In Silicon Valley, a Rogue Plan to Alter the Climate | Some restless entrepreneurs are releasing pollutants in the sky to try to cool the planet.

www.nytimes.com

nytimes.com

New York Times gift articles @sopuli.xyz

1y ago

www.nytimes.com /2024/09/25/climate/rogue-solar-geoengineering.html

8 comments

Animated by the “move fast and break things” credo that permeates Silicon Valley, the founders of Make Sunsets have no such concerns. They are selling “cooling credits” to customers who want to offset their personal carbon emissions. And a few times each month, after selling enough credits, they head for the hills and release balloons full of sulfur dioxide into the California sky.
“This is the one tool realistically that can cool Earth in our lifetime,” said Mr. Iseman. “Every day we’re not doing this leads to needless harm.”
Sikina Jinnah, a professor of environmental studies at the University of California Santa Cruz who has studied geoengineering, is also concerned about harm. “They are a couple of tech bros who have no expertise in doing what they’re claiming to do,” she said. “They’re not scientists and they’re making claims about cooling credits that nobody has validated.”
Yeah....Gotta admit I didn't have a lot of confidence in the idea when I first started reading the article. Then I read this part and my confidence went from low to zero.
- Silicon Valley, where scams go to get funded.
- Yeah, this is a giant scam. The whole "we're stealth" and "we look just like a regular RV" are key giveaways. If what they were doing was 100% legal and above board, they wouldn't be doing it this way.
One problem I have with this idea is that the cooling profile from releasing sulphates into the atmosphere looks very different from the greenhouse gas warming profile. For example, the latter has a more pronounced effect at higher latitudes, since GHG are insulators. The arctic is getting hit harder than the tropics. The former, I would expect, would affect the places in the world that get the most sun, since it is effectively a solar filter. So, the lower latitudes, in other words.
If we have a baseline scenario A of what would have happened without the GHGs and B with what is currently happening, this would make for a scenario C that is neither of the others. I would submit that C would likely be as far from A as B is. Yes, you might get global warming under control in an accountant-looking-at-only-the-bottom-line sort of way, but this would still represent a massive climate change into uncharted territory. Would scenario C still be preferable to B is the question I guess?
The part where he asks 'what am I missing here?' falls on silent ears...
I haven't finished it yet, but Neal Stephenson's newest book Termination Shock deals with this exact concept, from what i can tell.
- It does, but importantly, it's fiction. So it raises some (but not all ) of the relevant issues, but doesn't necessarily present a realistic view of how things will play out.
  More would involve some serious spoilers.
- Also Snowpiercer.