• Ooops@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 months ago

    Sure… we can totally invent a hundred different solutions soon™ that mean we can just keep burning fossil fuels like we really, really want to.

    Okay… they will actually never work and we will irreversibly damage our planet. But that’s okay, because the people telling you those fairy tales will have made a lot of money by then. And that’s also worth something, isn’t it?

    • _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      I have to wonder how this would impact fossil fuel competitors like solar and wind, given that both are driven by the sun. I’m sure these rich bastards would love to kill two birds with one stone.

  • Annoyed_🦀 🏅@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    Feels like this will just delay the warming, just like the sulfur dioxide pollution. And then crops yield will reduced, famine will be widespread. These billionaires would rather find a non-solution than to commit to the known solution.

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The course we’re on is bad enough that we should talk about it and potentially plan it though. Unless we want to continue to wait until it is too late, just with everything else regarding climate change.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah. That’s a very low-probability outcome though; we’re much more likely to end up doing something like redistributing rainfall in a way that leaves us without enough food.

  • dotslashme@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ah yes of course. We can’t even agree if methane will have an accelerating effect or if methane simply breaks down too fast to have a significant effect. The obvious solution is to add more things and see if it helps. Great plan!

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ah yes of course. We can’t even agree if methane will have an accelerating effect or if methane simply breaks down too fast to have a significant effect.

      They aren’t suggesting to pump methane in the atmosphere.

      The obvious solution is to add more things and see if it helps. Great plan!

      That’s our current course already, since co2 emissions in the atmosphere are still skyrocketing.

      • dotslashme@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Bad wording on my part. I mean that we cannot even agree on the effects one more heat-trapping gas would have, and now we plan to add yet another thing that apparently caused a year without summer. Forgive me for having little faith in people that thinks we should pump some other crap up there and see what happens.

        • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          We do actually agree on that adding more greenhouse gasses is bad. Just because methane breaks down quicker does not mean it is beneficial for our already heating climate. The people who argue against it are typically part of the agriculture lobby, specifically cattle herders etc.

          We have seen a similar bullshit resistance with coal miners and the argument of “clean coal”. Or with ICE cars and how badly EV batteries are or how they’re powered by dirty power plants, etc. It’s all bad faith bullshit.

  • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Okay, so say it works and we reduce warming. Our atmosphere is still filled with more CO2 than it should be, thus making it more difficult to breathe. So we’d have a dark, oxygenless planet with everyone wearing suits or at least carrying around oxygen canisters that they probably have to buy from a machine.

    Not a world I want to live in.

  • griD@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    And a million years after the skies have darkened we’ll realize there is a whole universe to kill… wait, I’ve read that storyline somewhere.

      • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        That definitely doesn’t sound ominous. “The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.”

      • mynachmadarch@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        We just need to find a way to grow a film of algae in the sky around the planet. Food source. Absorbs some of the heat which is the big problem most know about climate change. And it’s a fun colour. Win win win

  • MercurySunrise@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve been talking about this issue for years, though not very loudly since it’s considered a “conspiracy theory”. Interesting that it’s starting to be taken more seriously. Must be about to happen on a level that can’t be ignored, if it isn’t already. Real nightmare-fuel. (Pun intended.)