• silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 months ago

    It doesn’t fully stop it — we still end up with ocean acidification and an altered pole-to-equator temperature gradient, with significant impacts on rainfall patterns.

      • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        We can’t actually do that though, let alone keep it functional for the hundreds of thousands of years the earth will remain warmed by today’s CO2 emissions

              • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Many small ones implies a huge and ongoing launch schedule.

                And no, if we do this, we’re not going to stop burning fossil fuels, or remove significant amounts of carbon — schemes like this mostly serve as propaganda for the fossil fuels industry to create continued permission to extract and burn.

                • Sonori@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  How would many small ones imply a huge and oncoming launch schedule, especially if you are using an L1 array? It’s much easier to repair and refuel a field of cubesats already on site than to get them there in the first place after all.

                  Moreover, why would orbital shades and or mirrors mean that we keep buring fossil fuels? We would be near net zero before such an array would being anywhere near complete enough to compensate for anything, and more to the point such an array would not serve as continued permission for fossil fuel companies, as it does nothing to address the majority of ecological effects such as ocean acidification.

                  The whole point of such an array is to save tens of millions of lives which will otherwise be ended by the damage already done long before they were even born by blunting more violent storms and reversing sea level rise, not exactly a carbon offset.

                  • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Because they’re going to fail and drift out of position over time.

                    Remember here: we don’t have any real history of maintaining stuff up there. It goes up, and is used until it fails, and then replaced. There are a couple exceptions in low earth orbit, but that’s it.