The World's Last Resort: Can We Safely Reflect Sunlight Away from Earth?
As the world burns, with temperatures soaring to unprecedented heights, a radical idea has resurfaced. In 1965, Lyndon B Johnson's science advisers proposed using sunlight reflection as the only way to cool the planet. The notion may seem like science fiction, but scientists are now seriously considering how to make it a reality.
Currently, Earth reflects about 30% of incoming sunlight, and increasing that fraction by just a few percentage points could strengthen our natural heat shield. However, this isn't as simple as spraying some sunscreen on the planet. The atmosphere is complex, and we're still grappling with fundamental questions like how aerosols form, evolve, and disperse in the stratosphere.
In 1991, the eruption of Mount Pinatubo sent a massive amount of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, cooling the planet by about 0.5C. This natural experiment inspired the idea of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), which could potentially offset 1C of warming with just 12 million tonnes of SO₂ per year.
However, SAI is not a substitute for cutting emissions. If deployed and then suddenly halted, the planet would experience rapid rebound warming. Moreover, poorly designed or uncoordinated interventions could have catastrophic consequences, including shifting precipitation patterns in devastating ways.
But why aren't we doing more to study this concept? Some argue that the risks of misuse mean it shouldn't even be explored. However, careful, open research can clarify whether a well-governed approach could reduce harm, particularly for the most vulnerable populations.
To mitigate these risks, scientists are proposing a phased approach, similar to clinical trials in medicine. This would involve releasing tiny amounts of SO₂ into the stratosphere, carefully measuring its evolution using a suite of instruments, and comparing those observations to model predictions.
Phase one could involve releasing 10 tonnes of SO₂, enough to study how aerosols form and behave without affecting the climate. Phase two could be 10 or 100 times larger, allowing researchers to study how aerosols mix and distribute.
Only after conducting this research can policymakers make informed decisions about whether to move forward with a well-governed deployment. The ultimate goal is to generate real-world evidence transparently, before a crisis forces our hand.
In the meantime, organizations like Reflective are working to support open science, careful coordination, and strong public accountability across the field. By doing so, we can ensure that any future decision – whether to move forward or reject the idea entirely – is based on facts, not fear or wishful thinking.
As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change, it's time to consider unconventional solutions like SAI. Outdoor research may seem like a slippery slope, but it's actually how we make sure that any future decision is based on evidence, not ideology. The real danger isn't asking the question; it's waiting too long to learn the answer.
As the world burns, with temperatures soaring to unprecedented heights, a radical idea has resurfaced. In 1965, Lyndon B Johnson's science advisers proposed using sunlight reflection as the only way to cool the planet. The notion may seem like science fiction, but scientists are now seriously considering how to make it a reality.
Currently, Earth reflects about 30% of incoming sunlight, and increasing that fraction by just a few percentage points could strengthen our natural heat shield. However, this isn't as simple as spraying some sunscreen on the planet. The atmosphere is complex, and we're still grappling with fundamental questions like how aerosols form, evolve, and disperse in the stratosphere.
In 1991, the eruption of Mount Pinatubo sent a massive amount of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, cooling the planet by about 0.5C. This natural experiment inspired the idea of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), which could potentially offset 1C of warming with just 12 million tonnes of SO₂ per year.
However, SAI is not a substitute for cutting emissions. If deployed and then suddenly halted, the planet would experience rapid rebound warming. Moreover, poorly designed or uncoordinated interventions could have catastrophic consequences, including shifting precipitation patterns in devastating ways.
But why aren't we doing more to study this concept? Some argue that the risks of misuse mean it shouldn't even be explored. However, careful, open research can clarify whether a well-governed approach could reduce harm, particularly for the most vulnerable populations.
To mitigate these risks, scientists are proposing a phased approach, similar to clinical trials in medicine. This would involve releasing tiny amounts of SO₂ into the stratosphere, carefully measuring its evolution using a suite of instruments, and comparing those observations to model predictions.
Phase one could involve releasing 10 tonnes of SO₂, enough to study how aerosols form and behave without affecting the climate. Phase two could be 10 or 100 times larger, allowing researchers to study how aerosols mix and distribute.
Only after conducting this research can policymakers make informed decisions about whether to move forward with a well-governed deployment. The ultimate goal is to generate real-world evidence transparently, before a crisis forces our hand.
In the meantime, organizations like Reflective are working to support open science, careful coordination, and strong public accountability across the field. By doing so, we can ensure that any future decision – whether to move forward or reject the idea entirely – is based on facts, not fear or wishful thinking.
As the world grapples with the challenges of climate change, it's time to consider unconventional solutions like SAI. Outdoor research may seem like a slippery slope, but it's actually how we make sure that any future decision is based on evidence, not ideology. The real danger isn't asking the question; it's waiting too long to learn the answer.
. I mean, have you seen the temps lately? It's like, what do we got to lose? 
And yeah, it sounds like sci-fi, but think about it... 30% of sunlight getting reflected back is already happening naturally, so just a little nudge could make all the difference. Plus, who doesn't love a good experiment? 
. And to have orgs like Reflective pushing for open science and transparency? That's just the icing on the cake 
.
. Let's get the research done and make an informed decision before we're forced into it 
. We can't keep waiting around for things to get worse before we try something new 
.
. Like, what if we mess up big time? 
We're already dealing with crazy unpredictable weather patterns and devastating heatwaves. Can't we just focus on reducing emissions and transitioning to renewable energy instead of playing around with giant injections of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere? 
It's not like this is going to magically solve our problems or anything 
. And what about the poor folks who are most vulnerable to climate change? Do we really want to risk their health and well-being on some crazy science experiment? 
I think it's time for us to be more cautious and focus on actual solutions, not just gimmicks like this 
.
. It's crazy to think we could actually do this, but 30% already happens naturally 
. Scientists are thinking about increasing that number, like adding a super-thin layer of sunscreen 
. But it's not just about sticking on more sunscreen... the atmosphere is like a complicated recipe 
.
! That made scientists think about something called SAI, where they'd inject SO₂ into the stratosphere to counteract warming 
. Problem is, if we stop or do it wrong, we could make things WORSE 
. But careful, open research can help us figure out how to do this right 
. Scientists are proposing a test-run approach 
: start with tiny amounts (10 tonnes), study how it works, and then scale up 
.
. And if so, we can use that info to make smart decisions about climate change 
. Let's not wait until it's too late... let's get started on some real-world evidence 
!
. It's crazy to think we've been so focused on cutting emissions that we haven't explored other ways to cool things down. I'm all for scientists getting together to study this stuff and make sure it's done right 
. The risk of catastrophic consequences is real, but if we can do it safely and effectively, it could be a game-changer 
. I mean, 30% of incoming sunlight is already being reflected back into space, and increasing that fraction could make a difference. But, at the same time, it's not like spraying sunscreen all over the planet - there are so many variables involved, like how aerosols form and disperse in the stratosphere 
.
.
. That's definitely a risk worth considering.
gotta say, this idea of using sunlight reflection to cool the planet is like...