3 ms·
The $5 billion figure in the article is the cost of spraying the atmosphere, creating a new virus every year would be way cheaper (I am not saying it would be a
by yiyus 6y ago
The $5 billion figure in the article is the cost of spraying the atmosphere, creating a new virus every year would be way cheaper (I am not saying it would be a good idea). But, as it has happened with this virus, reducing sunlight would have huge effects in all economic sectors. Agriculture is the most obvious one, but tourism for example would be very affected too, real state markets may radically change, solar power would be much less efficient... It may be much less or much more than 8-16% GDP, I do not know (specially in an hypothetical scenario in which climate change may already be devastating), but for sure it would not be free.