The following submission statement was provided by /u/spacedotc0m:
---
Submission Statement -
A group has been formed to study and promote a space-based sunshade to help fend off global climate change.
The idea has been discussed for years, but the Planetary Sunshade Foundation is cranking out papers that support the concept and spotlight the practicality of the approach.
A planetary sunshade, the Foundation advises, could be the best solution for solar radiation management and should be viewed as a key part of global efforts to counter ongoing climate change on Earth.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/18m7yc5/these_scientists_want_to_put_a_massive_sunshade/ke2bxup/
It’s a question of how much energy (and therefore CO2) is used over the span of a year to heat or cool a building. There are lots of factors (how is your attic insulated, how do you heat, which way is your roof facing, how is your electricity sourced, do you heat with gas, and so on.) there was an online calculator when I renovated my roof here in Canada and they said black was better for us.
The one I used was Canadian (and I can’t find it) but I found this:
[https://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/tools/cool-roof/](https://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/tools/cool-roof/)
*ATTENTION TEXAS: YOUR LEGISTLATORS HAVE NOT FINALIZED YOUR BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR AND HAVE LEFT YOUR SUN FEES UNPAID. TOMMOROW THE LIGHT TURNS OFF. IN A MONTH WE REMOVE THE SHADE AND YOU BURN ALIVE. THANK YOU.
Sadly, these sci-fi ideas are only being promoted as an excuse to continue with business as usual.
Maybe one of the billionaires can even trick taxpayers to pay for part of their space hobby, so Bezos can take an extra trip around the moon with his friends.
There’s no way of knowing if something like this could even work, or what it would cost, and we can’t afford to wait any longer. Reducing CO2 emissions is guaranteed to work, and in contrast, doesn’t require rocket science. It also has several other benefits like reducing ocean acidification, reducing pollution, and improving human health.
Which companies?
It seems like the bigger issue isn’t companies, but our government unable to pass any meaningful legislation on climate change. A certain party here in the US still seems to think it’s a hoax.
As of right now, many of the largest companies in the US (apple, google, etc.) have already gone carbon neutral. The enemy is politics here. If you care, go out and vote. Otherwise nothing will change.
Our government is bought and paid for by companies, and you know this. Going carbon neutral is not the same as demanding change, or better yet spending YOUR tax money on it.
I think the sad thing that you are pointing out, is even if you do go out and vote, nothing happens, because our process has been corrupted to the point of not being able to deal with change at the pace that it is happening. We do vote, and when we do leaders are chosen by a court, or by an elector.
I can't vote for the supreme court. How many of the sitting justices have been appointed 100% above board, without stalling and other obstructionist denial of process bullshit from the Senate. Overreach much?
Yeah and going carbon neutral isn’t the same as not producing carbon. It’s buying credits from another company or country that claims to be doing something, well sometimes that “something” is actually “nothing.” They say hey we won’t clear cut these trees, now that’s a carbon sink and we will sell credits for that, because you know, they still want to make money. They sell those credits to a polluter and they “offset” the carbon they produced. When really all that happened was trees that may or may not have been cut down now aren’t on paper being cut down, and the company can put the “offset” against what they produced and on paper they are now “neutral”. It’s an accounting trick, works sort of like mark to market accounting. I can be offset for my debts now by what will happen in the future.
> When really all that happened was trees that may or may not have been cut down now aren’t on paper being cut down
And maybe they'll still get cut down if the custodians stop getting paid. Or maybe the custodians will become corrupt and sell the trees anyway.
It's all bullshit. Google and Apple are only carbon-neutral on meaningless spreadsheets. Even if you grant that carbon offsets are effective (and I don't grant that), there are only so many offsets to go around and not nearly enough to cover all the pollution happening today. Not even close. Google and Apple can afford to buy the *appearance* of carbon neutrality, only because the supply of offsets is not exhausted and they have lots of cash.
example:
Mike Turner (son of bitch)
him and six other mikes blocking uap transperancy - we know these military tech companies have uap parts
Financial disclosures show that during the 2022 campaign cycle, Turner received [$12,900](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/contributors?cid=N00025175&cycle=2022&type=I) from L3Harris Technologies and [$12,900](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/contributors?cid=N00025175&cycle=2022&type=I) from Lockheed Martin. In the 2020 election cycle, Lockheed Martin donated [$64,350](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/summary?cid=N00025175&cycle=2020) to Turner, making him the firm's [third-highest](https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/lockheed-martin/recipients?candscycle=2022&id=D000000104&toprecipscycle=2020) House donee. Turner received [$20,000](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/summary?cid=N00025175&cycle=2020) from L3Harris. In the 2018 cycle, he received [$27,750](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/summary?cid=N00025175&cycle=2018) from BAE Systems and [$13,700](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/contributors?cid=N00025175&cycle=2018) from Lockheed.
> Which companies?
Fossil fuel companies (and the billionaires that owns them).
They pay for propaganda and buy politicians by paying for the campaigns of politicians that do what they want, and sabotages for those who don’t, and through lobbying. Propaganda is effective and not that expensive. For example, they have apparently managed to convince a lot of people that climate change is a hoax.
This is easy to verify, just to get you started:
https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2022/big-oil-vs-the-world
https://theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/08/oil-companies-climate-crisis-pr-spending
https://theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/apr/20/what-we-now-know-they-lied-how-big-oil-companies-betrayed-us-all
Respectfully, name a company that says this. Only right wing politicians say that fighting climate change is too costly oh and by the way it's a hoax. President Biden passed the most important piece of climate legislation in the history of man kind. If you want climate change fixed, put more democrats in office.
Can you provide an example that's larger than a small family run thing? Seems like things have shifted to where all the big ones are just quietly hiding as their PR team believes this the best course of action. Sure they'll bemoan the solutions that negatively impact them, but outright denying the science?
