3 ms·
I believe (at least) research in solar geoengineering is urgently needed. No, this is not a long-term replacement for bringing down carbon emissions (not least
by cgeier 4y ago
I believe (at least) research in solar geoengineering is urgently needed.
No, this is not a long-term replacement for bringing down carbon emissions (not least, because carbon also acidifies our oceans), but if you look at the horrible effects climate change is already causing now, imagine how a world will with average temperature raised by 1.5° or 2.0° Celsius.
- seri4l 4y agoSince our society is unable to perform any activity without descending into an uncontrolled positive feedback cycle, I would rather none of us work towards cooling the Earth.
- schiffern 4y agoDo you also apply this fatal (and fatalistic) attitude toward efforts to cool the Earth by cutting emissions?
- dalmo3 4y agoI share GP's concerns, and would answer no to your question. Via negativa is a fundamentally distinct way of thinking.
- concordDance 4y agoWe're currently in a number of feedback loops that are rather more dangerous.
- paganel 4y ago> but if you look at the horrible effects climate change is already causing now What are those "horrible effects"? And how do you know the cure won't be worst than the supposed "horrible effects" it is meant to make disappear?
- cgeier 4y agoHave a look at this for some first ideas: https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/climate/climate-change-impacts https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/climate/... (think more draughts, much more intense wildfire seasons, intense rain events, nature's rhythm which is depending on temperature being disturbed). And I don't know if the "cure" will be worse, that's why for now, I'm only advocating for research into solar geoengineering. (But as the stratospheric release of sulphuric aerosols is also a natural occurring phenomena -- think volcanoes -- it is not something completely new we would be doing here.)
- paganel 4y agoYes, weather (and climate more generally) is not a static phenomenon, it never has been one. "More intense" compared to what? To the last 100 years? (meaning the period for which they have accurate meteorological data) Who says the last 100 years were the norm?
- cgeier 4y agoSorry, but I'm not willing to discuss if "the last 100 years were the norm" for climate-wise.
- ttyprintk 4y agoThank you for posting this. People should imagine wildfires where we’ve never experienced wildfires before, in times of water shortage.
- concordDance 4y agoIIRC the IPCC has released some estimates on how damaging the current trajectory is. It gets very overhyped by campaigners but global climate change is still going to be very expensive to the tune of tens of trillions of dollars and tens or hundreds of millions of premature deaths.