Geoenigneers

We could reduce warming by putting things in space to block the sun’s rays. This would be a multi-trillion-dollar effort giving NASA a more meaningful project than its traditional one of running a probabilistic human-sacrifice ritual. For an extra trillion we could put Venetian blinds in space in case cooling, not warming, turns out to be the problem.

There are more plausible, and much cheaper geoengineering options:

• Spraying fine particles into the stratosphere reduces sunlight and is reversible (after two or three years) based on experience from volcanic eruptions like Mt Pinatubo. It would cost just a few billions. In fact, current pollution is believed to be reducing global temperatures by one degree Celsius, masking some of the effect of CO2 warming. Options that cool without reducing atmospheric CO2 do not deal with carbonic acidification of the Ocean, however.
• CO2 can be removed directly. The most plausible method is to promote the growth of algae that consumes CO2.

The charm of geoengineering is that it doesn’t depend upon reducing emissions and all the societal changes that will require. It might be expensive, but the burden would fall on all taxpayers rather than specific industries that are motivated and capable of resisting.

 Create your own educational wiki!Support CommunityPublic, not yet premium Privacy Policy RSS