4 ms·

> Bottom line: we need large scale carbon capture quickly The short term solution/bandaid is pumping SO2 into the stratosphere while we figure out carbon captu

> Bottom line: we need large scale carbon capture quickly The short term solution/bandaid is pumping SO2 into the stratosphere while we figure out carbon capture.

XorNot 3y ago
I do wonder if some of the "massed solar sail" ideas for terraforming Mars' atmosphere would work here (in short: use cellphone processors to build and launch a couple hundred thousand solar-sail equipped satellites). Because it would be expensive, but it would kill several birds with one stone: we (1) prove whether the concept would work on Mars, (2) develop the technology to do it, and (3) unlike SO2 in the atmosphere, "switching it off" or modifying the scale of the effect can be done almost instantly (you could remove the swarm by having it fall back to an Earth orbit).
S201 3y ago
Is there anything left to really "figure out" about carbon capture? The tech works, it's just too expensive. Given a sufficient amount of cheap enough energy it could be scaled up as far as I understand. As a layperson, it's just one more reason I so wish we'd invest in nuclear. Nuclear powered DAC plants might be the only way to scale it fast enough. Sure, it would still be expensive, but that's much cheaper than not massively reducing CO2 in the atmosphere.
- BurningFrog 3y ago
  I think it's way, way too expensive now, and it will probably take a few decades to get it down to practically useful cost levels. Which is why keeping temperature down with SO2 during that time makes sense.
brutusborn 3y ago
Based on our record of environmental interventions; SO2 sounds suicidal. But it only lasts a few days in the atmosphere so maybe it has an in built off switch.
- BurningFrog 3y ago
  Note that is for the stratosphere, not the atmosphere. The mechanism is well known from volcanic eruptions, and it only lasts (from memory) 1-2 years in the stratosphere, so if something goes wrong, it can easily be tapered off.

> Bottom line: we need large scale carbon capture quickly The short term solution/bandaid is pumping SO2 into the stratosphere while we figure out carbon capture.

XorNot 3y ago

I do wonder if some of the "massed solar sail" ideas for terraforming Mars' atmosphere would work here (in short: use cellphone processors to build and launch a couple hundred thousand solar-sail equipped satellites). Because it would be expensive, but it would kill several birds with one stone: we (1) prove whether the concept would work on Mars, (2) develop the technology to do it, and (3) unlike SO2 in the atmosphere, "switching it off" or modifying the scale of the effect can be done almost instantly (you could remove the swarm by having it fall back to an Earth orbit).

S201 3y ago

Is there anything left to really "figure out" about carbon capture? The tech works, it's just too expensive. Given a sufficient amount of cheap enough energy it could be scaled up as far as I understand. As a layperson, it's just one more reason I so wish we'd invest in nuclear. Nuclear powered DAC plants might be the only way to scale it fast enough. Sure, it would still be expensive, but that's much cheaper than not massively reducing CO2 in the atmosphere.

BurningFrog 3y ago
I think it's way, way too expensive now, and it will probably take a few decades to get it down to practically useful cost levels. Which is why keeping temperature down with SO2 during that time makes sense.

brutusborn 3y ago

Based on our record of environmental interventions; SO2 sounds suicidal. But it only lasts a few days in the atmosphere so maybe it has an in built off switch.

BurningFrog 3y ago
Note that is for the stratosphere, not the atmosphere. The mechanism is well known from volcanic eruptions, and it only lasts (from memory) 1-2 years in the stratosphere, so if something goes wrong, it can easily be tapered off.