Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumDimming Sun's rays could ease climate impacts in Africa
From phys.org
"It's not a pleasant thought, but we may have to decide whether it is riskier to reflect away sunlight, or risker to go over the 2C threshold."
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dialling down the Sun's heat a notch by injecting billions of shiny sulphur dioxide particles into the stratosphere could curtail devastating drought across parts of Africa, new peer-reviewed research has reported.
This form of solar radiation management would slash the risk of another "Day Zero" drought in Cape Town, South Africaa city of 3.7 million which ran out of water in 2017by as much as 90 percent, according to a study published last week in Environmental Research Letters.
Global warming to datejust over one degree Celsius since the mid-19th centuryenhances the likelihood of such droughts by a factor of three, earlier research has shown.
more ...
AllaN01Bear
(18,009 posts)southern ca area .
Phoenix61
(16,994 posts)anyone would choose to have a dark colored roof here.
exboyfil
(17,862 posts)It does seem like using a teaspoon to empty a lake. Something that should be done but is not a solution to global warming.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,966 posts)I don't know, but there may be a relationship.
exboyfil
(17,862 posts)The numbers were not pretty given current costs to lift objects into orbit. Moving an asteroid of appropriate size and processing it into solar shielding is probably 100 years away given current progress on technology.
Screwing with our environment by injecting reflective particles in the atmosphere seems to also be very concerning.
Phoenix61
(16,994 posts)Dimming the Sun. It discusses the impact reducing particulate air pollution without addressing green house gas emissions. Basically, the particulates had mitigated the impact of the green house gasses and when we got rid of them it allowed the full effect of the green house gases to be felt. It makes sense if you think about it. When there is a forest fire green house gases are released but so are particulates. There is a balancing effect. Mother Nature is so smart.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,966 posts)The heat absorbed by dark particulates stays on the planet.
Heat reflected by white particulates has a fair chance to escape by radiation into space.
Volcanoes typically eject sulphate particles into the atmosphere which have a cooling effect on the planet.
Phoenix61
(16,994 posts)as much as it was about how they impacted clouds.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,816 posts)Some of those have reduced world wide temperatures for several years.
Boomer
(4,167 posts)I can't remember the source, but somewhere I read a critique of this proposed technique to block the sun.
As best I can remember, the caution was that this ploy should only be used if we had an aggressive plan already in place to reduce CO2, with the particles serving only as a temporary bridge until that reduction plan had reversed global warming.
Why? Because particle suspension is not a true fix; it's just masking the global warming that is taking place. Without some method of sequestration, the CO2 causing global warming will be with us for tens of thousands of years. Masking that climate forcing just keeps kicking the can down the road. We would be committed to continuing this high tech injection process for effectively forever, and there's no guarantee that an industrial human civilization would last long enough to support that long-term task. The minute we stopped the injection process, ripping off the mask, the full force of the escalated global warming would be revealed all at once. Instead of adapting along the way, we'd be plunged into a new hell.
There were other factors at play, too, but this was the one I remember most clearly.