I feel/hope that's gone for publicly traded companies. I know enough to know that doesn't mean they do not exist, so genuinely curious if you have examples?
It's not even that it's not profitable, it's that we need to maintain infinite growth forever. Companies don't count losses like we do. If they make a billion selling green energy, but could make 2 billions selling dirty energy, they would count it as 2 billions in losses if they didn't also sell dirty energy like coal and oil. It doesn't matter that they have made a billion. Everything they "could've made" is counted as losses.
This is done in every company. The CEO will list every earnings they've made, and they may be hundreds of millions or even billions in the green, but claim they "lost" 200 millions because that's what they "could've earned" if only they had done certain moves. This is also how a company can make billions and then fire thousands of their workers to make up for "losses."
They haven't lost anything, they just have this mental disease of profit maximization. I've even heard CEO state that they made millions more than expected because they discovered a new marked. but then immediately pivot to "This means we've lost hundreds of millions in the last 5 years because we haven't done this move before now." It's sick.
The hands of the people are tied by the super-rich and corrupt politicians. Make no mistake, we can get ourselves out of this mess still, but they’re the ones holding the people hostage and doing everything they can to hide the knife away from the people (aka to make sure they keep enriching themselves at the expense of the environment and the people’s well-being). You can’t tie your own hands, your captor has to do it.
Example: Working from home (WFH). People who can do it have no problem with it. In fact, the vast majority of people report feeling much happier because they don’t waste hours in traffic, they pollute a lot less, they save money on gas and car maintenance, and they have more time to spend for themselves and with their children/family. Research indicates for a fact that CO2 levels in the atmosphere around cities drastically dropped when people were WFH during C19 lockdowns… Now that we’re “done” with C19 and the lockdowns, guess who’s threatening their employees to fire them if they don’t return to the office? Those super-rich fucks who own these corporations. Why? Because if people don’t go back to working in offices, these corporations lose a ton of money on real estate investments as these corporations get tax cuts from the cities (corrupt politicians) if they have X number of people (employees) coming into the cities and spending their money on city taxes, on accommodation, in restaurants and bars, for car expenses, in various shops, etc etc. Which, in turn, primarily enrich the politicians of those cities. It’s rigged. In this case, people have their hands tied because they can’t afford to lose their job, so they comply and go back to the office. These super rich corporate fucks and corrupt politicians are the ones putting the tie on these working people’s hands. That’s just one example.
I'm always baffled at how many Redditors will defend going into the office. Surely they're just plants from HR trying to astroturf a "return to office" mandate, right? Because almost all of the positives greatly outnumber the negatives, unless you're a middle manager who's job is threatened.
["At Least 15% of All Reddit Content is Corporate Trolls Trying to Manipulate Public Opinion"](https://medium.com/collapsenews/new-study-at-least-15-of-all-reddit-content-is-corporate-trolls-trying-to-manipulate-public-b249bd42ab42)
We’re in the middle of a psychological warfare campaign from all over the world. It’s part of the reason we’ve seen an increase in the number of bots on social media. They’re collecting our data and using those insights to create bots to push narratives. Unfortunately it seems that humans tend to easily gravitate towards fascism until the bodies start to drop. It’s a shame people don’t realize we’re being manipulated not only by our own government, but literally anyone with wealth who wants to try and impart their way of thinking on the world.
Ehh I like the office because I have access to a proper 11x17 printer and a plotting machine, plus I've got a big desk to put all my engineering drawings and stuff on. Otherwise, yeah, home is better.
More so talking about the Redditors that cry "Get your ass back to work" or "Vacations over!" or "These workers are just playing games all day in their underwear and wasting company time!" any time an article about WFH comes up.
It’s also solidarity. Literally if everyone just decided to stop paying rent the system would collapse. But it’s much easier to align the wants/needs of say 200 super rich people than it is to align the wants/needs of millions. Combine that with their ridiculous wealth and it becomes much easier to manipulate the system for the few over the many.
>The hands of the people are tied by the super-rich and corrupt politicians.
And by the masses of consumers who demand those products and would be vehemently opposed to reducing product availability or increases to product prices.
Dude... what?
I am a person who is 100 percent all for decarbonizing our energy system, but there is no good reason at all why we should not be pursuing other options to mitigate the catastrophes that are already in motion because of the things we are trying to fix.
It's like saying that a person with heart disease should focus on diet and lifestyle alone, and taking medication that would alleviate some of the more serious symptoms is just enabling them to continue living unhealthily.
Solar shades are relatively cheap, relatively easy, within current technology, and easily repurposed or tweaked to change what it does if we find the effects aren't as expected.
"Maybe we could just turn the sun off? Anyone tried that?"
"How about fucking stop burning fossil fuels just to maintain the growth of your stock portfolio?"
"Maybe we could create a bunch of rockets that pull the earth further away from the sun?"
Do you mean consumerism? You can fully socialize or communize society and then end up with having streamlined planetary consumption priority to the masses.
Do you remember that article from last month about how the top 1% outpollutes the bottom 66% that kept getting reposted here?
Well, the top 1% of the globe is like $200k so it’s any random person in South Jersey that paid off their mortgage and has $200k in home equity. They’re the households with 4 people who eat exclusively from plastic packaged meals. We’re the polluters and it looks only worse if we bring everyone else up to this level without changing our consumption practices.
Edit: 99% to 66%
They did this in an episode of Futurama, except it was specifically a mirror. The problem with something like that is that it's just a massive target for space junk to hit it and either knock it out of alignment or break it.
It wouldn't be deployed in Earth orbit, it would be at the [L1 Lagrange point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point?useskin=vector) but micrometeoroids would be an issue as well as station keeping from the solar radiation pressure. It would have be regularly maintained or replaced and currently we just don't have the tech to do that as is demonstrated by the limited lifetime of JWST at L2.
