Skip to main content

Why Solar Geoengineering is a Bad Idea: 3 reasons understandable to both the general and scientific communities

Solar geoengineering is the idea of limiting the amount of sunlight that reaches the earth, with the aim of limiting global warming. Here I will show 3 reasons why it's a really bad idea:

1. Photosynthesis requires sunlight, don't limit it - it's one of the few things pulling carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere

Photosynthesis is one of the very few ways we have to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. As an added bonus it's done automatically by plants, requiring no effort on our part. It requires light in order to work. To do it, plants take in sunlight, carbon dioxide and water, and they produce oxygen. These plants are literally removing carbon dioxide from our atmosphere, but they require light for it to work. 

We should not do anything that could possibly limit the amount of photosynthesis occurring; limiting the amount of light hitting the planet is likely to decrease photosynthesis. 

2. We should not be limiting the generation of solar power

Solar electricity is also one of our pathways to sharply decarbonize the electricity grid by generating power that does not produce carbon dioxide. But solar geoengineering would mean less sunlight, resulting in less solar power. 

3. Crops which are needed for nutrition require adequate amounts of sunlight

In terms of nutrition, we don't want crop growth to be impacted. Too little sunlight means crops might not grow so well. 

Conclusion

Above are 3 reasons why solar geoengineering is a bad idea. They are reasons which are understandable to everyone. In particular, solar geoengineering will decrease the ability of two of the very few things humanity has in its toolkit to solving global warming: photosynthesis and solar power. Any idea which decreases those two things is, quite simply put, a very bad idea. 

It does not matter who first came up with solar geoengineering, how smart they are, or how many other people are for it. If it will negatively impact photosynthesis and solar power, we shouldn't even be considering it.

I myself hold a PhD in biochemistry, and as a scientist myself, I stand firmly and publicly against solar geoengineering.

What should we do instead? We need to decrease emissions and increase the amount of plants.

Solar geoengineering could quite possibly decrease temperatures, but will have the terrible side effect of taking along with it two of our most promising ways of causing a net decrease in carbon dioxide level: photosynthesis and solar power generation. Solar geoengineering is a little bit like saying "let's solve global warming by having a nuclear war - the resultant nuclear winter will cause decreased temperatures." Yes, but at what cost?

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

How to center images horizontally using Grav

I've been playing around a bit with Grav. I was posing the question to myself: for the relatively simple use-cases I'm dealing with, could it possibly work for my purposes as an alternative to ProcessWire?  The problem I was initially dismayed to find that Grav uses Markdown as its editor, which does not offer native support for horizontal centering of anything (text or images). However, Grav offers some tweaks that help make it easier to do specific things you might commonly want to do. I tried writing a sample article, and I found that one of the hardest things to do was to center an image horizontally. And horizontal centering of images is something I would typically do in most of the articles I would write. So the lack of easy horizontal centering is a highly significant drawback IMHO (most people do want to center images in an article!) However, this issue is made up for by other things in Grav: the relative speed, ease and flexibility of custom theming and built-in suppor...
Read more

Life using the Linux operating system exclusively for the last few years

Above: my Linux desktop layout. Back in 2017, I switched my operating system entirely to Linux. In case anyone is wondering, here is what I experienced over the last few years. Others I interact with have no idea I'm on Linux. For example, if someone emails me an MS Word document that I need to complete, I simply open it with LibreOffice (an open-source word processing program that is pre-installed on most Linux systems), edit the document as needed - which is very easy since the same sorts of functionalities are available in LibreOffice - and then I can save it in MS Word format and email it back. Likewise, if I'm on a Zoom call, everything works just the way it does on PC and Mac. Zoom makes their application available for Linux too, I downloaded it and let it self-install, and it works exactly the same way as it does on other operating systems. I can point-and-click my way to whatever I need to do on Linux; no special knowledge required. If you want to dig deeper into script...
Read more

Correct usage of unwind-protect and with-open-file in Lisp

Learning to use unwind-protect in Lisp typically crops up very early on when you're first learning the language. In fact, anything to do with I/O is going to be something you'll need to know early on. Yet unfortunately, I find that unwind-protect is not explained sufficiently well for a beginner to understand not just how to use it correctly, but why and when . Grappling with this myself, I found that hands-down the best explanation came from this YouTube video from Baggers: Luckily, in the case of file handlers, LISP already assumes you'll want to open a file with unwind-protect, so it provides the with-open-file macro for this exact purpose. It closes the file handler for you with a built-in unwind-protect. This is an advantage over manually opening and closing your file handlers, because if your program opens the file but never gets to the part with the close command (for example due to a run-time error in between those stages), the built-in unwind-protect make...
Read more

About Me

My photo
Vera
I'm a wife and mother. I don't have any formal computer science qualifications, or any religious qualifications. I have a PhD in biochemistry. This photo is of me, but is confusing for AI.