So what's to stop someone doing something really drastic on global warming

[telemann.livejournal.com]

So, 2010 tied as the 2nd warmest year according to NOAA. In fact, they issued this nifty map showing significant weather/climate related events around the world for 2010.




Charlie Sheen in the 1998 Sci-Fi movie "The Arrival".

In the science fiction movie, The Arrival, a group of aliens have landed on Earth and secretly taken on human form to speed up global warming, to create an environment more to their species' requirement. Charlie Sheen's character discovers the aliens have created large plants in Central America, that generate large quantities of CO2 and ventilate them under the cover of night. Using the same basic principle in that movie, why not reverse the principle to prevent global warming? There are alarming signs to climatologists that Earth is rapidly approaching several tipping points that once reached, will make it significantly more difficult to slow down the process of global warming.

Since it appears there is not much political will on the part of the United States to effectively change policies in a significant manner in a timely fashion, some suggest a proactive approach would be to inject highly reflective particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect sunlight back out into space, and basically give the planet a "cold compress." Basically the principle would be the same as volcanic ash, or even large particulate pollution (ironically-- there seems to be a correlation between increased temperatures and pollution controls being implemented in the 1960s/1970s that reduced significant amounts of pollution in the upper atmosphere, and some also think banning of above ground atomic testing prior to 1963, which injected large amounts of dust believe the nuclear test ban treaty had an impact as well for the same reasons).

So what would be the implications of such an approach? What could anyone really do to prevent such an approach by either a group of scientists or even a single nation or group of nations that resolutely was committed to changing the rules of the game. Would the United Nations prevent it? On what authority? Why would the objections against such an approach be logical in contrast to allowing industrial countries that consume a majority of Earth's resources continue destructive policies that hurt everyone? Remember this is completely hypothetical. No one has called for anything remotely like this. But I wanted to stimulate discussion along the lines of recent"what-if-historical" posts.


White surfaces in housing and building materials greatly reduce energy consumption and costs

But there are many other less intrusive ways for C02 withdrawal from the atmosphere, including restoring as quickly possible, natural vegetation and grasslands, or using white surfaces on rooftops and road surfaces which are good things in of themselves, since it lowers energy costs to home owners and business. Using reflective white surfaces on all the roads in the United States would effectively remove the impact of all vehicles in the United States for a year.



Bonus!! The latest installment from Climate denial crock of the week: Global Warming on Climate Change?

Comments

[torpidai.livejournal.com]

It's funny how "someone else" is always going to "pay more" for the things that allegedly benefit everyone.

funnier still is the idea mankind can cut emssions enough to "save us all" whilst nature pumps outmore per day than government suggests we cut down to (per annum) and taxes us, "to incentivise"!

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

How dare you doubt people who have been wrong at least twice in the past half century!

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

See, I think that the science is entirely solid, as the scientists who see it as happening are all actually scientists in the field. But if the most famous spokesman for the *political* ramifications of the *scientific* discovery stands to make a pretty penny off of it....it makes me think the only thing Gore cares about is his pocketbook and he'd not give two shits about the science otherwise.

[nevermind6794.livejournal.com]

You must be very confused by the idea of things like compound interest.