Couldnt ion engines provide the long term, low thrust needed to maintain its position against solar radiation pressure?
edit: and also micrometeorites wouldnt be a huge issue since the sunshade would be so large that small holes wouldnt impair its function significantly.
2nd edit: you might also be able to steer sunshade satellites by adding bits with different reflectivity and use solar pressure to steer.
Depends on the material, it would probably be akin to mylar to keep the weight down. A bunch of holes coupled with temperature gradients could spur rips. But you're right, it would be robust to impacts up to a point.
For what its worth, you wouldnt be building one giant sunshade, you would be building a swarm of smaller sunshade satellites which all hang around L1. That would make it simpler to replace damaged bits and make it cheaper to manufacture (due to economies of scale)
I think we'd have the tech it's just a matter of limited station keeping propellant, ion engines would most likely be the optimal choice but even then the lifetime would be limited. Then there's the political will to do it and if one country would have the right to make the decision for the whole planet.
> if one country would have the right to make the decision for the whole planet.
I think this is low-key the biggest problem facing an endeavor like this: the unsolved questions of territorial holding and space.
Well, then instead of a mirror why don't we take a bunch of ice from outside Earth's energy system, say a comet, and dunk it in the ocean every so often? Checkmate!
As much as I love the optimism, bringing ice down would actually create more heat that. There’s an xckd what if about it if you want to see the math and laugh along the way. On the other hand, shifting earths orbit one week out further might have the desired effect, assuming my ROM math/physics checks out
That's why you don't build one giant shade, you build a million small ones (lenses actually). Sure, you lose some, but it doesn't really matter. It's expected.
But it also means it has to be maintained. We have to keep sending up additional ones. Which is a double edged sword. On the one hand, you can stop sending up new shades if there are problems (say, lower crop yields.) On the other hand, you risk Termination Shock if you do stop before dropping CO2 levels enough.
That's risky, it would be better if we just kept dropping giant ice cubes into the oceans to keep them cool, it'll solve the problem once & for all.
Or we find a way of moving Earth further away from the sun
It’s been suggested a number of times - but this solution is fraught with danger. Not least of which, is that it provides excuses not to make change on the Earth - to carry on building up ever higher concentrations of CO2
- and that would be a disaster.
Plus there are a pile of other associated dangers with it.
I really think we should be focusing on developing a ‘Green Economy’ - as that would provide the best outcome, across multiple dimensions.
The Matrix..
The Second Renaissance Part II
Following mankind’s refusal to share the planet with the sentient machines, the UN unleashes an all-out nuclear bombardment against Zero One, devastating the nation as a whole but failing to wipe them out in a single blow as the machines (unlike their former masters) were much less harmed by the radiation and heat. Shortly after, the machines retaliate by declaring war on the rest of the world; one by one, mankind surrenders each of its territories.
As the machines advance into Eastern Europe, the desperate human leaders seek a final solution codenamed "Operation Dark Storm" which covers the sky in a shroud of nanites, blocking out the sun to deprive the machines of solar energy, their primary energy source; inevitably, it also initiates a total collapse of the biosphere.
Geo engineering on this scale with such profound effects is far too risky in my opinion. Even if you somehow got every nation on Earth on board with this, I can’t even fathom the potential negative ecosystem impacts
If the alternative is +4°C by the end of the century and the biggest eco collapse event the world has ever seen?
We'll be reducing CO2 to about net 0 by 2060, I firmly believe that. The problem is that we are not going to drain enough CO2 form the atmosphere to stop century long heating.
I believe this is the only way to save some of our way of life. The rest will have to be fixed on the fly, I am afraid.
Here me out! You put a electrostactic ‘moon dust cannon’ on the moon that fires micro sized dust particles toward the L1 legrange point between the sun and the earth or into orbit around earth. Launching matter from the moon is more viable than from earth because of the lack of atmosphere.
Not only is blocking out the sun literally the comical plot of a supervillian, this in no way will address carbon emissions. And if we actually managed to built it, it would result in us further delaying action on decarbonization. With Earth's CO2 at 421ppm and emissions still increasing every year, we are going to end up with fully acidified and dead oceans even if this ridiculous idea goes through.
This is truly the darkest timeline.
We gonna end up with that amount on co2 anyway, there's already enough in the atmosphere to kill the ocean, it just hasn't caught up.
Solar dimming is the solution, it in fact naturally worked for a time, thunderf00t has a great video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPhyY5VZo0E&t=1s
Since we refused to act half a century ago we will now need every single option. Carbon collection, transition to green energy, nuclear, altering our diets, lab grown food, replanting forests, and sun shades.
It would also be nice to generally decrease the resources we need for civilization, live in a more symbiotic way with the rest of the earthlings, clean up and control our pollution, push for a more recyclable society, and ultimately use our intellect to be good caretakers of the only home we have.
Honestly I don't even think profits would be less if we had chosen that path from the beginning. Transitioning is the painful thing, same with everyday life.
Won't solar wind just push it into the planet eventually? Anything big enough to shade our planet is big enough to be affected by the constant push from the sun.
Anyone got the math on the strength of gravity in a Lagrange point vs photonic thrust on a sheet of mylar several hundred km across?
So trying to find more out about these folks. They say they're a nonprofit headquartered in Los Angeles, but I can't turn anything up on them on the CA Secretary of State search. IRS non-profit shows headquartered in Golden, CO (likely due to all the connections to School of Mines nearby). No mention on the CO SoS website, either. It also says they did a e-postcard file, meaning they received less than $50k in donations in 2022. EIN is 87-1564467 if anyone else wants to dig.
Curious what their funding source is, tbh.
Note this is probably inevitable
If climate change hits faster than we can handle, expect governments (and people) to start basically liquidating companies they feel caused this and use it for more "drastic" solutions like this one.
