Rendered at 21:26:17 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
perrygeo 46 minutes ago [-]
In 2020 we eliminated sulfur dioxides from international shipping fuels to reduce pollution. We inadvertently did a little geoengineering project, albeit in the wrong direction. Pretty solid evidence that this sulfur removal had direct warming effects - https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01442-3 - For anyone needing a large scale demonstration of the climate-changing power of sulfur, this was it.
So the sulfur schemes are viable, in that they will block radiation and cool the planet. God knows what else it'll do - but the fact that sulfur works at scale and it's easiest option to try indicates that someone may attempt it before we understand.
I know it's a work of fiction, but check out Neal Stephenson's "Termination Shock". That's basically the plot.
willis936 12 hours ago [-]
This is a great article. I'm glad to see this sentiment is finally starting to gain traction:
>She fears that the rising dangers of climate change will put growing pressure on nations and other actors to move forward with solar geoengineering, even if no one has done the necessary research to reduce scientific uncertainty and sort out the technical challenges.
>“We don’t think the alternative is decisions not happening at all,” she says. “We think the alternative is decisions being made in a panic or on lack of evidence.”
Unfortunately the article ends on that point and we don't get the rebuttal of the lofty idyllic academics or fearful policymakers.
georgefrowny 11 hours ago [-]
Yep. Someone is surely going to do something at some point if we continue on this course. Hand-wringing from relative safety of above-sea level places at high latitude is cheap. If you're in charge of millions of people in peril, even if it's a horrible idea, if you don't actually know its a horrible idea, well...
Also it does annoy me when people say "well it went badly wrong in the Matrix/Snowpiercer/etc., therefore we should not even talk about it, as it is clearly stupid. It may be stupid, or it may not be, but that should be determined on its own (de)merits, not because fiction used the idea as a plot device.
ZeroGravitas 10 hours ago [-]
I'd like to see more open discussion of blockading and bombing uncooperative country's fossil fuel supply chains once decarbonization is in full swing.
And get wide global agreement that anyone geoengineering when they are still pumping oil is effectively declaring war on other countries and so attacks on their pipelines or ports are considered a counter strike.
JumpCrisscross 5 hours ago [-]
> like to see more open discussion of blockading and bombing uncooperative country's fossil fuel supply chains
One, we're doing a pretty good job of that without any particular aim in mind. Two, this currently constitutes a war crime and will always constitute collective punishment.
dv_dt 11 hours ago [-]
Setting out on a major geo engineering project is a folly or a cynical PR greenwash - maybe both. Anything to avoid change to entrenched interests. We already have a highly viable path to transition to Renewable power while optimizing all sorts of sustainability loops.
So the sulfur schemes are viable, in that they will block radiation and cool the planet. God knows what else it'll do - but the fact that sulfur works at scale and it's easiest option to try indicates that someone may attempt it before we understand.
I know it's a work of fiction, but check out Neal Stephenson's "Termination Shock". That's basically the plot.
>She fears that the rising dangers of climate change will put growing pressure on nations and other actors to move forward with solar geoengineering, even if no one has done the necessary research to reduce scientific uncertainty and sort out the technical challenges.
>“We don’t think the alternative is decisions not happening at all,” she says. “We think the alternative is decisions being made in a panic or on lack of evidence.”
Unfortunately the article ends on that point and we don't get the rebuttal of the lofty idyllic academics or fearful policymakers.
Also it does annoy me when people say "well it went badly wrong in the Matrix/Snowpiercer/etc., therefore we should not even talk about it, as it is clearly stupid. It may be stupid, or it may not be, but that should be determined on its own (de)merits, not because fiction used the idea as a plot device.
And get wide global agreement that anyone geoengineering when they are still pumping oil is effectively declaring war on other countries and so attacks on their pipelines or ports are considered a counter strike.
One, we're doing a pretty good job of that without any particular aim in mind. Two, this currently constitutes a war crime and will always constitute collective punishment.