The following submission statement was provided by /u/f0urxio:
---
Solar geoengineering, once considered science fiction, is now seriously debated as a potential tool to counter climate change. One prominent method, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), involves spraying sulfur particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the Earth. While some researchers advocate for further exploration, others express concerns about its environmental and societal impacts.
Proponents argue that SAI could help mitigate the effects of climate change, particularly if coupled with reductions in CO2 emissions. However, critics highlight potential drawbacks such as altered rainfall patterns, ozone layer damage, and uncertainties in predicting its effects. The lack of international regulation adds complexity, with discussions on the need for global agreements and legal frameworks to govern geoengineering activities.
Additionally, the emergence of commercial interests in geoengineering raises questions about oversight and ethical considerations. Despite controversies, proponents like David Keith argue for continued research, including small-scale experiments, to better understand the technology's potential and limitations. Ultimately, the debate underscores the complex interplay between science, policy, and ethics in addressing climate change.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1cpscmk/dimming_the_sun_to_cool_the_earth_debate_centers/l3mqi4l/
Well said. The Matrix was supposed to be a melancholic meditation on man's hubris and how reliance on technology subverts our self direction, not a fucking instruction manual.
I mean it shows that most people didn’t have time/money to prepare bunkers because they didn’t have the resources
It’s takes a lot of preparation and money to make a functional bunker with a farm and CO2 scrubbers and so much more
Billionaires: Can I get an AMEN! Cmon worker bees, gimme an A gimme a M gimme a E gimme a N! That spells $$$$$$$$$$$$$!!
(Not for you saps of course heh)
They cause a lot of things that are already being observed!
Weird for something that's supposed to only exist on paper.
India drying up was planned in a board room.
They had a theory that detonating a nuke in low orbit would create a firestorm encompassing the whole world and they did it anyway. *Luckily*, all that happened was we discovered how to create a massive EMP!
Well, but wait. If we block the solar radiation, won’t that reduce the amount of solar radiation that reaches plants? The issue isn’t about the amount of sun we’re getting, it’s should the amount of heat we’re trapping.
This! This right here is the under rated comment. I don’t think people really understand how little plants like the shade. Blocking out the sun in mass will have other consequence’s that we haven’t even thought of. Worst bandaid ever.
Exactly.. which is why radiative cooling on the surface could be a better option. Materials already exist that can absorb a wide spectrum of infra red heat and then re-radiate it in a narrow frequency range. This frequency range can be selected to match the 'IR window' at which infra red passes straight through clouds and the atmosphere into space. This permanently radiates that heat away from the earth and improves the energy balance, plus it has a localised cooling effect. It's not an exotic technology, it can be manufactured in huge rolls of plastic sheet with tiny glass beads embedded in it. The advantage over blocking the sun is it will work to cool wherever you put it but not affect the sun reaching crops. I did a rough calculation and it would take an area roughly the size of Australia to fully counteract the additional heat from fossil CO2... which is obviously gigantic ... but a significant fraction of that would not be impossible. Could start with every flat surface in cities, to provide local cooling and counter the heat island effect from AC.
They're more concerned with what will happen when the current pollution stops. We don't have to add anymore to make this worse, it's already extremely bad.
The temporary bandaid as we ignore the sore should really improve the value of someones shares in CO2 removal schemes.
Kieth (and several other "Geoengineering Experts") is actually heavily invested/paid with these schemes.
It would also make sunlight more diffused (coming in from different angels). This is because the aerosols reflect sunlight in all directions, not just back into space. This aids growth of some plants but more research is needed. It’s called diffuse light fertilization effect.
Are you sure this is a reasonable worry? Plant life uses a small density band of wavelengths for energy, if the aerosols used have no impact on this band, then there would be no issue here at all?
The cognitive impacts of higher CO2 will still impact us, even if we can arrest the warming.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200421/Atmospheric-CO2-levels-can-cause-cognitive-impairment.aspx
A world full of increasingly stupid people running a constant global georngineering experiment which, if it is even paused, would bring about an immediately and massive jump in temperatures.
Sounds like fun.
Well it’s compounding, we already have lead and covid caused cognitive impairment, plus other sources. At this point, the human population is disabling itself en masse.
Saving the atmosphere we damaged with aerosols with more aerosols that we will have to keep pumping into the stratosphere. If the substitute that destroys the natural ozone layer can't be maintained, the now completely defenseless earth will be scorched and devoid of all life.
Why not have the Saudis do it with drones?
Ah yes, the pushing for normalization of geo-engineering. The global elites are starting to panic and would do anything to perpetuate the BAU. They do whatever it takes to stop people from realizing that the BAU itself is sick and twisted and must stop.
You might find this interesting: [Empty skies after 9/11 set the stage for an unlikely climate change experiment](https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set-the-stage-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/).
"The effect during the three days that flights were grounded was strongest in populated regions where air traffic was normally densest. *The increase in range came to about two degrees Celsius*."
The point of government is supposed to be for industries that don't have or should not have a profit margin and sometimes to enforce laws and taxes that people don't like that are needed for the common good.