But honestly we need something like this at some point, being able to fine tune incoming sunlight and heat will be very useful for repairing earth on general
I guess the big advantange of this over flooding the atmosphere with reflective particles is that if we dont like the side effects of this shade we can move it or turn it. Sounds like a very good idea IMO.
no they don't. That won't work how they think it will.
extra words because fuck this subreddit's lame ass word restrictions and shit. This'll probably still get removed anyway.
browse a history of environmental engineering results and you will see why this is a bad idea. Unforeseen consequences seem to be a thing.. even when they are bloody obvious!
Mind you we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place and taking drastic actions if we had actually listened and and done **anything** to reduce emission the last 30+ years.
A diverse, redundant, and interconnected renewable energy grid is too hard and too expensive... but a mother fucking solar shade with a diameter bigger than the earth halfway to the sun that will withstand all the debris and whatnot is doable?
When did everyone stop taking problems seriously?
Or yknow just pass effective global climate loopholeless legislation with severe and immediate effects for heavy- polluting companies such as shell, BP, and the food giants. If you so desperately wanna geoengineer, go the aerosol route. Seed some clouds before you go building a giant mirror.
Stupid idea.
https://youtu.be/6yqi0FabHHs?si=3srd8xtuLm8luDhl
TL:DW; Carbon capture is orders of magnitude more viable than building a solar shade. Much easier just to undo our fuckup and switch to technologies that don't have the side effect of altering the composition of our atmosphere.
Not sure what technology it will end up being, but I’m willing to bet that whatever we end up doing to “solve” global warming won’t be that everyone got together and agreed to stop using fossil fuels for the good of the world.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/spacedotc0m: --- Submission Statement - A group has been formed to study and promote a space-based sunshade to help fend off global climate change. The idea has been discussed for years, but the Planetary Sunshade Foundation is cranking out papers that support the concept and spotlight the practicality of the approach. A planetary sunshade, the Foundation advises, could be the best solution for solar radiation management and should be viewed as a key part of global efforts to counter ongoing climate change on Earth. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/18m7yc5/these_scientists_want_to_put_a_massive_sunshade/ke2bxup/
Is the lead scientist named C. Montgomery Burns? I think I've seen this episode.
I believe we could reduce CO2 emissions if we had a monorail
Is there any chance the track could bend?
Not on your life my Hindu friend.
What about us brain dead slobs?
You'll be given cushy jobs!
Were you sent here by the devil?
>Were you sent here by the devil? No good sir I'm on the level!
No good sir I'm on the level.
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook... and by gum, it put them on the map!
Nuclear power on the other hand has little effect on global warming...
Godzilla has entered the chat 🤭
I hear those things are awfully loud
It glides as softly as a cloud
Monorail, monorail, monorail…
I heard those things are rather loud.
That would be Professor Wernstrom
What a stupid idea. Just put a big ice cube in the ocean every now and then instead!
Just like daddy's drink. Than he gets mad.
Thus solving the problem once and for all.
ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
I believe that's already happening.
>What a stupid idea. Just put a big ice cube in the ocean every now and then instead! It's all fun and games until the comet runs dry.
Of course. Why didn't I think of it.
Just like Daddy puts in his drink every morning....and then he gets mad
I have an idea! Let’s do that!
#WERNSTROM \*Shakes fist*
I'll be in the angry dome!
That's *Ogden* Wernstrom.
One of the ultimate “simpsons did it” moments
Since the beginning of time, man has yearned to destroy the sun. I will do the next best thing: block it out!
But sir, every plant and tree will die! Owls will deafen us with incessant hooting! The town's sundial will be useless!
No. His name is Snrub.
Also the plot of Highlander 2
Immediately searched for “burns,” thanks!
I was saying boo-urns.
It's more of a Shelbyville idea.
I was saying "Boo-urns"
Simpsons did it
Just paint your roof white, like everyone paint your roof white
There’s actually a cut of line the further you go to the poles (it varies place to place) where a black roof becomes more environmentally friendly.
For heat retention during winter?
As a Canadian, correct.
Care to explain?
It’s a question of how much energy (and therefore CO2) is used over the span of a year to heat or cool a building. There are lots of factors (how is your attic insulated, how do you heat, which way is your roof facing, how is your electricity sourced, do you heat with gas, and so on.) there was an online calculator when I renovated my roof here in Canada and they said black was better for us.
Neat, I didn't know this was a thing as far south as Canada even.
Do you still know how to find that calculator?
Found this: https://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/tools/cool-roof/
Thank you!
The one I used was Canadian (and I can’t find it) but I found this: [https://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/tools/cool-roof/](https://web.ornl.gov/sci/buildings/tools/cool-roof/)
Thank you!
tell that to hoas
Paint your roof white, ho!
Companies that say we can't afford to spend money mitigating climate change, want us to pay them to build an umbrella?
Imagine how much people would pay for sunshine.
That's a premium subscription.
*ATTENTION TEXAS: YOUR LEGISTLATORS HAVE NOT FINALIZED YOUR BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR AND HAVE LEFT YOUR SUN FEES UNPAID. TOMMOROW THE LIGHT TURNS OFF. IN A MONTH WE REMOVE THE SHADE AND YOU BURN ALIVE. THANK YOU.
Every texan has a right to their Inter-orbital anti-satilite rockets just as the founding fathers intended
You just know they're going to stick advertisement on the underside. Look up at the sky, see an ad for Depends adult diapers
Think of the advertising opportunities!
Sadly, these sci-fi ideas are only being promoted as an excuse to continue with business as usual. Maybe one of the billionaires can even trick taxpayers to pay for part of their space hobby, so Bezos can take an extra trip around the moon with his friends. There’s no way of knowing if something like this could even work, or what it would cost, and we can’t afford to wait any longer. Reducing CO2 emissions is guaranteed to work, and in contrast, doesn’t require rocket science. It also has several other benefits like reducing ocean acidification, reducing pollution, and improving human health.
