Hacker News Reader

Comment by alexose | Hacker News Reader

As I'm sitting here reading about what's happening with the Yangtze, the Danube, and the Rhine, the flooding in Pakistan, the greater-than-expected warming in the arctic, and the sudden uptick in methane emissions, I wonder: At what point do we deploy solar geoengineering?

View on HN

I used to joke that local politicians in Shanghai will eventually resort to geoengineering. And that they won't ask permission from anyone.

In the grand scheme of things, solar geoengineering is cheap. There are many entities in the world that could afford it on their own without coordinating with anyone else. For some of them, it would be cheaper than preparing for the consequences of climate change. And some of those may be willing to take the risk.

At the point where all of the above starts seriously inconveniencing the ultra-rich.

How about geo-engineering? Already being employed in secret government programs.

Never.

What problems do you see?

People caring

This makes the very large assumption that people will care soon enough.

Aside from the enormous risks.. We see that people are not even willing to limit their own emissions in the long term for their own benefit (and I am not talking about the poor, I am talking about the rich - 90% emissions is caused by top 10% wealthy of all people). How do you imagine then, people actually investing energy to cool the planet on other people's behalf?

The truth is, we always had technological solutions, problem is where you draw the line on a finite planet to avoid overshoot.

It's really like that joke, in a flood, a religious man rejects a neighbor's boat, because he believes the god will save him. Then he rejects a rescue helicopter, again, the god will sure save him. Eventually, he dies, comes to heaven and asks god, why didn't he save him? Well, the god says, I sent the boat and the helicopter..

That's what we do with technology. We have technological solutions (to reduce emissions), we just reject them, because they are below us. Geoengineering is just another prayer.

It took a while to scroll to find this. I'm glad someone has read the actual reports.

All of these campaigns aimed at the everyman will do almost nothing to avert climate change. To actually impact it, companies and the ultra wealthy need to be the targets. If every US citizen making under $500,000/year drove an EV, kept their power off most of the day, and ate only vegetables there would not be a perceivable impact on the climate. Yet, we are sold this nonsense by the media who is ostensibly controlled by the very people doing the most damage.

I find it completely insane the idea that the farmer with his diesel truck, or 100,000 farmers with their diesel trucks, are the cause of the problem. The numbers say otherwise. It is not "our" problem, it is their problem. The ultra wealthy and their companies.

The wealthy, globally and locally, are responsible for most of the emissions but they're doing that by spending money on things that then cause poor people to drive trucks or tractors spewing toxins.

So everyone needs to stop doing the stuff we dont want to happen. Most of it we know is a long term money saver for the poor average joe. They just don't have the funds to invest in that up front.

This is what all the "just transition" stuff is about.

Earth and its systems are too complex and left with too much unknown variables to be confident in messing with them without the danger of creating a feedback loop that makes the matter worse.

Take for example invasive species of plants and animals -- some of them were deliberately spread to non-native habitats in hope to regulate X but are now wrecking havoc in local ecosystems and pushing out native species.

I don't understand this. If people cared (or perhaps comprehend) complex feedback loops, we wouldn't be in this mess. If the majority of the human population starts suffering, including you and I, we will certainly do whatever we can to stop prevent that suffering, short term. I don't think there's any evidence, from any point in history, that suggests we'll, as a collective species, shun our instincts of self preservation, and die for the unknown of possible future problems.

Let's say India (they seem especially vulnerable) starts having mass heat and starvation, where they're losing significant parts of their population, and decided to slow it, immediately, by launching some solar shields. Do we shoot it down?

I think "never" is ludicrous. Once people start dying, people will demand and plea for something to be done, or heads will roll.

Well, there's that part where all the major Western governments basically have their head in the sand and think that aiming for gradual changes by 2050 is perfectly fine.

China might go for it, though. They've got that balance of enough top-down authority to actually make big projects happen and the need to continue showing large-scale improvement to the common people to maintain legitimacy.

I actually think it’s more likely that geo-engineering will be started by wealthy individuals. Think about it: it’s the ultimate form of philantrophy! The ultimate ego boost for those who have it all.

Snowpiercer explored one potential failure mode of geoengineering.

But that's not realistic engineering. Every proposal for a solar shade that I've seen includes a way to remove it. Some are ephemeral, by design.

I got the impression the Snowpiercer situation was chemical, but a solar shade does seem like a better option indeed.

Edit: they used atmospheric aerosol injection:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Piercer#Plot

It's more like what problems you don't see. The unknown unknowns.

It takes monumental levels of hubris to think we can control the planet's climate, THE chaotic system.

Especially when the proposed solution to the effects of a perturbation to the system (increase in greenhouse gases) is an even bigger perturbation (blocking sunlight).

It's like trying to avoid a tsunami by generating another tsunami in the opposite direction and hoping the waves will cancel out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com