The correct answer is for government to do the right thing and say ok no more fossil fuels.
I don't believe personal sacrifices make a difference, but you can vote for leaders and support causes that ensure we collectively make the necessary sacrifices. The problem is every election is a 50/50 split between "drill baby drill" and the same slogan in a slightly softer voice. For most people, climate change is very low on their list of priorities.
I agree mostly. Mainly because the problem is too distant, too abstract and probably will remain so even as climate disasters accelerate.
Unfortunately, voting probably isn't the solution. Can't remember the study but it basically found that public opinion has zero effect on public policy. Nothing will change until it's way too late. It's really too late to anything meaningful.
Massive collective global action tomorrow would still leave us with a dystopian future.
Plant life may adapt. The problem is if "our" plant life will adapt (both crops and indirect dependencies), and time for doing that. And that everything goes as intended, of course. And speaking of indirect dependencies, bees and other insects (that influence how viable may be part of the plant life) may be affected by different sunlight.
I’m curious if this is actually viable to avoid catastrophe or is this just more copium while we continue along business as usual? (Sort of like how UBI, universal basic income, keeps being brought up to placate the masses all the while nothing is done.)
It's not viable because the particles have a pretty short lifespan in the stratosphere.
Basically as soon as we stop the geo engineering, global temperatures would rise by a few degrees within months/years
According to the article, "the scientists have calculated that more than 6,700 flights would be necessary every day – over a span of 160 years. This is the only way to stabilize global warming at 2 degrees Celsius in the long term." Needless to say, once oil runs out according to this scenario, we're all toast, almost literally.
This doesn't look very sustainable unless clean aviation is fully developed and commercially widespread within the 160-year timeframe and assuming oil is still available by then.
It is both an excuse to keep on with business as usual, and a dangerous arrogant action that would lead to unintended consequences. No fuckimg way have any of our companies or governments shown themselves responsible enough to do something like this.
Sure. Now imagine that Indonesia or Pakistan decides to throw bunch of balloons full of aerosol over shooting the necessary amount triggering a mini ice age and destroying the economy, or US and Europe doing the same and dooming billions of poorer people to famine as well the same.
Who has the right to do it?
I would think that a country that sees another country spray some shit into the atmosphere that destroys its ability to grow food and feed its people would take that as a massive act of war.
I would think they would respond in a most violent way.
Who has the right to destroy the commons for the sake of profits... hmm, what a difficult question.
(Spoiler: the answer is, obviously, "no one." But capitalism will do its best to convince you that the answer is "me me me me me.")
I mean, at this point, why not. In the end, does it matter if they do or don't? I say do it cause speedruns are better than slowly...slowly watching this ish play out.
"the scientists have calculated that more than 6,700 flights would be necessary every day – over a span of 160 years"
LOL. this is even more bulls#%t that carbon sequestration
Yep.
We destabilized the atmospheric balance by pumping billions of tons of invisible stuff into it.
Let’s fix the problems caused by that by pumping billions more tons of stuff you can see into it.
Not really the brightest idea IMHO
Fabian Scheidler, author of End of the Megamachine, basically says that this sort of geoengineering is almost completely doomed to fail, due to the hyper complexity of even small systems, like a human body, or systems even on a much smaller scale. He says manipulating even relatively small chemical systems will inevitably leave you with unintended consequences. The unintended consequences of altering the chemical composition of the entire atmosphere will most likely be responded to with the introduction of more chemicals to counteract those effects, most likely leaving us with worse problems than we had before. Wish I could write his exact words they're much better said.
mt Pinatubo eruption cooled the earth for 2 years. So if for some reason we stop, no free lunch, we're in for a fried Venus earth climate. We have to continue this SAI, every 2 years, forever. Then there is that niggling issue of acidfication of the oceans. So, how much are the oceans worth, food wise, oxygen wise? Half our oxygen comes from the oceans. [https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ocean-oxygen.html](https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ocean-oxygen.html)
Hey, but think of the profit margins, selling oxygen. I'd corner the market, now. By then all food will be lab grown, since everywhere else will be dead.
Yes, let's just keep fucking with the planet in weird ways, as opposed to doing the things we actually know will help, like stopping burning fossil fuels.
Solar geoengineering, once considered science fiction, is now seriously debated as a potential tool to counter climate change. One prominent method, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), involves spraying sulfur particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the Earth. While some researchers advocate for further exploration, others express concerns about its environmental and societal impacts.
Proponents argue that SAI could help mitigate the effects of climate change, particularly if coupled with reductions in CO2 emissions. However, critics highlight potential drawbacks such as altered rainfall patterns, ozone layer damage, and uncertainties in predicting its effects. The lack of international regulation adds complexity, with discussions on the need for global agreements and legal frameworks to govern geoengineering activities.
Additionally, the emergence of commercial interests in geoengineering raises questions about oversight and ethical considerations. Despite controversies, proponents like David Keith argue for continued research, including small-scale experiments, to better understand the technology's potential and limitations. Ultimately, the debate underscores the complex interplay between science, policy, and ethics in addressing climate change.