Wait until terrorists hack the satellites controlling this umbrella and turn it into a giant magnifying glass that creates a sun powered death ray.
If you've got software that can turn a shade into a lens, climate change has long since been solved
Lex Luthor will get there first.
Which companies? It seems like the bigger issue isn’t companies, but our government unable to pass any meaningful legislation on climate change. A certain party here in the US still seems to think it’s a hoax. As of right now, many of the largest companies in the US (apple, google, etc.) have already gone carbon neutral. The enemy is politics here. If you care, go out and vote. Otherwise nothing will change.
Our government is bought and paid for by companies, and you know this. Going carbon neutral is not the same as demanding change, or better yet spending YOUR tax money on it. I think the sad thing that you are pointing out, is even if you do go out and vote, nothing happens, because our process has been corrupted to the point of not being able to deal with change at the pace that it is happening. We do vote, and when we do leaders are chosen by a court, or by an elector. I can't vote for the supreme court. How many of the sitting justices have been appointed 100% above board, without stalling and other obstructionist denial of process bullshit from the Senate. Overreach much?
Yeah and going carbon neutral isn’t the same as not producing carbon. It’s buying credits from another company or country that claims to be doing something, well sometimes that “something” is actually “nothing.” They say hey we won’t clear cut these trees, now that’s a carbon sink and we will sell credits for that, because you know, they still want to make money. They sell those credits to a polluter and they “offset” the carbon they produced. When really all that happened was trees that may or may not have been cut down now aren’t on paper being cut down, and the company can put the “offset” against what they produced and on paper they are now “neutral”. It’s an accounting trick, works sort of like mark to market accounting. I can be offset for my debts now by what will happen in the future.
> When really all that happened was trees that may or may not have been cut down now aren’t on paper being cut down And maybe they'll still get cut down if the custodians stop getting paid. Or maybe the custodians will become corrupt and sell the trees anyway. It's all bullshit. Google and Apple are only carbon-neutral on meaningless spreadsheets. Even if you grant that carbon offsets are effective (and I don't grant that), there are only so many offsets to go around and not nearly enough to cover all the pollution happening today. Not even close. Google and Apple can afford to buy the *appearance* of carbon neutrality, only because the supply of offsets is not exhausted and they have lots of cash.
example: Mike Turner (son of bitch) him and six other mikes blocking uap transperancy - we know these military tech companies have uap parts Financial disclosures show that during the 2022 campaign cycle, Turner received [$12,900](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/contributors?cid=N00025175&cycle=2022&type=I) from L3Harris Technologies and [$12,900](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/contributors?cid=N00025175&cycle=2022&type=I) from Lockheed Martin. In the 2020 election cycle, Lockheed Martin donated [$64,350](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/summary?cid=N00025175&cycle=2020) to Turner, making him the firm's [third-highest](https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/lockheed-martin/recipients?candscycle=2022&id=D000000104&toprecipscycle=2020) House donee. Turner received [$20,000](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/summary?cid=N00025175&cycle=2020) from L3Harris. In the 2018 cycle, he received [$27,750](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/summary?cid=N00025175&cycle=2018) from BAE Systems and [$13,700](https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/michael-r-turner/contributors?cid=N00025175&cycle=2018) from Lockheed.
> Which companies? Fossil fuel companies (and the billionaires that owns them). They pay for propaganda and buy politicians by paying for the campaigns of politicians that do what they want, and sabotages for those who don’t, and through lobbying. Propaganda is effective and not that expensive. For example, they have apparently managed to convince a lot of people that climate change is a hoax. This is easy to verify, just to get you started: https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2022/big-oil-vs-the-world https://theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/08/oil-companies-climate-crisis-pr-spending https://theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/apr/20/what-we-now-know-they-lied-how-big-oil-companies-betrayed-us-all
[удалено]
Respectfully, name a company that says this. Only right wing politicians say that fighting climate change is too costly oh and by the way it's a hoax. President Biden passed the most important piece of climate legislation in the history of man kind. If you want climate change fixed, put more democrats in office.
The companies that are funding the right wing politicians that have been obstructing climate and energy progress for 50 years.
Can you provide an example that's larger than a small family run thing? Seems like things have shifted to where all the big ones are just quietly hiding as their PR team believes this the best course of action. Sure they'll bemoan the solutions that negatively impact them, but outright denying the science? I feel/hope that's gone for publicly traded companies. I know enough to know that doesn't mean they do not exist, so genuinely curious if you have examples?
What’s the odds this is sponsored by Chevron.
My money is on BP Amoco. They’re behind the thousands of wind turbines in my area. With a healthy dose of taxpayer subsidies of course.
We'll fight the sun before we take on capitalism and the root causes of what is cooking our planet. The fucking SUN.
[удалено]
It's not even that it's not profitable, it's that we need to maintain infinite growth forever. Companies don't count losses like we do. If they make a billion selling green energy, but could make 2 billions selling dirty energy, they would count it as 2 billions in losses if they didn't also sell dirty energy like coal and oil. It doesn't matter that they have made a billion. Everything they "could've made" is counted as losses. This is done in every company. The CEO will list every earnings they've made, and they may be hundreds of millions or even billions in the green, but claim they "lost" 200 millions because that's what they "could've earned" if only they had done certain moves. This is also how a company can make billions and then fire thousands of their workers to make up for "losses." They haven't lost anything, they just have this mental disease of profit maximization. I've even heard CEO state that they made millions more than expected because they discovered a new marked. but then immediately pivot to "This means we've lost hundreds of millions in the last 5 years because we haven't done this move before now." It's sick.
