4 ms·

Inexpensive? The stuff laid out in there would require a global effort. Microbubbles across the ocean surface! Spraying salt into the air to form reflective clo

by a2tech 3y ago

Inexpensive? The stuff laid out in there would require a global effort. Microbubbles across the ocean surface! Spraying salt into the air to form reflective clouds (and I'm sure spraying salt everywhere wouldn't hurt anything either).

PaulHoule 3y ago
I think the most developed scheme is to seed the stratosphere with SO2. You need a large aircraft that flies above 80,000 feet. If you inject it where air is upwelling near the tropics it will spend a long time before settling out near the poles. The obvious rebuttal is "What about acid rain?" but note that SO2 from power plants lasts several days in the atmosphere but SO2 is expected to last several years in the stratosphere. It seems likely you could get a larger cooling effect then we got from sulfur in coal back in the day but have much less acid rain.
- ifyoubuildit 3y ago
  To me the obvious rebuttal is what about the things that aren't obvious? The unknown unknowns that nobody knows to test for beforehand? Our usual approach of "well we can't think of any reasons why it could go wrong, and we have to do something, so let's ship it and see what happens" is a little scary when it comes to something you might not get any do overs for. I think it would be very much like us to wipe ourselves out this way though. And probably be proud of it at the same time.
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    Developing the aircraft would cost something in the low billions if you can find a partner that is experienced in developing aircraft. It's not going to have the need for extreme optimization that you'd need to compete with the A220 or the F-22. It could take 5 years to a decade to complete the project. A small test of a full-scale system would get answers to the above questions and would not plausibly have catastrophic results. The longer we wait to try, the more likely we'll be up against the wall and facing dangerous tipping points and it will be too late. And it all costs less than a failing social media site.
    - ifyoubuildit 3y ago
      > would not plausibly have catastrophic results This is what I was talking about with this: > well we can't think of any reasons why it could go wrong Sometimes smart people thinking about things really hard isn't enough. With such a complicated system, it seems likely that there would be some unforeseen results.

by a2tech 3y ago

PaulHoule 3y ago

I think the most developed scheme is to seed the stratosphere with SO2. You need a large aircraft that flies above 80,000 feet. If you inject it where air is upwelling near the tropics it will spend a long time before settling out near the poles. The obvious rebuttal is "What about acid rain?" but note that SO2 from power plants lasts several days in the atmosphere but SO2 is expected to last several years in the stratosphere. It seems likely you could get a larger cooling effect then we got from sulfur in coal back in the day but have much less acid rain.

ifyoubuildit 3y ago
To me the obvious rebuttal is what about the things that aren't obvious? The unknown unknowns that nobody knows to test for beforehand? Our usual approach of "well we can't think of any reasons why it could go wrong, and we have to do something, so let's ship it and see what happens" is a little scary when it comes to something you might not get any do overs for. I think it would be very much like us to wipe ourselves out this way though. And probably be proud of it at the same time.
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  Developing the aircraft would cost something in the low billions if you can find a partner that is experienced in developing aircraft. It's not going to have the need for extreme optimization that you'd need to compete with the A220 or the F-22. It could take 5 years to a decade to complete the project. A small test of a full-scale system would get answers to the above questions and would not plausibly have catastrophic results. The longer we wait to try, the more likely we'll be up against the wall and facing dangerous tipping points and it will be too late. And it all costs less than a failing social media site.
  - ifyoubuildit 3y ago
    > would not plausibly have catastrophic results This is what I was talking about with this: > well we can't think of any reasons why it could go wrong Sometimes smart people thinking about things really hard isn't enough. With such a complicated system, it seems likely that there would be some unforeseen results.