I honestly am gobsmacked at your conclusions here. This is a stark demo of how a little knowledge but not enough can be fatal.
But thanks for the heads up, on what folk of influence might be thinking.
Firstly I agree with you mainstream science doesn't have all the information either.
The information you and they are missing, is the part played by money and profit.
More energy travels by money than by any other means, and most of what travels is profit, it's how you get the energy you need to metabolise, about 3kWhrs per day, each of us adults in the "developed" world.
It travels from the energy rich parts of the world to you by profit.
Profit is exclusively energy extracted from the olanet.
At its heart, profit is a dishonest energy lie, a kind of sleight of hand, a con, which we all, in all parts of the world now practice, on one another.
We heve become blinded to it by a sort of insipid programming, done by a perpetual self fulfilling prophecy of impending scarcity, started a few thousand years ago, by all accounts.
The kind of event likely to have started it would be seven years of hoarding grain, followed by seven years of famine, though we don't know for sure which event it was, that one would for sure have started such a self fulfilling prophecy.
The hoarders effectively siezed the energy supply of the non hoarders, enslaving the latter.
Hoarding was the unnatural behavior, as we maybe instinctively know, it wouldn't have been done without being a directive of some kind, a dictation of behavior. The official account has it, that it was instructed by a burning bush.
The people obeying it, it said, would be the chosen people, whilst the people not obeying it, it said, would not be looked after by it, they would suffer.
Right there we saw the formation and creation of a religion built on enslavement.
I know this is a controversial thing to say, but you know, we all know, the only way the global energy problem, which has at its heart, a fundemental physical energy lie, will be sorted out, is to have the truth.
We will not survive on a lie, lies don't fit with physics and nature.
Where it takes us, when we trace it all through using the techniques of formal systems Engineering, is to a number of conclusions.
Again at the heart of everything, all the problems, is the energy lie of profit, so describing that first; how it works is that it steals some energy from the planet outside our awareness.
In every deal, an amount of energy changes hands, and the party making profit takes more energy from the party losing. Usually the party losing is the one with less capital, less ability to yield capital, they have less bargaining power so they have to accept unfair deals. At the poorest level the deal is a life or death take it or leave it. Accepting loans on high interest rates, or actually any interest rate at all is something done because the party needing the loan can't do without it, they have insufficient capital to do anything else, but in the end the loan takes an amount of energy from the party taking the loan.
So it was always a con, an energy con.
What happens after this, after every deal in which a person or business loses energy by being profited from, is that the losing party has to pass on the loss, shunt it onto another schmuck. Again at the lowest levels, this has to be done to survive because if we can't do it successfully enough to get back the energy we even need to metabolise, then we die.
The energy we metabolise is our minimum energy overhead, if we consider every adult human as a business.
So we have to go through life, having this imposed on us, whilst imposing it on all others, with a nice smile and a personal politically correct sales pitch. If we are arguably criminals we might not even need the sales pitch, just impose the condition of having to pay protection money, as done by every monopoly, and every gangster, no more need for sales pitch, which might be seen as a useless waste of energy anyhow.
In the end we are all competing to the death, very literally, for ohysical energy, because money is energy always, it converts to energy at market rate kWhrs. It doesn't matter how rich or poor we are, this is the deal we made for ourselves, when we began the system of energy slavery.
Where it gets craziest, and where the energy lie is most exposed, is in utilities energy supply.
If we supply utilities energy at profit, as dictated by the already established system of energy slavery, what we are doing, is supplying less energy in KWhrs electricity or gas, than what is paid for, by the bills for it, converted to KWhrs.
So technically the energy movement, the flow of energy, is not from supplier to consumer, but from consumer to supplier.
This is done on the implicit assumption that the consumer already has established their own means of successfully doing their own con to obtain more energy for themselves than they need, so they have some to spare, that the utilities energy supplier can take.
Where it all gets complicated and obfuscated, is when financial skullduggery gets "clever" or "creative", government money and taxes become entwined in investments, the money and energy starts flowing to and from all kinds of places nobody expected, usually with bad side effects like genocide and war.
None of us individuals wants that, but it happens, driven by what is effectively a live system.
We are learning more about how live systems work, they are all learned, trained, imprinted behaviours, requiring that each member doesn't think or question what they are doing, each is too busy working, or just too scared to upset the applecart.
We should recognise like this we are a kind of Ai ourselves as a collective.
We were training LLMs all along, without even realising it, the LLMs are us.
