4 ms·

Are we so beaten down that we think no new useful technology is possible ? That we cant do large projects ? It is quite hard to not be cynical .. we have lots

by jgord 2y ago

Are we so beaten down that we think no new useful technology is possible ? That we cant do large projects ? It is quite hard to not be cynical .. we have lots of evidence that we should be cynical, that our politicians are scamming us etc. But it does seem to me that we have geo-engineered our way into a warming climate - by burning Carbon fuels the last 150 years - and we will need to geo-engineer our way out of the mess. I saw a statistic that said around 50% of people dont believe that climate warming is caused by human activity. It seems unpopular on HN to talk about climate change, but here goes : We are nearing or at +1.5C now, currently at a long plateau of peak CO2 and CH4 emissions .. and we may be warming at around +0.3C per decade. That puts us near +2.1C by 2045 .. not so far in the future. Lets say we electrify everything and reach "Net-Zero" by 2060 .. the accumulated CO2 will stay there for a long time until we remove it. Its the area under the graph that counts. Net Zero emissions == Peak CO2 == PEAK HEAT Were headed for more ice melt, more energetic storms, more wildfires, more floods, crop failure, less stable food supply. Id prefer if we could go back and stop burning carbon 30 years ago .. but here we are, soon heat itself will be its own problem. Only a few crazy people seem to be willing to discuss the unthinkable option of _deliberately_ polluting the sky with Sulfur particulates to increase cloud cover over the ocean, so more light is reflected and less heat is absorbed by the sea .. but what other plan is there to survive peak heat ? Given the urgency of the problem - the burning need to get away from Carbon fuels - I have to wonder why governments aren't underwriting large projects such as deep drilled geothermal ? If otoh, Small Modular Nuclear reactors are really the best solution.. why dont we have a whole coterie of them working by now ? Why aren't rich ex-founders financing more of these hail-mary projects ? Drilling a 12-km hole in the ground and pouring a billion dollars into it, with 5% odds of getting a vast supply of free energy out of it seems an okay tradeoff to make, if I have 10Bn net worth and there is a chance that Ill be making the planet livable for my grand-kids.

orson2077 2y ago
My impression was that stratospheric aerosol injection has been kept out of the public consciousness deliberately. If the public discussed it now, they’d learn quickly about things like termination shock, and the calculable consequences to weather systems depending on where the sulphur is injected (eg Inject over Norway and mess up el Nino), and come to the conclusion that it’s a pretty undesirable option. If, however, it’s left to the last minute, fossil fuels can continue, and then use this as a “last resort” card.
- andyjsong 2y ago
  Termination shock is already happening as we've been decreasing the amount of SO2 in the air we breathe. Peak global SO2 emissions were 131 million tons in 1979. Now it's 69 million as of 2022. We've been removing the sunscreen that unintentionally cooled the Earth, and one of the reasons why 2023 and 2024 were the hottest in recorded history. If you want to understand the risks of doing vs. not doing SAI check out this recently published paper: https://climate.uchicago.edu/insights/comparing-the-benefits-and-risks-of-solar-geoengineering/ https://climate.uchicago.edu/insights/comparing-the-benefits... The next step is to redeploy the SO2 that has unintentionally cooled Earth and do it better in the stratosphere with a fractional amount that we've tolerated since the start of the Industrial Revolution. Here's an article I recently wrote if you want to understand from a macro-level: https://www.keepcool.co/p/no-one-is-coming-to-save-us-time-to-cowboy-up https://www.keepcool.co/p/no-one-is-coming-to-save-us-time-t... The last point about "fossil fuels can continue" is also called moral hazard. Regardless of SAI or not, we're going to keep using whatever is the cheapest and accessible fuel we have available, and right now, it's hydrocarbons pulled from the ground. We've already gotten good at recklessly warming our planet and unintentionally cooling it, so we might as well get good at cooling intentionally.

by jgord 2y ago

orson2077 2y ago

My impression was that stratospheric aerosol injection has been kept out of the public consciousness deliberately. If the public discussed it now, they’d learn quickly about things like termination shock, and the calculable consequences to weather systems depending on where the sulphur is injected (eg Inject over Norway and mess up el Nino), and come to the conclusion that it’s a pretty undesirable option. If, however, it’s left to the last minute, fossil fuels can continue, and then use this as a “last resort” card.

andyjsong 2y ago
Termination shock is already happening as we've been decreasing the amount of SO2 in the air we breathe. Peak global SO2 emissions were 131 million tons in 1979. Now it's 69 million as of 2022. We've been removing the sunscreen that unintentionally cooled the Earth, and one of the reasons why 2023 and 2024 were the hottest in recorded history. If you want to understand the risks of doing vs. not doing SAI check out this recently published paper: https://climate.uchicago.edu/insights/comparing-the-benefits-and-risks-of-solar-geoengineering/ https://climate.uchicago.edu/insights/comparing-the-benefits... The next step is to redeploy the SO2 that has unintentionally cooled Earth and do it better in the stratosphere with a fractional amount that we've tolerated since the start of the Industrial Revolution. Here's an article I recently wrote if you want to understand from a macro-level: https://www.keepcool.co/p/no-one-is-coming-to-save-us-time-to-cowboy-up https://www.keepcool.co/p/no-one-is-coming-to-save-us-time-t... The last point about "fossil fuels can continue" is also called moral hazard. Regardless of SAI or not, we're going to keep using whatever is the cheapest and accessible fuel we have available, and right now, it's hydrocarbons pulled from the ground. We've already gotten good at recklessly warming our planet and unintentionally cooling it, so we might as well get good at cooling intentionally.