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

The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

climate.benjames.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 125 posts

Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

#11

Post by pokstad »

bmmayer1 wrote: post #8

It's amazing that this solution has not been considered more openly and widely until now. It's cheaper, more effective, and doesn't require draconian regulations or near-impossible expectations on human behavior. It's also something that could be tested for a year. It's not irreversible. It would allow the undeveloped world a chance to achieve a piece of the global wealth pie. Why are so many people (especially envir…

The sky belongs to everyone. Hard to get sign off from everyone on making a change to it.

Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

#13

Post by brink »

Whether or not you believe in climate-change, the interesting discussion to me is that climate change is a convenient justification for power-grabs by wannabe dictators. I'm not so sure that the elite will be so ready to give up that lever of control by simply tinting the sky. We'll see, I guess.

Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

#15

Post by notpachet »

bmmayer1 wrote: post #8

It's amazing that this solution has not been considered more openly and widely until now. It's cheaper, more effective, and doesn't require draconian regulations or near-impossible expectations on human behavior. It's also something that could be tested for a year. It's not irreversible. It would allow the undeveloped world a chance to achieve a piece of the global wealth pie. Why are so many people (especially envir…

From the article:

> Crucially, the biggest problems with SRM are probably not yet known. The side effects of putting sulfur into the stratosphere could be some of the most consequential unknowns in human history.

Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

#16

Post by Lonestar1440 »

I'm continually surprised that this idea gets so much traction. While possible to build, it's also strictly Temporary and just leaves us with a worse problem later on. We'll just need a bigger one, 20 years down the line, when CO2 levels keep going up! At some point, it's pretty obviously a non-solution.

Let's put this energy into Nuclear Power and CO2 recapture; and actually fix things.

Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

#19

Post by incrudible »

slimsag wrote: post #10

Are there ways this could be done with rapidly biodegradable materials, such that e.g. it would need to be continually done year after year or else the sky would return to the exact same state it was in before? Also, living in Arizona with 120F/49C summers, I sure wish someone could come up with some geography-wide sunshade! I guess that will need to be after they stop growing the city forever, and stop paving the ea…

Not sure if you consider sulphur biodegradable, but it will need to be done continually, or else the effect will disappear.

Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering

#20

Post by [deleted] »

alanbernstein wrote: post #9
bmmayer1 wrote: post #8

It's amazing that this solution has not been considered more openly and widely until now. It's cheaper, more effective, and doesn't require draconian regulations or near-impossible expectations on human behavior. It's also something that could be tested for a year. It's not irreversible. It would allow the undeveloped world a chance to achieve a piece of the global wealth pie. Why are so many people (especially envir…

Because warming is just one symptom of the core problem, which is pollution.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN