Scientists Want to Fight Climate Change by Blocking the Sun With Dust

submitted by format from singularityhub.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]StillLessons 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

As a person with a history within the belly of the "climate science" apparatus, I can tell you this idea has been around for a long time, longer than the particular project this article discusses.

This kind of thinking puts its finger on a bunch of the central themes in climate change. The first problem is that if we accept that CO2 is actually the driver of our current change (a more debatable proposition than how it is presented in the press or in the groupthink of current "climate science"), then simply stopping the input of additional CO2 - which is what almost all the mainstream strategies are geared toward - would be insufficient. The CO2 that is already there will continue to warm the planet - again, important to note the assumption that CO2 is the thing creating our problems, which is a massive simplification of an extremely complex system.

This is where ideas like this come from. More than "stopping CO2" would be necessary. We would need to counter the warming from what is already there. Enter geo-engineering, such as what is described here.

The major problem I have with a strategy such as the one described is that it is irreversible. Once dust would be released, you can't get it back, and we are stuck with consequences that we honestly understand or can predict extremely poorly.

If we want to do geo-engineering, I would be far more interested in strategies that are reversible. There is, for example, an idea out there of "artificial trees", which are chemical stands placed in high-wind areas designed to leech CO2 from the air; said CO2 would then be injected underground (where it originally was, before we dug it up and burned it). What I like about this idea is that if we discover unexpected negative side-effects to our tinkering, we would be able to tailor it as necessary (remove "trees" or other adjustments).

But dumping a bunch of dust in the air with no possibility to undo what is done as an engineering solution to solve an engineering problem we created by thinking we understood the world better than we clearly do? These morons keep coming up with ways to add potentials of making a bad situation exponentially worse.

[–]No_ 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Co2 Doesn’t warm the climate, it keeps warmth in.

The sun warms the climate, and blocking the sun will prevent some of it gettin in.