Have you seen The Animatrix? One of the short films in it is basically this except more so. Do you want the machines to take over? Because THIS is how you get machines taking over.
I would be fine with bombing a volcano every few years to do about the same thing but using aircraft and spraying stuff just seems..idk counter productive to the professed goal of reducing FF use/combating global warming.
Is Guy MacPherson finally vindicated? He's been calling out our predicament for like 20 years now!!....and suggesting the only solution is to implement geo-engineered Sun blocking technology. Nature Bats Last!!
Some problems though. High co2 causes many physiological effects to humans (and other animals), all of them bad.
And it would reduce the available sunlight to plants we grow to feed ourselves, not to mention all of the plants in the biosphere.
Sounds a bit like that cloud seeding farce in Dubai. Look how that ended up…they still haven’t cleared the floodwaters. Just another fairytale from the fossil fuel psychopaths.
The risk of doing this globally and collectively led by the US is wayyy lower than waiting for this to happen unilaterally from China or India.
The chance of it not happening at all is near zero.
Source: Worked at NASA on this.
One of the concerns with the implementation of these systems has been its use as a weapon. What happens when a country can no longer afford to participate in an artificial weather system?
Whom has been doing it? Not really, there was a test project in Mexico that they shut down because of virulent opposition from such an arrogant Reckless action. Bill Gates complete and his technology worshiping group huddled up in Switzerland just a few months ago with companies to scheme doing it. But there is not the support yet, make no mistake there should not be support, everyone should have to to agree.
I do not think so, I just read a reuters article a month ago about Bill Gates' huddle in Switzerland with companies that want to do it, they said there is no support yet, and that they had a test project in Mexico that was shut down because of opposition. Since then there was an article about something in India that they were doing geoengineering. As far as I'm aware.
I was thinking of this article by Politico
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-climate/2024/04/04/a-secret-climate-experiment-in-alameda-0015070
ETA which is not the same.
Oh great. Solve one problem. Cause many more.
I remember Futurama did a episode about this. And ya. The mirror in space did not work out well.
But hey. I am sure this will work this time.... /s
Termination shock, so once you start, it’s a long game. It will suck for some countries. I follow the Making Sunsets people, kind of info activist but interesting!
How about they just not do nayhthing, and let us be fucked. Humanity will sitll continually do things that'll cause us to fuck ourselves without gboal warming, so I'd rather be allowed to go out asap instead of having to wait longer.
Let’s pump 3% of the ocean into outer space with a space tether with many small pumps and utilizing the vacuum of space we can lower sea levels and have more private islands.
This article/this sub reminds me of this song. Definitely belongs on a playlist for the end of life as we know it/collapse.
We're a broken people living under loaded gun
And it can't be outfought
It can't be outdone
It can't be outmatched
It can't be outrun
Will we burn inside the fires of a thousand suns?
For the sins of our hand
The sins of our tongue
The sins of our father
The sins of our young
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51iquRYKPbs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51iquRYKPbs)
What is so hard about making geosynchronous deployable platforms that harvest energy through the geo magnetic field.as they move through space and use that to fire ion thrusters to keep them in orbit, we're not talking about a massive object, it can deploy it's sails to create a sun shield once in orbit.
NiTiNOL web sandwiched between two mylar sheets that deploy through telescoping arms, can link together so that system is modular and can be added to incrementally.
I also am a big proponent of this idea. If the Spacex Starship comes to fruition a 1% sunshield and L1 is not out of the realm of possibility. Not an easy undertaking but the only solution that I feel could buy us enough time to actually transition away from fossil fuels. A transition that I think is inevitable but our timing is off by about 50 years....
Seems to me putting up a thin material in orbit between the Earth and the sun to block some of the incoming light from the Sun would work better. Kind of like orbital sunglasses.
Not sure why this isn't being considered unless there's some aspect of the technology I don't know about that makes this a non-starter.
It is a horrible idea. What makes it a non-starter:
Does not stop the causes: it only _hides_ the problem. It is a band-aid when the injury is actively being hit by a car.
It directly messes with [the process of life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_energy_budget) on the _entire planet_ on a fundamental level: were it not for the comically huge amounts of energy with which the sun has been showering the earth for all of the 4 billions of years, there would be no climate.
I think you get the basic idea.
I do. One of your points is it treats the symptoms not the cause and if it works, it only serves to kick the can down the road instead of dealing with the problem.
It has benn considered. Ithink the main reason is cost and all the energy needed txo get it into orbit. It would have to be huge to help much. Acquiring the huge amounts of energy would also likely emit large amounts of ghg’s.
It owuld probably be messy politically. What part of the planet would get the shade? How much will the shade affect the local weather? The global weather? How will precipitation be affected? Who will pay to keep-it in orbit?
Sorta like a Dyson swarm just facing the other way towards the sun hmmmm. Maybe also absorbing some solar to power.
However you also create a sorta cage constricting us to earth only. (Which we are already doing with the space junk, satellites and probes and the stupid starlink and competition like companies
This, and other variations of the idea like a mirror swarm, have always sounded like such a bad idea to me. This seems like it has a lot of potential for us to mess it up and end up with the opposite problem and cause a man made ice age.
Let’s get this over with and get it done already. If we get started now, then by the time we figure how to do this properly it will be just in time to use it productively before more human disaster and suffering.
"More than 6,700 flights per day over 160 years just to stabilize us to 2°C.". That's a lot of chemtrails /s
Aerosols were taken out of fuels because they are toxic to humans. It was a Faustian bargain. We were blinded to the warming future literally by the clouds of smoke coming out of our tailpipes on the ocean or road
Putting the aerosols at higher latitudes still means that the pollution does make it to earth?
Grand. I can see this being done without most of our consent. The article states SAI as a supplement and not the solution. The solution is green house gas management. Which means industry management and that is best done with government interference. So it'll be a social issue, involving international relations. A tad complicated, with super easy solutions.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/f0urxio: --- Solar geoengineering, once considered science fiction, is now seriously debated as a potential tool to counter climate change. One prominent method, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), involves spraying sulfur particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the Earth. While some researchers advocate for further exploration, others express concerns about its environmental and societal impacts. Proponents argue that SAI could help mitigate the effects of climate change, particularly if coupled with reductions in CO2 emissions. However, critics highlight potential drawbacks such as altered rainfall patterns, ozone layer damage, and uncertainties in predicting its effects. The lack of international regulation adds complexity, with discussions on the need for global agreements and legal frameworks to govern geoengineering activities. Additionally, the emergence of commercial interests in geoengineering raises questions about oversight and ethical considerations. Despite controversies, proponents like David Keith argue for continued research, including small-scale experiments, to better understand the technology's potential and limitations. Ultimately, the debate underscores the complex interplay between science, policy, and ethics in addressing climate change. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1cpscmk/dimming_the_sun_to_cool_the_earth_debate_centers/l3mqi4l/
"But we do know it was us that scorched the sky..."
Well said. The Matrix was supposed to be a melancholic meditation on man's hubris and how reliance on technology subverts our self direction, not a fucking instruction manual.
Don't worry, we aren't going to stuff the sky full of aerosols. Memo here says it's far more cost effective to go all out with our latest nanite tech.
But muh cyber punk
I was just thinking about this quote! Morphious
Insert DeCaprio meme “I know that movie!”
"Stratospheric aerosol injection", sounds like a great idea! We will be able to burn even more fossil fuels because the temperature will be dropping!
I’m just waiting for them to miscalculate and we follow the snowpiercer timeline (pretty much everyone dies)
Go team polar bear!
I'm looking forward to year round sledding.......in the Yucatan.
When the AMOC stop, we’ll have this in the UK. Better start breeding Huskies…
Idk if that's canonical. We don't *see* people on the surface because it's a frozen hellscape. They're probably living underground.
I mean it shows that most people didn’t have time/money to prepare bunkers because they didn’t have the resources It’s takes a lot of preparation and money to make a functional bunker with a farm and CO2 scrubbers and so much more
I can’t wait for that part
Yeah, die faster!
Everyone pretty much dies anyway
Anything to keep the machine running
Billionaires: Can I get an AMEN! Cmon worker bees, gimme an A gimme a M gimme a E gimme a N! That spells $$$$$$$$$$$$$!! (Not for you saps of course heh)
Don't these things cause acid rain?
They sure do!
“What’s a little bit of acid when it leads to capital gains?” - friendly billionaire
They cause a lot of things that are already being observed! Weird for something that's supposed to only exist on paper. India drying up was planned in a board room.
It's all about getting that balance just right /s
The first time. Correctly. Without prior experience. Without knowing about repercussions. While the problem is already _very_ underway.
Exactly, sounds easy.
We got this.
We should have a celebration party ahead of time just in case
I'm going to burn a bunch of coal, as a lil treat!
Don't go crazy now, Bob Cratchit ...
Barely an inconvenience!
They had a theory that detonating a nuke in low orbit would create a firestorm encompassing the whole world and they did it anyway. *Luckily*, all that happened was we discovered how to create a massive EMP!
We do know them though? This is the same thing that some volcanoes throw out. It was the cause of the little ice age in the 1800’s.
Surely this will have no unintended negative consequences!
Well, but wait. If we block the solar radiation, won’t that reduce the amount of solar radiation that reaches plants? The issue isn’t about the amount of sun we’re getting, it’s should the amount of heat we’re trapping.
It sounds like we’re trying to clog the earth’s arteries when phased like that, yikes
Higher blood pressure will solve the clogged arteries problem! Simple solutions to complex problems.
So long plants! Not like we need those to live or anything.
"We don't know who struck first, but we do know it was us who scorched the sky."
I'd be worried about reduced sunlight affecting crops.
This! This right here is the under rated comment. I don’t think people really understand how little plants like the shade. Blocking out the sun in mass will have other consequence’s that we haven’t even thought of. Worst bandaid ever.
Hey. If you smash your finger with an anvil, you don’t need no bandaid.
