology being used as a weapon? • Does science consider the long-term effects of atmospheric frequency saturation? • Is global warming a natural occurrence or are we accelerating it?
“Microwaving Our Planet,” 1997, Arthur Firstenberg: