Thoughts on Geo Engineering?

[STe_rsv4]

It has been confirmed that the UK will go ahead with a £50m Geo Engineering experiment to try and "dim the sun"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bl...

Before 2020 I would have called anyone out for even suspecting this was a thing as a bit nutty but nothing since then really surprises me anymore (grade 3 tin foil hatter these days )

Now call me cynical, but the spraying of millions of tonnes of chemicals / particulates into the atmosphere doesn't sound like the safest thing that can effect humans / animals and flora. Not to mention, we live in a country with far not enough sunny days and I would prefer not to live under a grey haze.

Has this government gone absolutely barking mad allowing this?

Edited by STe_rsv4 on Wednesday 30th April 10:55

[simon_harris]

They have been already doing this for years, they know exactly what is going to happen and how bad it is for us

1. chemtrails
2. 5g
3. lizzardpeeple

[P-Jay]

I'm no scientist, but this has all the hallmarks of a law of unintended consequences fk up.

[Hoofy]

P-Jay said:

I'm no scientist, but this has all the hallmarks of a law of unintended consequences fk up.

That was my immediate thought. But never fear, if it goes wrong, we can have a new Dodgy Cloud Tax bestowed upon us.

[Terminator X]

Also millions of solar panels required for Net Zero whilst "dimming the Sun"

TX.

[otolith]

I like this one more:

https://www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/...

[Trash_panda]

P-Jay said:

I'm no scientist, but this has all the hallmarks of a law of unintended consequences fk up.

Nah, it'll be global warming causing this catastrophic fk up, not man made meddling

[Tim330]

I read the headline and thought at first it was like the film Sunshine but adapted a little, oops.

[vixen1700]

I mentioned this last week in the sauna and nobody was even slightly aware of it. In fact one woman said it was a good thing as her skiing had been st the last couple of years.

Personally, I think people should be up in arms about even the thought of this.

[Skeptisk]

STe_rsv4 said:

It has been confirmed that the UK will go ahead with a £50m Geo Engineering experiment to try and "dim the sun"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bl...

Before 2020 I would have called anyone out for even suspecting this was a thing as a bit nutty but nothing since then really surprises me anymore (grade 3 tin foil hatter these days )

Now call me cynical, but the spraying of millions of tonnes of chemicals / particulates into the atmosphere doesn't sound like the safest thing that can effect humans / animals and flora. Not to mention, we live in a country with far not enough sunny days and I would prefer not to live under a grey haze.

Has this government gone absolutely barking mad allowing this?

Edited by STe_rsv4 on Wednesday 30th April 10:55

Just because British scientists are involved does not mean that the plan is to reduce sunlight above the UK. The problem is global warming, not British warming.

Yes diddling with the atmosphere is probably not a great plan…but we are doing that anyway with burning of fossil fuels. Geo Engineering is a last resort if we can’t shift to green energy fast enough.

[croyde]

It's the next step to Terraforming Mars.

[tegwin]

STe_rsv4 said:

Now call me cynical, but the spraying of millions of tonnes of chemicals / particulates into the atmosphere doesn't sound like the safest thing that can effect humans / animals and flora. Not to mention, we live in a country with far not enough sunny days and I would prefer not to live under a grey haze.

Has this government gone absolutely barking mad allowing this?

Edited by STe_rsv4 on Wednesday 30th April 10:55

If you read the entire info from the funding organisation you will see that they have no intention of spraying millions of tonnes of chemicals anywhere as part of the projects.
Looks to me like they are doing the sensible thing and investigating the science and engineering behind the hypothesis in order to provide future decision makers with facts about how safe or not it would be. one of many strands of research that helps inform decisions.

Would you prefer that no research be done atall so we remain ignorant of the possibilities and their consequences?

[Tisy]

Skeptisk said:

Yes diddling with the atmosphere is probably not a great plan…but we are doing that anyway with burning of fossil fuels. Geo Engineering is a last resort if we can’t shift to green energy fast enough.

Umm, they've been harping on about burning coal and needing to shut down all coal power stations for decades because global warming and we all gonna die. What does burning coal produce a stload of? Sulfur dioxide. So sulfur dioxide very bad and need to stop immediately to save planet.
But now they're gonna load up a bunch of 777s with...... sulfur dioxide and spray it all over the globe and us, because now apparently sulfur dioxide is good for planet.



It's all a massive load of bks and obvious to anyone with more than a couple of brain cells.

[STe_rsv4]

tegwin said:

STe_rsv4 said:

Now call me cynical, but the spraying of millions of tonnes of chemicals / particulates into the atmosphere doesn't sound like the safest thing that can effect humans / animals and flora. Not to mention, we live in a country with far not enough sunny days and I would prefer not to live under a grey haze.

Has this government gone absolutely barking mad allowing this?

Edited by STe_rsv4 on Wednesday 30th April 10:55

If you read the entire info from the funding organisation you will see that they have no intention of spraying millions of tonnes of chemicals anywhere as part of the projects.
Looks to me like they are doing the sensible thing and investigating the science and engineering behind the hypothesis in order to provide future decision makers with facts about how safe or not it would be one of many strands of research that helps inform decisions.

Would you prefer that no research be done at all so we remain ignorant of the possibilities and their consequences?

In bold - My cynicism from the Covid debacle somehow prevents me from believing this would be the governments correct course of action.
Im thinking more "act first, worry about the consequences later"

[tegwin]

STe_rsv4 said:

In bold - My cynicism from the Covid debacle somehow prevents me from believing this would be the governments correct course of action.
Im thinking more "act first, worry about the consequences later"

I get the cynicism but are you saying that all research into medicines, climate science, nuclear energy etc should be stopped because the future use of those technologies MIGHT cause harm?

That specific research looks like its investigating the science to see if the method could work. Nowhere does it say they plan to pump millions of tonnes of anything into the atmosphere as part of the experiments?!

Id rather research into the theories be done and the results freely published so that an informed discussion could be had if we ever got to the point where some corporation or government actually wanted to do dim the sun...

Edited by tegwin on Wednesday 30th April 14:59

Edited by tegwin on Wednesday 30th April 15:00

[trickywoo]

The silver lining to this is that it’s ‘only’ £50m.

In terms of government projects that will buy you a couple of meetings with biscuits and not much else.

[otolith]

Tisy said:

Umm, they've been harping on about burning coal and needing to shut down all coal power stations for decades because global warming and we all gonna die. What does burning coal produce a stload of? Sulfur dioxide. So sulfur dioxide very bad and need to stop immediately to save planet.
But now they're gonna load up a bunch of 777s with...... sulfur dioxide and spray it all over the globe and us, because now apparently sulfur dioxide is good for planet.



It's all a massive load of bks and obvious to anyone with more than a couple of brain cells.

They aren't proposing using sulphur dioxide.

The climate problem with burning coal is carbon dioxide. The sulphur dioxide is a problem for acid rain - and for breathing. The formation of sulphate particles from the sulphur dioxide has been masking some of the warming, so cleaning up the emissions from coal is making the warming worse. The suggestion is using something else - currently undecided what - to do more of that masking.

<This space left empty for a Turbo Boak>

[Terminator X]

trickywoo said:

The silver lining to this is that it’s ‘only’ £50m.

In terms of government projects that will buy you a couple of meetings with biscuits and not much else.

I saw a link that stated £800m over a number of years.

Ice Age every 11k years though so not long to wait.

TX.

[Essel]

Who needs chemicals. We just need a mad billionaire. (Orange optional)

[Tisy]

otolith said:

They aren't proposing using sulphur dioxide.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2024EF005567

Last time I checked, SO2 was sulphur dioxide.