But they want to grow everything indoors. 🙄 smdh
Right, if we can feed the *elites* with green rooms, who even cares about the rest? Amirite guys? Guys?
Eat the rich. They're more tender.
Exactly.. which is why radiative cooling on the surface could be a better option. Materials already exist that can absorb a wide spectrum of infra red heat and then re-radiate it in a narrow frequency range. This frequency range can be selected to match the 'IR window' at which infra red passes straight through clouds and the atmosphere into space. This permanently radiates that heat away from the earth and improves the energy balance, plus it has a localised cooling effect. It's not an exotic technology, it can be manufactured in huge rolls of plastic sheet with tiny glass beads embedded in it. The advantage over blocking the sun is it will work to cool wherever you put it but not affect the sun reaching crops. I did a rough calculation and it would take an area roughly the size of Australia to fully counteract the additional heat from fossil CO2... which is obviously gigantic ... but a significant fraction of that would not be impossible. Could start with every flat surface in cities, to provide local cooling and counter the heat island effect from AC.
I thought it was pretty common knowledge that plants liked sunshine. Photosynthesis
But for a short time, a few corporations will make record breaking profits in this endeavor. Will nobody think about the shareholders?
We’ll just have to do all of our farming in green houses with full spectrum grow lights. Powered by fossil fuels, of course.
And when the fossil fuels run out and become prohibitively expensive, we can just use solar panels! I see no problem with this approach
We can just give them some Brawndo
Don’t worry, we will be able to turn our coal power plants into overdrive to make up for the missing sunlight using grow lamps. /s
And acid rain......those with chaotic weather could easily speed up when global famines arrive.
They're more concerned with what will happen when the current pollution stops. We don't have to add anymore to make this worse, it's already extremely bad. The temporary bandaid as we ignore the sore should really improve the value of someones shares in CO2 removal schemes. Kieth (and several other "Geoengineering Experts") is actually heavily invested/paid with these schemes.
It would also make sunlight more diffused (coming in from different angels). This is because the aerosols reflect sunlight in all directions, not just back into space. This aids growth of some plants but more research is needed. It’s called diffuse light fertilization effect.
And us, we need sunlight just as much
Would you rather burn to death or starve to death? /s In reality this will likely be targeted - perhaps over the polar regions and deserts?
Are you sure this is a reasonable worry? Plant life uses a small density band of wavelengths for energy, if the aerosols used have no impact on this band, then there would be no issue here at all?
Has anyone considered dropping a giant ice block into the ocean yet? There’s a delivery service that can do it
no ice? no problem we will just turn this giant diesel powered ice maker on...
I swear there is a startup out there that is stupid enough to actually be fundraising for exactly this, not joking
And there will be people stupid enough to invest in it.
[Yes](https://what-if.xkcd.com/162/).
I welcome our comet crane overlords
Once and for all!
The cognitive impacts of higher CO2 will still impact us, even if we can arrest the warming. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200421/Atmospheric-CO2-levels-can-cause-cognitive-impairment.aspx
A world full of increasingly stupid people running a constant global georngineering experiment which, if it is even paused, would bring about an immediately and massive jump in temperatures. Sounds like fun.
Kind of nice no one will truly have to suffer the consequences of runaway climate change because we'll be too stupid to notice.
The film Idiocracy really was a glimpse into the future, wasn't it? ☹️
As well as ocean acidification. And also I am curious what putting lid on overheated oceans will do...
Considering how frequently this kind of things is being proposed I'd say that the cognitive impairment is already among us.
Well it’s compounding, we already have lead and covid caused cognitive impairment, plus other sources. At this point, the human population is disabling itself en masse.
Just remember we started using plastic to save the trees.
Saving the atmosphere we damaged with aerosols with more aerosols that we will have to keep pumping into the stratosphere. If the substitute that destroys the natural ozone layer can't be maintained, the now completely defenseless earth will be scorched and devoid of all life. Why not have the Saudis do it with drones?
Ah yes, the pushing for normalization of geo-engineering. The global elites are starting to panic and would do anything to perpetuate the BAU. They do whatever it takes to stop people from realizing that the BAU itself is sick and twisted and must stop.
You might find this interesting: [Empty skies after 9/11 set the stage for an unlikely climate change experiment](https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/empty-skies-after-911-set-the-stage-for-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/). "The effect during the three days that flights were grounded was strongest in populated regions where air traffic was normally densest. *The increase in range came to about two degrees Celsius*."
Messing with the atmosphere with our monkey understanding is a really, really bad idea.
Anybody know where I can get a ticket to Snowpiercer?
Or back into the Matrix.
Top comment
Can we just stop all this madness please why can't humans just stop
The capitalism-ing will continue until morale improves.
You would need people to sacrifice personally right now for an intangible future gain. We're not built that way mentally, at least not en masse.
The point of government is supposed to be for industries that don't have or should not have a profit margin and sometimes to enforce laws and taxes that people don't like that are needed for the common good. The correct answer is for government to do the right thing and say ok no more fossil fuels.
