6 ms·
The only way to do it that cheap is with sulfate aerosols. We don't have the data to use the right amount yet but that's fixable. A larger problem is it woul
by Symmetry 9y ago
The only way to do it that cheap is with sulfate aerosols. We don't have the data to use the right amount yet but that's fixable. A larger problem is it would make ocean acidification even worse. That might end up being better than the alternative but its not a step to take casually.
- phreeza 9y agoWhat about marine cloud brightening? Wikipedia claims that could be done for a couple of billion $/year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_cloud_brightening#Costs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_cloud_brightening#Costs
- xiaoma 9y agoThus the moral hazard. If geo-engineering were a major point in climate change discussions, some would feel a false sense of security. Ultimately, this could increase the odds of such drastic measures would be needed. The other thing is that we just can't know how much acidity it would take to cause an ecosystem collapse until it's too late. That said, sulfate aerosols are one of the oldest proposed plans and our technology has advanced considerably since then. Perhaps some people working on or funding work on a better solution are on reading this thread. I sure hope someone is quietly tackling it because the political efforts around CO2 emmissions agreements of the past 50 years are not working very well despite a great deal of activism.
- marcosdumay 9y agoWhat are the news on ocean iron releases? It's something that does not cause acidification, and seems to be very easy to start or interrupt if a problem arises. It's also toward economical gains, as it can be done around ocean farming to increase yelds.