Experiments to dim the sun given green light
Source: The Times (UK)
Research into whether the sun could be dimmed to combat global warming will be given the go-ahead by the government within weeks and £50 million is expected to be spent on experiments and analysis.
The geo-engineering techniques that will be explored include spraying aerosolised particles high into the stratosphere to deflect a small fraction of the sun’s energy away from the Earth.
Early modelling studies have suggested that this may cool the planet relatively cheaply. Advocates have pointed to natural experiments in which emissions of such particles through volcanic eruptions led to the Earth cooling. However, experts have warned of possible unintended consequences, including the potentially catastrophic disruption of weather patterns.
Other geo-engineering techniques that will be looked at include “marine cloud brightening” — spraying sea salt into the atmosphere, making the clouds whiter and deflecting solar radiation. Another option involves thinning natural cirrus clouds, which act as heat-trapping blankets.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/environment/article/uk-experiments-dim-sun-global-warming-fss9l5cw5
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ponietz
(3,600 posts)
Silent Type
(9,148 posts)Sorry, has nothing to do with OP, but reminded me.
thought crime
(188 posts)Reminds me of a New Yorker cartoon from about 20 years ago. A large planet acting as doctor (with stethoscope, etc) and Earth looking sick (sneezy).
The Planet-Doctor tells Earth-Patient, "I'm sorry. You've got humans."
Figarosmom
(5,417 posts)
NNadir
(35,707 posts)Ponietz
(3,600 posts)
Earl_from_PA
(241 posts)
underpants
(190,240 posts)
StevieM
(10,569 posts)
C Moon
(12,814 posts)
C_U_L8R
(47,221 posts)And what's the point of this magic shield if we're just going to belch out more smoke and gasses into the atmosphere?
melm00se
(5,100 posts)where "pollute less" will have a substantive quick response.
Of course we can't have a substantive quick response. So what? That is no excuse to further destabilize Earth's systems.
IbogaProject
(4,336 posts)Jimmy Carter had a comprehensive plan to get us off of imported oil by the year 2000 using only 1970s technology and maybe some estimates of likely efficiency improvements. Now were are almost 100 ppm of CO2 higher then we were then. This won't be incremental, it is leading to more week to week variability. This includes about 3 high temp records per 1 low temp record, but the pace of record temps either way has been increasing. The amount of water in the air is increasing, and the combination of heat with humidity is what will start killing many people every summer. Even here where we have Air Conditioning, if the power goes out it could turn deadly fast. It is now time to attempt things like this. I personally believe we need to take every nuclear powered ship and start building up the arctic and antarctic ice covers to try and increase our planets reflectivity. And the geologic records shows that rapid climate shifts go exponentially and usually happen over just 10-15 years, if we've begun a switch, which the increase in warming indicates it is about to get very serious. And this is happening far faster than previous switches at the start or end of recent ice ages. Our plants like trees won't be able to settle into new climate zones fast enough.
We haven't been above 400 ppm for about 15 million years, humans and our food sources aren't evolved to handle what is coming in our lifetimes. https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/ The average temperature worldwide was 10 to 20 degrees warmer overall, with less variations, just very hot or hot all the time.
electric_blue68
(21,204 posts)an international effort of ships in the artic in a three, or four ship clusters stretching out extremely strong how ever treated white fabric to increase reflectivity.
electric_blue68
(21,204 posts)🤬😭🤬
It would have slowed climate change down maybe a fair amount, at the same time with that government encouragement in that direction more ideas for green energy, sequestration of CO2, ?trapping more methane, etc would have been encouraged.
.
We need a "Sigh" emoji. 👍
angryxyouth
(220 posts)But if I remember correctly, it was actually a solar hot water system not panels. I believe UVM ended up with it. But your premise is still right. Carter understand what the scientists were saying and Reagan said fuck it. Carter also helped get fluorocarbons banned because there was a huge hole in the ozone that because of Carter and actions by our allies, first world countries, the hole was able to fixed itself.
angryxyouth
(220 posts)by the government. Back in the Bush Sr. days. I was working in demolition back then and a government bid notice went out to demolish a giant area of solar panels in the desert. They would have been nothing like what we have now but I think that was the end of government research on solar panels for a while.
sl8
(16,386 posts)electric_blue68
(21,204 posts)When other countries ramp up carbon emissions so much that it wipes out our reductions. What to do? Impose tariffs if they don't abide by our rules?
Oddly, those tariffs might reduce emissions. Less imported crap-manufacture = less off-shored carbon emissions. All that crap we get from China or Mexico or Vietnam--that's on *their* carbon budgets, we just pay them to emit the carbon ... yes ... in our name. And by any means necessary.
Note that last Sunday I plopped 25 species of mostly cactus seeds into pony packs and covered them with panes of glass to trap in moisture. Monday when I came home from work I found the sun that managed to get under the back porch, past the crepe myrtle and Mexican fan palms, was too intense and I didn't like the temperature of the mini-greenhouse I set up. My response? Strung up 40% shade cloth. It's a 2-fer. It'll reduce the insolation of the germination area and it'll reduce the insolation of the wall for the master bedroom--should have done that 10 years ago, to be honest.