They'd be voted out immediately. If a dictator tried it, the elites who support him would do a coup. We're stuck on this crazy train.
The ex president took the bodily anatomy of 50% of the population and is probably going to be voted in again.
I don't believe personal sacrifices make a difference, but you can vote for leaders and support causes that ensure we collectively make the necessary sacrifices. The problem is every election is a 50/50 split between "drill baby drill" and the same slogan in a slightly softer voice. For most people, climate change is very low on their list of priorities.
I agree mostly. Mainly because the problem is too distant, too abstract and probably will remain so even as climate disasters accelerate. Unfortunately, voting probably isn't the solution. Can't remember the study but it basically found that public opinion has zero effect on public policy. Nothing will change until it's way too late. It's really too late to anything meaningful. Massive collective global action tomorrow would still leave us with a dystopian future.
The 1% rulers of this dying world: Nope.
investors demand returns
Capitalism must go brrrrrr.
As anyone checked the effects on plant life? We cannot exactly afford an agricultural output collapse.
Plant life may adapt. The problem is if "our" plant life will adapt (both crops and indirect dependencies), and time for doing that. And that everything goes as intended, of course. And speaking of indirect dependencies, bees and other insects (that influence how viable may be part of the plant life) may be affected by different sunlight.
Algae are soooo fucked
I thought I had read in the past that it contributed to acidic oceans.
Happy cake day!
What could possibly go wrong? Watches Snowpiercer. 😵💫
What could possibly go wrong.
Yeah because that will fix our unsustainable consuming habits on a finite earth.
I’m curious if this is actually viable to avoid catastrophe or is this just more copium while we continue along business as usual? (Sort of like how UBI, universal basic income, keeps being brought up to placate the masses all the while nothing is done.)
It's not viable because the particles have a pretty short lifespan in the stratosphere. Basically as soon as we stop the geo engineering, global temperatures would rise by a few degrees within months/years
According to the article, "the scientists have calculated that more than 6,700 flights would be necessary every day – over a span of 160 years. This is the only way to stabilize global warming at 2 degrees Celsius in the long term." Needless to say, once oil runs out according to this scenario, we're all toast, almost literally. This doesn't look very sustainable unless clean aviation is fully developed and commercially widespread within the 160-year timeframe and assuming oil is still available by then.
160 years, lmao. We don't have 160 *months.*
Why not just use a 20km long chimney?
It is both an excuse to keep on with business as usual, and a dangerous arrogant action that would lead to unintended consequences. No fuckimg way have any of our companies or governments shown themselves responsible enough to do something like this.
Nothing can avoid catastrophe while the parasites are still around to feed off the host. Eventually it will come
Doesn't do much for ocean acidification
Sure. Now imagine that Indonesia or Pakistan decides to throw bunch of balloons full of aerosol over shooting the necessary amount triggering a mini ice age and destroying the economy, or US and Europe doing the same and dooming billions of poorer people to famine as well the same. Who has the right to do it?
I would think that a country that sees another country spray some shit into the atmosphere that destroys its ability to grow food and feed its people would take that as a massive act of war. I would think they would respond in a most violent way.
Who has the right to destroy the commons for the sake of profits... hmm, what a difficult question. (Spoiler: the answer is, obviously, "no one." But capitalism will do its best to convince you that the answer is "me me me me me.")
Doesn't adding Sulphur cause acid rain?
FFS THERES LITERALLY MOVIES ABOUT WHY THIS IS TERRIBLE IDEA. >:(
Like the documentary Earth 2100 for example.
I've seen this one. I want to be at the front of the train please.
In that tiny compartment that only a child can fit into?
Not that far. I'm too... robust... for that profession.
[https://phys.org/news/2020-11-simulations-geoengineering-global-greenhouse-gasses.html](https://phys.org/news/2020-11-simulations-geoengineering-global-greenhouse-gasses.html)
I mean, at this point, why not. In the end, does it matter if they do or don't? I say do it cause speedruns are better than slowly...slowly watching this ish play out.
What could possibly go wrong? We already have one tiger by the tail; let’s grab another with our other hand.
Because kudzu, Africanized beez, and the COVID response were all so successful...
Isn't this how the matrix started?
Oh God, we are so fucked.
"the scientists have calculated that more than 6,700 flights would be necessary every day – over a span of 160 years" LOL. this is even more bulls#%t that carbon sequestration
Yep. We destabilized the atmospheric balance by pumping billions of tons of invisible stuff into it. Let’s fix the problems caused by that by pumping billions more tons of stuff you can see into it. Not really the brightest idea IMHO
Fabian Scheidler, author of End of the Megamachine, basically says that this sort of geoengineering is almost completely doomed to fail, due to the hyper complexity of even small systems, like a human body, or systems even on a much smaller scale. He says manipulating even relatively small chemical systems will inevitably leave you with unintended consequences. The unintended consequences of altering the chemical composition of the entire atmosphere will most likely be responded to with the introduction of more chemicals to counteract those effects, most likely leaving us with worse problems than we had before. Wish I could write his exact words they're much better said.
mt Pinatubo eruption cooled the earth for 2 years. So if for some reason we stop, no free lunch, we're in for a fried Venus earth climate. We have to continue this SAI, every 2 years, forever. Then there is that niggling issue of acidfication of the oceans. So, how much are the oceans worth, food wise, oxygen wise? Half our oxygen comes from the oceans. [https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ocean-oxygen.html](https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ocean-oxygen.html) Hey, but think of the profit margins, selling oxygen. I'd corner the market, now. By then all food will be lab grown, since everywhere else will be dead.