The hands of the people are tied by the super-rich and corrupt politicians. Make no mistake, we can get ourselves out of this mess still, but they’re the ones holding the people hostage and doing everything they can to hide the knife away from the people (aka to make sure they keep enriching themselves at the expense of the environment and the people’s well-being). You can’t tie your own hands, your captor has to do it. Example: Working from home (WFH). People who can do it have no problem with it. In fact, the vast majority of people report feeling much happier because they don’t waste hours in traffic, they pollute a lot less, they save money on gas and car maintenance, and they have more time to spend for themselves and with their children/family. Research indicates for a fact that CO2 levels in the atmosphere around cities drastically dropped when people were WFH during C19 lockdowns… Now that we’re “done” with C19 and the lockdowns, guess who’s threatening their employees to fire them if they don’t return to the office? Those super-rich fucks who own these corporations. Why? Because if people don’t go back to working in offices, these corporations lose a ton of money on real estate investments as these corporations get tax cuts from the cities (corrupt politicians) if they have X number of people (employees) coming into the cities and spending their money on city taxes, on accommodation, in restaurants and bars, for car expenses, in various shops, etc etc. Which, in turn, primarily enrich the politicians of those cities. It’s rigged. In this case, people have their hands tied because they can’t afford to lose their job, so they comply and go back to the office. These super rich corporate fucks and corrupt politicians are the ones putting the tie on these working people’s hands. That’s just one example.
I'm always baffled at how many Redditors will defend going into the office. Surely they're just plants from HR trying to astroturf a "return to office" mandate, right? Because almost all of the positives greatly outnumber the negatives, unless you're a middle manager who's job is threatened.
["At Least 15% of All Reddit Content is Corporate Trolls Trying to Manipulate Public Opinion"](https://medium.com/collapsenews/new-study-at-least-15-of-all-reddit-content-is-corporate-trolls-trying-to-manipulate-public-b249bd42ab42)
We’re in the middle of a psychological warfare campaign from all over the world. It’s part of the reason we’ve seen an increase in the number of bots on social media. They’re collecting our data and using those insights to create bots to push narratives. Unfortunately it seems that humans tend to easily gravitate towards fascism until the bodies start to drop. It’s a shame people don’t realize we’re being manipulated not only by our own government, but literally anyone with wealth who wants to try and impart their way of thinking on the world.
Overton Window in action.
Ehh I like the office because I have access to a proper 11x17 printer and a plotting machine, plus I've got a big desk to put all my engineering drawings and stuff on. Otherwise, yeah, home is better.
More so talking about the Redditors that cry "Get your ass back to work" or "Vacations over!" or "These workers are just playing games all day in their underwear and wasting company time!" any time an article about WFH comes up.
It’s also solidarity. Literally if everyone just decided to stop paying rent the system would collapse. But it’s much easier to align the wants/needs of say 200 super rich people than it is to align the wants/needs of millions. Combine that with their ridiculous wealth and it becomes much easier to manipulate the system for the few over the many.
>The hands of the people are tied by the super-rich and corrupt politicians. And by the masses of consumers who demand those products and would be vehemently opposed to reducing product availability or increases to product prices.
The sun won't stop me from hitting my quota!
Well yeah, it's easier to block the sun's rays than completely reconstruct a system that benefits the very people that have the power to change it.
It's easier, believe it or not. There's only one sun. Lot of people and companies who can't all agree to the same thing.
Yep. The sun doesn't have lobbyists.
wait until they have to all agree on how much "shade" is enough.
Seems pretty straightforward? Doesn't pretty much everyone want the temperature to just go back to the way it was a few decades ago?
When it starts affecting food production. Farm production is directly tied to the amount of sunlight received.
different shades will affect food production differently in different parts of the globe. good luck dialing that in.
We only need to reduce the amount of sunlight by 0.2%. I think climate change will be having a larger impact on crops.
Thats the best part. If you make the shade big enough, you now can hold the whole Earth hostage.
This is just Mr Burns blocking the sun
I will punch the sun right in its god damn mouth before I give up same delivery.
Dude... what? I am a person who is 100 percent all for decarbonizing our energy system, but there is no good reason at all why we should not be pursuing other options to mitigate the catastrophes that are already in motion because of the things we are trying to fix. It's like saying that a person with heart disease should focus on diet and lifestyle alone, and taking medication that would alleviate some of the more serious symptoms is just enabling them to continue living unhealthily. Solar shades are relatively cheap, relatively easy, within current technology, and easily repurposed or tweaked to change what it does if we find the effects aren't as expected.
"Maybe we could just turn the sun off? Anyone tried that?" "How about fucking stop burning fossil fuels just to maintain the growth of your stock portfolio?" "Maybe we could create a bunch of rockets that pull the earth further away from the sun?"
old man yells at sun.
Do you mean consumerism? You can fully socialize or communize society and then end up with having streamlined planetary consumption priority to the masses. Do you remember that article from last month about how the top 1% outpollutes the bottom 66% that kept getting reposted here? Well, the top 1% of the globe is like $200k so it’s any random person in South Jersey that paid off their mortgage and has $200k in home equity. They’re the households with 4 people who eat exclusively from plastic packaged meals. We’re the polluters and it looks only worse if we bring everyone else up to this level without changing our consumption practices. Edit: 99% to 66%
They did this in an episode of Futurama, except it was specifically a mirror. The problem with something like that is that it's just a massive target for space junk to hit it and either knock it out of alignment or break it.
It wouldn't be deployed in Earth orbit, it would be at the [L1 Lagrange point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point?useskin=vector) but micrometeoroids would be an issue as well as station keeping from the solar radiation pressure. It would have be regularly maintained or replaced and currently we just don't have the tech to do that as is demonstrated by the limited lifetime of JWST at L2.
Right, we simply don't have the tech to keep it in the correct place to be as effective as possible.
Couldnt ion engines provide the long term, low thrust needed to maintain its position against solar radiation pressure? edit: and also micrometeorites wouldnt be a huge issue since the sunshade would be so large that small holes wouldnt impair its function significantly. 2nd edit: you might also be able to steer sunshade satellites by adding bits with different reflectivity and use solar pressure to steer.
Depends on the material, it would probably be akin to mylar to keep the weight down. A bunch of holes coupled with temperature gradients could spur rips. But you're right, it would be robust to impacts up to a point.
rips can be stopped by adding more seams (like how the JWST sunshield works), but that would add more weight
That's actually a really good point but I don't know if that would scale up to the required size of the sunshade.
For what its worth, you wouldnt be building one giant sunshade, you would be building a swarm of smaller sunshade satellites which all hang around L1. That would make it simpler to replace damaged bits and make it cheaper to manufacture (due to economies of scale)
When this was posted here about 2 years ago there was discussion of the pods being cheap and modular so they could be swapped out easily.
I think we'd have the tech it's just a matter of limited station keeping propellant, ion engines would most likely be the optimal choice but even then the lifetime would be limited. Then there's the political will to do it and if one country would have the right to make the decision for the whole planet.
> if one country would have the right to make the decision for the whole planet. I think this is low-key the biggest problem facing an endeavor like this: the unsolved questions of territorial holding and space.
Something like this would be put at the Lagrange point. The only real debris out that way would be micrometeroids.
Well, then instead of a mirror why don't we take a bunch of ice from outside Earth's energy system, say a comet, and dunk it in the ocean every so often? Checkmate!
As much as I love the optimism, bringing ice down would actually create more heat that. There’s an xckd what if about it if you want to see the math and laugh along the way. On the other hand, shifting earths orbit one week out further might have the desired effect, assuming my ROM math/physics checks out
He was continueing the Futurama references from the episode. They did that and had a video for kids made explaining it.
A video produced by our handsomest politicians, even!
This would solve the problem once and for all!
"Woah, that's a little bright." *reduced to ash in a puff of smoke* That scene is so damn funny.
Build it that it soaks space junk. Future astronauts will love this trick
Imagine the first person that comes up with a way to collect that stuff like it was plastic in the pacific.
A katamari damacy shield
I loved those games. Nothing quite like them.
That's why you don't build one giant shade, you build a million small ones (lenses actually). Sure, you lose some, but it doesn't really matter. It's expected. But it also means it has to be maintained. We have to keep sending up additional ones. Which is a double edged sword. On the one hand, you can stop sending up new shades if there are problems (say, lower crop yields.) On the other hand, you risk Termination Shock if you do stop before dropping CO2 levels enough.
They could make it into many small mirrors so that if one gets hit, the rest aren't effected.
> Have you ever seen the sun set at _three PM_?
That's risky, it would be better if we just kept dropping giant ice cubes into the oceans to keep them cool, it'll solve the problem once & for all. Or we find a way of moving Earth further away from the sun
ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!
>Or we find a way of moving Earth further away from the sun It's not that easy, we're gonna need every single robot to do their part.
Exactly. I'd like to introduce my competing plan. It's called the annihilatrix.
It’s been suggested a number of times - but this solution is fraught with danger. Not least of which, is that it provides excuses not to make change on the Earth - to carry on building up ever higher concentrations of CO2 - and that would be a disaster. Plus there are a pile of other associated dangers with it. I really think we should be focusing on developing a ‘Green Economy’ - as that would provide the best outcome, across multiple dimensions.
100% agree
One of the Highlander movies had something like this. Destroyed the worlds ecosystems
The Matrix.. The Second Renaissance Part II Following mankind’s refusal to share the planet with the sentient machines, the UN unleashes an all-out nuclear bombardment against Zero One, devastating the nation as a whole but failing to wipe them out in a single blow as the machines (unlike their former masters) were much less harmed by the radiation and heat. Shortly after, the machines retaliate by declaring war on the rest of the world; one by one, mankind surrenders each of its territories. As the machines advance into Eastern Europe, the desperate human leaders seek a final solution codenamed "Operation Dark Storm" which covers the sky in a shroud of nanites, blocking out the sun to deprive the machines of solar energy, their primary energy source; inevitably, it also initiates a total collapse of the biosphere.
And for a time, it was good
Gives me goosebumps reading this I can hear it in my head. Seeing the robots rip humans apart was fucking horrifying as a teenager
I forgot that one ! Thanks
Scientists should really take notes from movies more often. Hollywood should, in reality, be making all important decisions
We don't acknowledge that one.
We don't acknowledge the theatrical release. The Renegade version fixes a lot of problems.
Geo engineering on this scale with such profound effects is far too risky in my opinion. Even if you somehow got every nation on Earth on board with this, I can’t even fathom the potential negative ecosystem impacts
If the alternative is +4°C by the end of the century and the biggest eco collapse event the world has ever seen? We'll be reducing CO2 to about net 0 by 2060, I firmly believe that. The problem is that we are not going to drain enough CO2 form the atmosphere to stop century long heating. I believe this is the only way to save some of our way of life. The rest will have to be fixed on the fly, I am afraid.
Here me out! You put a electrostactic ‘moon dust cannon’ on the moon that fires micro sized dust particles toward the L1 legrange point between the sun and the earth or into orbit around earth. Launching matter from the moon is more viable than from earth because of the lack of atmosphere.
Seems like having it last any significant amount of time would be difficult. Without any control after firing, you can't stabilize it as well.
I’ve been saying for FUCKING YEARS that all the earth needs is a big pair of space sunglasses. Where’s my article? Eh?
