• silence7@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    In general, this kind of thing has big issues at aren’t really resolved

    • You need to continue doing it for longer than civilizations last. People don’t really have a good track record of that kind of thing.
    • We end up with a smaller pole-to-equator temperature gradient, with real impacts on weather
    • These changes can alter rainfall patterns in ways that might cause significant food supply issues in some countries. This creates a governance problem. (eg: should China nuke India if the changes needed to prevent lethal heatwaves in India result in famine in China)
    • It does nothing about ocean acidification, so we still end up losing a big chunk of marine ecosystems
    • Addressing climate change this way means we don’t get any of the co-benefits of reduced air pollution we would otherwise get from phasing out fossil fuels
    • Probably other stuff we don’t know about because it’s not well studied
    • blindsight@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was surprised acid rain wasn’t mentioned in the article, too. Isn’t atmospheric sulfuric acid one of the causes of acid rain?