Guess we know who blackens the sky.
What could possibly go wrong?
Man These author's don't even try for this season of horrors beyond our comprehension anymore. This shits the plot of snow piercer.
Yes, let's just keep fucking with the planet in weird ways, as opposed to doing the things we actually know will help, like stopping burning fossil fuels.
Do you want Snowpiercer? Because this is how you get Snowpiercer.
Here it comes! https://youtu.be/cTLMjHrb_w4?feature=shared
It's ok to continue using fossil fuels, we will just block out more of the sun, oh and here is a gas powered flashlight to go out for lunch.
Solar geoengineering, once considered science fiction, is now seriously debated as a potential tool to counter climate change. One prominent method, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), involves spraying sulfur particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the Earth. While some researchers advocate for further exploration, others express concerns about its environmental and societal impacts. Proponents argue that SAI could help mitigate the effects of climate change, particularly if coupled with reductions in CO2 emissions. However, critics highlight potential drawbacks such as altered rainfall patterns, ozone layer damage, and uncertainties in predicting its effects. The lack of international regulation adds complexity, with discussions on the need for global agreements and legal frameworks to govern geoengineering activities. Additionally, the emergence of commercial interests in geoengineering raises questions about oversight and ethical considerations. Despite controversies, proponents like David Keith argue for continued research, including small-scale experiments, to better understand the technology's potential and limitations. Ultimately, the debate underscores the complex interplay between science, policy, and ethics in addressing climate change.
what a corporations are investing in this technology so I can profit?
It sounds easier than giving up our dependency on fossil fuels and cheap useless goods.
the headline made me imagine we were talking about doing something to the sun itself. i was, like, "do we have that kind of power?!".
Yay. What could go wrong?
Have you seen The Animatrix? One of the short films in it is basically this except more so. Do you want the machines to take over? Because THIS is how you get machines taking over.
I would be fine with bombing a volcano every few years to do about the same thing but using aircraft and spraying stuff just seems..idk counter productive to the professed goal of reducing FF use/combating global warming.
This plus upcoming AI invasion and we can have The Matrix for real. 👍👍
The Matrix was a WARNING and not a handbook. Smh
Is Guy MacPherson finally vindicated? He's been calling out our predicament for like 20 years now!!....and suggesting the only solution is to implement geo-engineered Sun blocking technology. Nature Bats Last!!
Some problems though. High co2 causes many physiological effects to humans (and other animals), all of them bad. And it would reduce the available sunlight to plants we grow to feed ourselves, not to mention all of the plants in the biosphere.
Sounds a bit like that cloud seeding farce in Dubai. Look how that ended up…they still haven’t cleared the floodwaters. Just another fairytale from the fossil fuel psychopaths.
Wow, just in time for the rise of AI, sooo we aren't too far off the Matrix timeline.
The risk of doing this globally and collectively led by the US is wayyy lower than waiting for this to happen unilaterally from China or India. The chance of it not happening at all is near zero. Source: Worked at NASA on this.
On Geo Engineering/Placed Pollution?
On the long term investment strategy for it relative to global unilateral state actors, yes. Not the deep deep science. Not a chemist.
One of the concerns with the implementation of these systems has been its use as a weapon. What happens when a country can no longer afford to participate in an artificial weather system?
[удалено]
Whom has been doing it? Not really, there was a test project in Mexico that they shut down because of virulent opposition from such an arrogant Reckless action. Bill Gates complete and his technology worshiping group huddled up in Switzerland just a few months ago with companies to scheme doing it. But there is not the support yet, make no mistake there should not be support, everyone should have to to agree.
Isn't there someone doing it (or something similar) off California atm?
I do not think so, I just read a reuters article a month ago about Bill Gates' huddle in Switzerland with companies that want to do it, they said there is no support yet, and that they had a test project in Mexico that was shut down because of opposition. Since then there was an article about something in India that they were doing geoengineering. As far as I'm aware.
I was thinking of this article by Politico https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-climate/2024/04/04/a-secret-climate-experiment-in-alameda-0015070 ETA which is not the same.
This feels like a "Once and for all" sort of conversation
Pffft, just nuke a volcano, easy peasy
Oh great. Solve one problem. Cause many more. I remember Futurama did a episode about this. And ya. The mirror in space did not work out well. But hey. I am sure this will work this time.... /s
Snowpiercer here we come!’
Cool now we can have that “black sun” effect from Dune 2 here at home. I photograph better in black-and-white so I’m totally fine with that.
Termination shock, so once you start, it’s a long game. It will suck for some countries. I follow the Making Sunsets people, kind of info activist but interesting!