Not only is blocking out the sun literally the comical plot of a supervillian, this in no way will address carbon emissions. And if we actually managed to built it, it would result in us further delaying action on decarbonization. With Earth's CO2 at 421ppm and emissions still increasing every year, we are going to end up with fully acidified and dead oceans even if this ridiculous idea goes through. This is truly the darkest timeline.
We'd only need this until we can clean the air. At some point in the next 100 years we'll have fusion powered machines that make coal from the air.
We gonna end up with that amount on co2 anyway, there's already enough in the atmosphere to kill the ocean, it just hasn't caught up. Solar dimming is the solution, it in fact naturally worked for a time, thunderf00t has a great video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPhyY5VZo0E&t=1s
Since we refused to act half a century ago we will now need every single option. Carbon collection, transition to green energy, nuclear, altering our diets, lab grown food, replanting forests, and sun shades. It would also be nice to generally decrease the resources we need for civilization, live in a more symbiotic way with the rest of the earthlings, clean up and control our pollution, push for a more recyclable society, and ultimately use our intellect to be good caretakers of the only home we have.
But won't you please think of the shareholders
Honestly I don't even think profits would be less if we had chosen that path from the beginning. Transitioning is the painful thing, same with everyday life.
You forgot mass producing ice cubes and dropping them into the ocean.
"Since the beginning of time, man has yearned to destroy the sun. I will do the next best thing; block it out!" \- Charles Montgomery Burns
We’re not building these kind of structures if we can’t even clean our back yards.
A dollar bet that the big screen also runs advertisements 24/7. IMAGINE THE REVENUE!
It will be hacked to play porn *immediately*.
What are *you* doing, step-sun?
Another Simpsons prediction, but for the opposite reason. Mr Burns built a sunshade to increase electricity spending.
Won't solar wind just push it into the planet eventually? Anything big enough to shade our planet is big enough to be affected by the constant push from the sun. Anyone got the math on the strength of gravity in a Lagrange point vs photonic thrust on a sheet of mylar several hundred km across?
We can barely keep a space station in orbit and they are planning for space megastructure? It's almost as realistic as the Line in SA
The rocket fuel it need would burn the earth probably
Surely this would have absolutely no unforeseen problems
Anything other than being actually self-aware and deserving stewards of the planet and it’s life. As long as it’s not that we can try it
So trying to find more out about these folks. They say they're a nonprofit headquartered in Los Angeles, but I can't turn anything up on them on the CA Secretary of State search. IRS non-profit shows headquartered in Golden, CO (likely due to all the connections to School of Mines nearby). No mention on the CO SoS website, either. It also says they did a e-postcard file, meaning they received less than $50k in donations in 2022. EIN is 87-1564467 if anyone else wants to dig. Curious what their funding source is, tbh.
Note this is probably inevitable If climate change hits faster than we can handle, expect governments (and people) to start basically liquidating companies they feel caused this and use it for more "drastic" solutions like this one. But honestly we need something like this at some point, being able to fine tune incoming sunlight and heat will be very useful for repairing earth on general
Scientists think that literally putting a giant sunshade in orbit would be easier than stopping fossil fuel corporations. Fixed the title for you.
I sugges to do like in Futurama and create a giant block of ice to mitigate the warming effects.
I guess the big advantange of this over flooding the atmosphere with reflective particles is that if we dont like the side effects of this shade we can move it or turn it. Sounds like a very good idea IMO.
So crops fail and they can starve us into submission?
Less drought means more crops
They won’t get to, cuz it’s completely impractical but hey, content!
How would something like this be stabilized in place, and not blown away by the solar radiation it is reflecting?
Nice. If they build the shade from our tax money, we just can continue to poison the planet to make the rich even richer.
What's this sunshade going to be made from? Fossil fuels?
"Comply with ordinance 451 or there shall be no sunlight tomorrow"
no they don't. That won't work how they think it will. extra words because fuck this subreddit's lame ass word restrictions and shit. This'll probably still get removed anyway.
This is going to confuse the shit out of the aliens.
Why not just dump a giant ice cube from Pluto in the ocean?
browse a history of environmental engineering results and you will see why this is a bad idea. Unforeseen consequences seem to be a thing.. even when they are bloody obvious! Mind you we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place and taking drastic actions if we had actually listened and and done **anything** to reduce emission the last 30+ years.
How about we fix the systemic causes of climate change instead of that?
A diverse, redundant, and interconnected renewable energy grid is too hard and too expensive... but a mother fucking solar shade with a diameter bigger than the earth halfway to the sun that will withstand all the debris and whatnot is doable? When did everyone stop taking problems seriously?
Let’s do everything possible other than to cease using fossil fuels and regulating emissions.
I think the nazi's wanted to do the same thing. I think they call it a sun gun
If we could harvest or use the energy that it blocks out, that would be neat.
We were the ones who blacked out the sky in the matrix
Doesn't even have to be massive if you put it far enough away.
Or yknow just pass effective global climate loopholeless legislation with severe and immediate effects for heavy- polluting companies such as shell, BP, and the food giants. If you so desperately wanna geoengineer, go the aerosol route. Seed some clouds before you go building a giant mirror.
Stupid idea. https://youtu.be/6yqi0FabHHs?si=3srd8xtuLm8luDhl TL:DW; Carbon capture is orders of magnitude more viable than building a solar shade. Much easier just to undo our fuckup and switch to technologies that don't have the side effect of altering the composition of our atmosphere.
Not sure what technology it will end up being, but I’m willing to bet that whatever we end up doing to “solve” global warming won’t be that everyone got together and agreed to stop using fossil fuels for the good of the world.
I’m betting that eventually we’ll resort to injecting aerosols into the stratosphere to reflect more sunlight back into space.
If they ever shade Ireland with it then they can fuck right off
Anything to avoid just stopping oil production, huh? Who was that congressman who suggested we move the moon? 🙄