Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 272 posts

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#111

Post by immmmmm »

tonnydourado wrote: post #97

Maybe I'm missing something, but besides reducing the Earth's temperature, vulcano eruptions have also caused famines, because reduced solar light impacts crop yield. We have much better agricultural technology now, but: 1. Is there even any research saying we can counteract the reduction in solar light by "planting smarter"? 2. Agricultural technology is very unevenly distributed. If solar light gets reduced globall…

> Maybe I'm missing something, but besides reducing the Earth's temperature, vulcano eruptions have also caused famines, because reduced solar light impacts crop yield.

There is already around -0.9W/m2 of radiative forcing due to shipping (sulphur in shipping fuels) which is massive compared to volcanos.

> We have much better agricultural technology now

Yes and no, "modern" agriculture depends massively in fossile fuels and mining so it is not sustainable.

> 1. Is there even any research saying we can counteract the reduction in solar light by "planting smarter"

I read some research saying we can absorb a significant amount of CO2 by regenerative farming. The best however is to plant forests where cows are grazing.

> Agricultural technology is very unevenly distributed. If solar light gets reduced globally, Europe and US might be fine, but Africa, Asia, and South America could still face catastrophic reduction of crop yield.

Unstable climate AND heatwaves are much worst to this regard IMHO. But yes, geoengineering is bad.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#112

Post by hef19898 »

stonogo wrote: post #99
hef19898 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A baloon you mean? What is there to validate?

This plan, which consists of multiple stages: https://makesunsets.com/blogs/news/january-2023-flights

So, basically what all those youtubers do when sending balloons up? Mark my utterly unimpressed. I think the rainbow background very fitting so, they only forgot to add the pink unicorn.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#113

Post by hutzlibu »

schiffern wrote: post #85
marginalia_nu wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] experiments with the atmosephere of the people of Mexico? Yeah I'm not sure that's how the atmosphere works. Surely this stuff would diffuse and affect the atmosphere globally.

If nations don't have national sovereignty over their slice of the atmosphere, then are we saying all air pollution is an international crime? [For clarity I don't particularly disagree with this stance, but my mostly-overlooked point is that:] If people really think this, why is it that (on HN in particular) we overwhelmingly hear this point made in the context of geoengineering, and not for regular old pollution? I…

"then are we saying all air pollution is an international crime?"

We are maybe not saying that in one voice, but many people, including myself are saying exactly that since quite a while. Same with polluting the groundwater, or the ocean.

One has to differentiate, of course and it is scale that matters. One coal fire is neglectible, but powering the economy with (maybe even unfiltered) coal plants is not. Yet most nations still do it, so it will take a while, before this will be seriously considered a punishable crime.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#114

Post by schiffern »

MrOwnPut wrote: post #105
schiffern wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so it's ok to do experiments with the atmosephere of the people of Mexico? So it's okay to do experiments with the atmosphere, as long as you re-brand them as "pollution" instead of as "experiments"? (and of course, organizationally separate the scientists performing the data collection/analysis steps)

You answered his question with another question. I believe your question is insinuating that pollution is branded as such and is really an experiment? I don't follow.. can you expand on that or clarify? But first please answer their question before shifting the conversation.

No, my point is that the atmosphere doesn't care what we call it. It's just a semantics game.

People care, but we do it in such a backwards way that the rule is apparently "you can hurt (for amoral profit), but don't you dare try to help!"

Clearly, if anything, the move is to re-brand geoengineering as "normal pollution". It wouldn't even be hard: every 737 emits 500 grams of SO2 in less than 100 miles, and not a peep!

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#115

Post by stonogo »

hef19898 wrote: post #112
stonogo wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This plan, which consists of multiple stages: https://makesunsets.com/blogs/news/january-2023-flights

So, basically what all those youtubers do when sending balloons up? Mark my utterly unimpressed. I think the rainbow background very fitting so, they only forgot to add the pink unicorn.

Yes, this is how engineering works. They calibrate their equipment's altitude and flight pattern predictions, then modify the equipment to vent at the target altitude (both the balloon gas, to arrest ascent, and the cloud chamber, to disperse the chemical), then test to make sure their modifications are working correctly. Then they finalize that design and enter into production of a calibrated device whose target altitude they can be confident of hitting.

