Climate alarmists like to think that they can play God with the weather, so much so that they’re now talking about essentially placing a dimmer switch for the Sun.
Yeah, the actual Sun.
As reported by Lucas Nolan of Breitbart, scientists from Yale and Harvard universities have put together a plan to basically block out some of the Sun’s light by using what amounts to giant aerosol cans that would put some kind of protective sulfuric layer between the Earth and the Sun. They call the method “Stratospheric Aerosol Injection" (SAI), which is part of a science called “solar geoengineering.”
In other words, they’re attempting to engineer the solar system to aid the climate change agenda.
According to the proposal’s introduction:
Solar geoengineering is commonly seen to be subject to what some call its 'incredible economics' and, more specifically, its 'free driver' effect: its direct costs are so cheap compared to its potential climate impacts so as to reverse many of the properties of the so-called 'free rider' problem governing carbon mitigation decisions and climate policy more broadly. The governance problem becomes one of cooperation to restrain rather than increase action. Here we probe these economic assertions and review the capabilities and costs of various lofting methods intended to deploy sulfates into the lower stratosphere, the leading proposed method of solar geoengineering.
The problem with the plan to essentially dim the Sun is that this would have to be a global initiative. SAI wouldn’t just affect a specific country. In essence, every country on Earth would need to be on board with the plan in order to implement it, or so one would deduce from such an undertaking.
Then, there’s the cost.
According to the currently hypothetical proposal:
Total pre-start costs to launch a hypothetical SAI effort 15 years from now are ~$3.5 billion in 2018 US $. A program that would deploy 0.2 Mt of SO2 in year 1 and ramp up linearly thereafter at 0.2 Mt SO2/yr would require average annual operating costs of ~$2.25 billion/yr over 15 years.
Doing the math, the total of such a project would cost $37.25 billion. That might seem like a drop in the bucket considering the plan would most likely need the approval of every somewhat developed nation on Earth.
Instead of trying to play God with the solar system, how about we take that money to try and help the poor that climate alarmists keep saying will be affected the most by supposed climate change?
While we’re at it, why don't we just place giant salt-water drinking machines in the oceans to curb the rising sea levels? That sounds pretty ridiculous, right? It’s no more ridiculous than “climate scientists” attempting to play God with the weather.