What they're planning is short-term--it'll be washed out of the atmosphere in a few weeks. Given the area involved and the way the atmosphere works, if they reduced the insolation by 100% it would produce darkness in a shifting area for a week or two before dispersing to near no effect.
It's one of the two geo-engineering approaches I favor; the other is seeding the ocean with Fe and Ca and letting phytoplankton harvest all that excess solar energy to produce biomass.
dweller
(26,501 posts)In a rocket into the Sun …. It won’t dim it , but it will brighten life here on Earth
✌🏻
littlemissmartypants
(27,414 posts)
Shipwack
(2,637 posts)Sounds like the opening narration of a post-apocalyptic movie...
or 
?
JustABozoOnThisBus
(24,101 posts)... when the next ice-age appears.
forgotmylogin
(7,822 posts)That might work like sunglasses or window tinting to prevent UV and heat from building up like a greenhouse...
RandomNumbers
(18,568 posts)
speak easy
(11,435 posts)SamuelTheThird
(206 posts)It was obvious all along geo-engineering was going to be tried
Igel
(36,742 posts)Think of it as a condom (or hormonal birth control). Yes, if that's how you're going to do things, you can never really stop. Unless that's not how you want to do things any more or you've simply stopped doing those things.
iemanja
(55,893 posts)It doesn't turn out well.
Grumpy Old Guy
(3,797 posts) Orrex
(65,085 posts)xuplate
(86 posts)Botany
(73,984 posts)….. energy into our atmosphere? You know CO 2 or CH 4 as the target of those infrared rays that are
produced by the burning of fossil fuels. Dimming Sun Light to cool our atmosphere? What a scam.
PortTack
(35,616 posts)
cbabe
(4,929 posts)LudwigPastorius
(12,321 posts)"You are meddling with the primal forces of nature!"
Midnight Writer
(23,813 posts)
Bread and Circuses
(724 posts)AdamGG
(1,686 posts)and there would be lower agricultural yields.
truthisfreedom
(23,391 posts)I love it. If you can afford one, get one. Used ones like mine are a steal compared to new and the warranties are excellent.
LT Barclay
(2,911 posts)littlemissmartypants
(27,414 posts)patphil
(7,739 posts)Sure, lets just alter the upper atmosphere to cool us down a bit. By the time we actually know how this will work globally, it'll be a bit late to say oops.
BUT if it works, we can go on polluting down here on the surface with no consequences.
That's the thinking behind this.
It's terrifying to say the least.
C Moon
(12,814 posts)But on edit, maybe we've reached the point of no return. So defense is now a necessity.
Layzeebeaver
(1,930 posts)what could possibly go wrong?
Karasu
(1,036 posts)to DIM THE FUCKING SUN.
Because that's so much more fucking rational, don't you know.
Humanity sucks. We have completely lost the plot. But now that we're here, I guess it's better than nothing.
littlemissmartypants
(27,414 posts)My first thought was what a waste of money.
I'd rather it fed children. There might be one or two intelligent children who could actually grow up to create a better world if we would feed them.
The last few generations have already thrown enough money around and done little more that fu>k things up.
❤️
RandomNumbers
(18,568 posts)Because there is NO relationship between the number of people doing things, and the impact of those done things on the climate.
None whatsoever!!
Hugin
(36,076 posts)But, that’s too hard. Let’s dim the Sun instead.
Javaman
(63,735 posts)Paladin
(30,283 posts)Eric and Don jr.: Talk about a couple of Dim Sons...
Conjuay
(2,396 posts)Let's come up with some stupid, cockamamie plan to launch more pollution into the upper atmosphere.
I'm sure Musk will get the contract-
Think about that a minute.
twodogsbarking
(13,496 posts) orangecrush
(24,405 posts)Misery loves company.
"Bloody Weather!"
?si=mEwRLE3bD8VC2zEm
orangecrush
(24,405 posts)
Bristlecone
(10,697 posts)
-misanthroptimist
(1,310 posts)It doesn't solve the problem of excess carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere. Sure, it's possible spraying aerosols will slow, stop, or even reverse warming. But that's only for as long as the aerosols are in the atmosphere. As others have pointed out above, that is a relatively short time.
However, those aerosols will have to be replenished. On top of that, we'll continue pumping CO2, methane, and everything else into the atmosphere. That means that warming will continue or even more aerosols will have to compensate. It also means that ocean acidification will continue.
There are more problems on top of those, but I think the stupidity and pointlessness of dimming the Sun is demonstrated adequately already.
Martin68
(25,614 posts)
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(16,081 posts)Sadly, instead of changing our ways, we seek to change the sun. Bizzare!
Nigrum Cattus
(494 posts)ALL plants (food) require sunlight at a certain level to thrive
The less sunlight the less oxygen they produce
Also, Einstein is quoted as saying -
"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them"