💾 Archived View for gemlog.blue › users › verachell › 1645223518.gmi captured on 2024-03-21 at 17:18:31. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2022-03-01)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Note: This post is a Gemini space version of my post originally published on March 25, 2021

https version of this post

Solar geoengineering is the idea of limiting the amount of sunlight that reaches the earth, with the aim of limiting global warming.

[https] 2020 What Is Solar Geoengineering? How does it work, what are the risks, and why should we study it? Union of Concerned Scientists

Here I will show 3 reasons why it's a really bad idea:

1. Photosynthesis requires sunlight, don't limit it - it's one of the few things pulling carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere

Photosynthesis is one of the very few ways we have to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

[https] Photosynthesis, National Geographic Resource Library

As an added bonus it's done automatically by plants, requiring no effort on our part. It requires light in order to work. To do it, plants take in sunlight, carbon dioxide and water, and they produce oxygen. These plants are literally removing carbon dioxide from our atmosphere, but they require light for it to work.

We should not do anything that could possibly limit the amount of photosynthesis occurring; limiting the amount of light hitting the planet is likely to decrease photosynthesis.

2. We should not be limiting the generation of solar power

Solar electricity is also one of our pathways to sharply decarbonize the electricity grid by generating power that does not produce carbon dioxide. But solar geoengineering would mean less sunlight, resulting in less solar power.

3. Crops which are needed for nutrition require adequate amounts of sunlight

In terms of nutrition, we don't want crop growth to be impacted. Too little sunlight means crops might not grow so well.

Conclusion

Above are 3 reasons why solar geoengineering is a bad idea. They are reasons which are understandable to everyone. In particular, solar geoengineering will decrease the ability of two of the very few things humanity has in its toolkit to solving global warming: photosynthesis and solar power. Any idea which decreases those two things is, quite simply put, a very bad idea.

It does not matter who first came up with solar geoengineering, how smart they are, or how many other people are for it. If it will negatively impact photosynthesis and solar power, we shouldn't even be considering it.

I myself hold a PhD in biochemistry, and as a scientist myself, I stand firmly and publicly against solar geoengineering.

What should we do instead? We need to decrease emissions and increase the amount of plants.

Solar geoengineering could quite possibly decrease temperatures, but will have the terrible side effect of taking along with it two of our most promising ways of causing a net decrease in carbon dioxide level: photosynthesis and solar power generation. Solar geoengineering is a little bit like saying "let's solve global warming by having a nuclear war - the resultant nuclear winter will cause decreased temperatures." Yes, but at what cost?