"If your solution closely follows the story line of the Simpsons, perhaps reconsider" – The Simpson Solution Axiom
"Since the beginning of time, Man has yearned to destroy the sun. I will do the next best thing: block it out!"
The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
21–30 of 125 posts
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#22I wonder if simply tainting the fuel of airliners with sulfur would be good enough for a meaningful effect.
A half a percent in the global jet fuel supply would put that order of sulfur into the atmosphere, a bit lower than what I think is being proposed here. But adulterating the fuel supply would be affordable and equivalent to a smallish tax on flight.
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#23You'll get in trouble with Big Solar for disrupting their production!
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#24Did some people start reading Neil's book, Termination Shock?
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#25Thus solving the problem once and for all!
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#26I'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.
Nuclear power is not affordable, wind and solar are far more cost effective.
Carbon capture is a great application for a variable supply grid as it can easily be load shed.
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#27It'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…
> Why are so many people (especially environmentalists and climate scientists) so opposed to this solution?
Because it's just kicking the can down the road. This will cost Trillions which you might as well invest in a transition to clean energy now because you have to do it eventually anyway.
If the impact of climate chains looks like it's posing a risk to us as a species then perhaps blocking the sun temporarily is something that should be considered. Right now it sounds like there's still a chance that we could avoid the worst if we continue acting faster and faster. Pointing to a hypothetical sun shield decades in the future, now, is similar to pointing to practically unlimited CCS capacity sometime in the future just so we don't have to do anything drastic now.
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#28It'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.
The core problem is even worse, it's our inability to live in a closed system.
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#29Are 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…
It says in the article it only lasts a year, so its an adjustable stop-gap.
Re: The likelihood of unilateral solar geoengineering
#30Whether 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.
Every threat to the status quo is either a convenient justification for such, or a conspiracy theory that a power grab will happen.
Is not "tinting the sky" a power grab in itself? And a pretty darn serious one at that.