3 ms·
You don't need to cover the whole planet, just the parts under the sun. I'm not an orbital machinist, but maybe we could park just enough blockers in an orbit t
by Kye 6y ago
You don't need to cover the whole planet, just the parts under the sun. I'm not an orbital machinist, but maybe we could park just enough blockers in an orbit that's always between the sun and Earth to halt the warming. How much of the sun would need to be blocked to bend the curve down? Everything necessary on the ground to stop putting CO2 in the air is already underway. All we need is more time.
- edrxty 6y agoThis is something that's been considered, particularly for doing things like terraforming Venus. There are these areas called Lagrange points[1] that provide a location where one can park a satellite where it'll remain stationary relative to the two-body system of interest. The point directly between the sun and earth is the L1 point and allows you to place a sunshade such that it'll always be directly between the sun and earth. It should be noted, however, that these points are generally not stable and so require some degree of station-keeping to remain viable long term. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point
- w-m 6y agoThe moon has the perfect size already. We just need to nudge it around a little bit to provide some local shade. Solar eclipse on demand, how hard can it be?
- Kye 6y agoYou know, you might be on to something. Set up a mine to blast rock out from the moon to create a ring at a higher orbit to block the light. The moon will eventually scoop it all back up as it continues its trip away from the planet.
- wmf 6y agoThere has been some research on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade
- xiphias2 6y agoIt's interesting how cheap it can be done ($20B-$200B), which may be $1T in real life, but that's still cheap compared to the programs the governments are running.