I'm not sure they're trying to impress you, but they have a feedback form if you want to let them know.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#116

Post by callmetom »

stonogo wrote: post #102
callmetom wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Validate that the contents of a balloon are released at the altitude the balloon ruptures? That seems like a very weak cover for action, especially since they admit in earlier statements that they are trying to grab attention... and also sell "cooling credits". Mission accomplished - they got that attention they wanted.

The plan is for the balloon to partially vent at a target altitude, and a separate cloud chamber to release then. This test is of an off-the-shelf balloon kit, presumably to validate altitude targets and flight predictions. They've been pretty open about exactly what they're doing and when, and even had (still have, technically) a feedback form for you to submit your advice.

None of that "plan" or "test" actually needs to release any sulfur dioxide, especially because they don't seem to be doing any kind of measurements of the substance once released. Pretending this is anything but an intentional act of provocation isn't "pretty open about exactly what they're doing". This is really all somebody needs to read to know what is going on:

> Luke Iseman, a serial inventor and the former director of hardware at Y Combinator, believed all of that research was not happening fast enough. So he started tinkering with releasing sulfur dioxide particles into the atmosphere with balloons, raised venture capital to fund the startup, and brought on co-founder Andrew Song to manage sales.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#117

Post by HPsquared »

dubcanada wrote: post #79

I really don’t like the idea of solar geoengineering. If we start sending up sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere and it fixes the problem. What do you think we’re going to do? Stop caring about global warming entirely, and pump way more green house gases… why wouldn’t we? We can just fix it with more sulfur dioxide. Then you send up more and more and more. And eventually something breaks. Now for some reason a countri…

You could make the same argument against medical care. "If we start healing the sick, people will stop taking care of their health".

That's not even considering potential side effects of therapies, medicines, etc. Any action has a balance of good and bad, both directly and indirectly.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#118

Post by bitL »

wolverine876 wrote: post #29

This isn't a Mexican company; the person behind it is. > Luke Iseman, a serial inventor and the former director of hardware at Y Combinator ... he started tinkering with releasing sulfur dioxide particles into the atmosphere with balloons, raised venture capital to fund the startup, and brought on co-founder Andrew Song to manage sales. Why did they choose Mexico? They couldn't get away with it in the US, so it's ok…

Next stop: international waters.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#119

Post by dubcanada »

schiffern wrote: post #106
dubcanada wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny enough I have zero problem with exploring other planets. My problem is when we start messing around with the only one we have without truly understanding every possible outcome. And having one country do it while it affects everyone.

Funny enough, me either. But that's missing the point. How long until we "truly understand every possible outcome"? 10 years? 15? When you speak in absolutes, you don't even need to move goalposts. Since we will (obviously) never understand everything , if we follow your criterion then nobody could ever start anything. This weird double standard is only ever applied to geoengineering, but never regular pollution. Bas…

No need to be snarky. I’m just trying to have a discussion.

I also never said I support pollution, but if I support going to mars I must because a rocket is a lot of pollution.

My main premise is I tend to think we’ve messed up so much so fast (in regards to the earth), I don’t think trying brand new studies that are based off words like “presumably”, “promising makes sense.

Wikipedia says

> However, as of 2021, there has been little research and existing natural aerosols in the stratosphere are not well understood.

And

> It is uncertain how effective any solar geoengineering technique would be, due to the difficulties modeling their impacts and the complex nature of the global climate system.

Do you think based on those words we should just be firing up balloons and see what happens?

I’m not saying at some point in time with studies done, and people agree we cannot proceed. But this doesn’t seem like sound science just yet. And I prefer sound science before messing with the environment.

Re: Mexico cracks down on solar geoengineering

#120

Post by irthomasthomas »

wolverine876 wrote: post #29

This isn't a Mexican company; the person behind it is. > Luke Iseman, a serial inventor and the former director of hardware at Y Combinator ... he started tinkering with releasing sulfur dioxide particles into the atmosphere with balloons, raised venture capital to fund the startup, and brought on co-founder Andrew Song to manage sales. Why did they choose Mexico? They couldn't get away with it in the US, so it's ok…

Why don't they just stick to Colorado, where most other weather modification programs are run? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34380470
Post reply on HN