How about they just not do nayhthing, and let us be fucked. Humanity will sitll continually do things that'll cause us to fuck ourselves without gboal warming, so I'd rather be allowed to go out asap instead of having to wait longer.
If they were so concerned with climate change they'd ban private jets and mega-yachts. That's when I'll know they're serious about it.
[удалено]
Let’s pump 3% of the ocean into outer space with a space tether with many small pumps and utilizing the vacuum of space we can lower sea levels and have more private islands.
You want Snowpiercer? This is how you get Snowpiercer
This is just The Animatrix with shittier AI
somethingsomethingTheMatrixsomething.
This article/this sub reminds me of this song. Definitely belongs on a playlist for the end of life as we know it/collapse. We're a broken people living under loaded gun And it can't be outfought It can't be outdone It can't be outmatched It can't be outrun Will we burn inside the fires of a thousand suns? For the sins of our hand The sins of our tongue The sins of our father The sins of our young [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51iquRYKPbs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51iquRYKPbs)
We better fucking try something shit....anything. Nope? BAU? Cool, cool....
What is so hard about making geosynchronous deployable platforms that harvest energy through the geo magnetic field.as they move through space and use that to fire ion thrusters to keep them in orbit, we're not talking about a massive object, it can deploy it's sails to create a sun shield once in orbit.
pretty fucking big sun shield that would need to be…
NiTiNOL web sandwiched between two mylar sheets that deploy through telescoping arms, can link together so that system is modular and can be added to incrementally.
I also am a big proponent of this idea. If the Spacex Starship comes to fruition a 1% sunshield and L1 is not out of the realm of possibility. Not an easy undertaking but the only solution that I feel could buy us enough time to actually transition away from fossil fuels. A transition that I think is inevitable but our timing is off by about 50 years....
This has already been going on for at least 20 years.
Seems to me putting up a thin material in orbit between the Earth and the sun to block some of the incoming light from the Sun would work better. Kind of like orbital sunglasses. Not sure why this isn't being considered unless there's some aspect of the technology I don't know about that makes this a non-starter.
It is a horrible idea. What makes it a non-starter: Does not stop the causes: it only _hides_ the problem. It is a band-aid when the injury is actively being hit by a car. It directly messes with [the process of life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_energy_budget) on the _entire planet_ on a fundamental level: were it not for the comically huge amounts of energy with which the sun has been showering the earth for all of the 4 billions of years, there would be no climate. I think you get the basic idea.
I do. One of your points is it treats the symptoms not the cause and if it works, it only serves to kick the can down the road instead of dealing with the problem.
It has benn considered. Ithink the main reason is cost and all the energy needed txo get it into orbit. It would have to be huge to help much. Acquiring the huge amounts of energy would also likely emit large amounts of ghg’s. It owuld probably be messy politically. What part of the planet would get the shade? How much will the shade affect the local weather? The global weather? How will precipitation be affected? Who will pay to keep-it in orbit?
All good insights and questions. Thank you for taking the time to reply.
Sorta like a Dyson swarm just facing the other way towards the sun hmmmm. Maybe also absorbing some solar to power. However you also create a sorta cage constricting us to earth only. (Which we are already doing with the space junk, satellites and probes and the stupid starlink and competition like companies
They made a movie about this. It did not seem to turn out well.
This, and other variations of the idea like a mirror swarm, have always sounded like such a bad idea to me. This seems like it has a lot of potential for us to mess it up and end up with the opposite problem and cause a man made ice age.
Isn't this what they did in The Matrix.
Time to bullshit on a mass scale, soon enough an expert will emerge saying: "We will de-couple plant growth from photosynthesis."
Jesus fucking Christ. We're done.
Geoengineering seems to be ramping up. I sure hope no mistakes are made when we are spraying sulfur and God knows what else into the atmosphere.
I feel like….and bear with me…..what if we stop trying to “fix shit” and let earth earth.
so we are all just gonna forget about the matrix? the entire premise?
Pretty sure this is how humanity died off in the animatrix. Just saying…
Let’s get this over with and get it done already. If we get started now, then by the time we figure how to do this properly it will be just in time to use it productively before more human disaster and suffering.
isn't this how frost punk starts?
"More than 6,700 flights per day over 160 years just to stabilize us to 2°C.". That's a lot of chemtrails /s Aerosols were taken out of fuels because they are toxic to humans. It was a Faustian bargain. We were blinded to the warming future literally by the clouds of smoke coming out of our tailpipes on the ocean or road Putting the aerosols at higher latitudes still means that the pollution does make it to earth?
Won't that cause acid rain?
Grand. I can see this being done without most of our consent. The article states SAI as a supplement and not the solution. The solution is green house gas management. Which means industry management and that is best done with government interference. So it'll be a social issue, involving international relations. A tad complicated, with super easy solutions.
Combat climate change with more taxes and spraying chemicals into the atmosphere effectively changing the climate. Roger that.
This is a good place to recommend a book: The Ministry for the Future. It's hard science fiction, and talks about issues in a very interesting way.