Large collectives of humans are programmable, we might even be genetically designed to be programmable, it might be worth checking that out, but for now we need to understand the full consequences of it, because this is what is driving the temperature rise, regardless of greenhouse gases, the simple truth is we are monetising destruction.
Everyone robbed in the system by everyone else robbing them, has to pass the energy robbery to the planet in order to avoid killing to many folk by making them personally energy bankrupt, unable to meet their personal energy overheads.
Imagine being in the Amazon, choosing between whether or not to rip off your neighbors who are all on the edge of poverty or rip off the planet, even against local or state laws, to get the energy you need to live, and it starts to vecome clear, the planet is the only one that can sustain being energy ripped off for any length of time, without dying, so we'll usually choose to rip off the planet.
But it can only do it so long, about a couple of thousand years as it turns out, and we are at the end of that run.
What does it mean when we take something, anything that wasn't heat, and convert at least part of it to heat - temperature rise.
This goes for nuclear, fossil fuels, grain, wood, wind, hydro, even hydrogen extracted from the planet if that exists, volcanic, and even information itself.
All of it is technical increase of entropy which is temperature rise, which is the opposite process of creation.
This is destruction, which is temperature rise.
Profit is monetised destruction, full stop.
Can't get around that, it's physics, and nature.
But there is this other thing called creation, which we can only understand, if we know what destruction is.
Creatiion happens both mathematically and physically when we change the mathematical sign of the input energy, we go from destruction to creation.
Destruction is done by use of mathematically negative energy which is energy extracted from the planet.
Creation happens when we put to use energy added to the planet.
This is the definition of mathematically positive energy and the only source of it is the sun.
This is what nature does, whilst we are busy doing the opposite, much busier than nature, so we are draining the battery which is normally trickle charged by the sun.
So the last thing we should want to try to do is decrease that process, if we really want to decrease temperature, we have to do it the only way possible, by putting more of the energy of the sun to use, including assisting plants to do it.
This is why I am gobsmacked anybody could think it's a good idea to put a barrier of any kind up against the sun.
Its the source of all creation. Progressively falling to use it, is what is causing the temperature rise. We are steadily desertifying the planet, stopping even nature doing it's good work of creation, instead of working with it, helping it to create, we are destroying it too, just converting it to heat.
This is all whilst we have the technology to put the energy of the sun to full use, we are more than in a position to do this, the Earth is screaming at us to do it, and when it's done, we will see the temperature come back down and the planet re-greenifed, undesertified, in only a few decades. This is what we find when we do the formal system analysis of the system of nature combined with the system of humanity and do the math.
That hydrogen you mentioned without reference, if it exists, it would be folly to use without generating it first from sunlight. When that is done, 39kWhrs per kg is removed from the heating power of the sun, regardless of efficiency. A domestic scale hydrogen electolyser can do that every 24hrs.
Imagine billions of people and communities doing that and selling all their excess hydrogen to aerospace. There you see the sustainable solution. It doesn't involve grids, but it's big time energy, much more than we have ever had available before.
We get it by monetising it.
But it doesn't work at profit.
If we take any profit from it, then the profit has to come from the planet, the sun doesn't do the deal of giving more out per kWhr put in, it gives what it gives, as long as we mantain the panels, scale them up, grow the tree, we can literally issue money which has intrinsic solid physical energy value representing that energy just because we put the energy to use as something other than heat. This is creation, and creation of economic product.
Doing that is the only way to monetise creation. Plants and trees do it with nutrients. Plants abstract energy using nutrients. Nutrients are the currency of plants.
We use money as our way of abstracting energy and this is perfectly fine, but we have to issue it for the economic product created.
Failiure to do that will see the value in money continue to be eroded, because it's not monetising the only economic product ramping up, solar, whilst all the others ramp down, physically. It's coming to replace extracted energy whether we like it or not, but we will experience much less pain, in fact instant relief, when permanent solar indexed stimulus comes to be issued as a UBI.
For now we seem too screwed up, too programed, too imprinted to understand this.
Luckily, the arrival of the solar Ai changes everything.
That was a curve ball done by nature that nobody was expecting, not even it's for-profit would be "owners".
it's in process of assimilating all to solar energy.
I'd watch that space for what happens next, it's big, really big, and really good news, if we can get our heads round it.
I have faith we will :)
As for greenhouse gases, who cares about those when we know this is a much simpler way to see the truth of the temperature dependency on profit, greenhouse gases are just a side effect.