Slashdot Mirror


A Sunshade In Space To Combat Global Warming

ultracool writes, "While the only permanent solution for human-driven global warming is developing renewable energy, a temporary hack to counteract possible abrupt climate change is to build a giant sunshade in space. The sunshade would be launched in small pieces by electromagnetic launchers, conventional chemical rockets being far too expensive. The sunshade could be developed and deployed in 25 years, would last about 50 years, and would reduce the amount of sunlight reaching Earth by 2% — enough to balance heating due to a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere." From the article: "The [trillions of] spacecraft would form a long, cylindrical cloud with a diameter about half that of Earth, and about 10 times longer... Sunlight passing through the 60,000-mile length of the cloud, pointing lengthwise between the Earth and the sun [at L-1], would be diverted away from our planet... The sunshade could be deployed by a total 20 electromagnetic launchers [collectively] launching a stack of [a million] fliers every 5 minutes for 10 years."

9 of 496 comments (clear)

  1. Didn't Mr Burns try this allready. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder what else this would stuff up? Less light for photosynthesis for example.

  2. Or.. by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1, Insightful

    We could just cut down on our insane energy usage/wastage.
    But hey, that would involve personal effort and we can't have that, can we.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    1. Re:Or.. by JoBlo69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The history of the planet has shown that there is a history of global temperature change. How is this any different? I can see how people could think that we are polluting the planet (we are dont get me wrong) but do you guys really think that 'man' is actually doing enough harm to this planet?? Im not saying that this article is nuts or something all im saying is that i think there should be more research into our contribution to raising the earths temperature before we start making it colder without knowing what will really happen. ps. this is my first slashdot post!

    2. Re:Or.. by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah, ok. Well just for the record, I think the idea is stupid too. We should fix the problem by fixing the problem, not by launching a sunshade. But still, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, which means if we're dumping CO2 into the atmosphere, it's going to raise the global temperature. It is indeed a big deal.

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
    3. Re:Or.. by syphax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hi, welcome to slashdot.

      I love this logic:

      1. The climate has always been variable.
      2. Therefore, man is not having an impact on today's climate!

      QED, right?

      Here's an exercise: Explain to me how increased levels of CO2 (which are rising due to humans- I challenge you to find an explanation that has not been debunked from here to Shanghai and back), which Arrhenius demonstrated over 100 years ago could cause climate change, can't possibly be causing climate change?

      Hey, climate science is uncertain, and questioning it's results are fine. But if you are going to do so, please find a coherent argument why the current thinking is incorrect (again, please stick to the stuff that hasn't been shown to be wrong 100x over). So please go read RealClimate, debunk them, and then we can talk. Debating from ignorance is... ignorant.

      PS I think this proposed solution, like most geo-engineering quick fixes, is f-ing nuts. For starters, it doesn't exactly have an 'Undo' button.

      PPS Let's forget about climate change. How does changing the pH of the ocean by half a point grab you? We're doing that, too (the excess CO2 is going into the oceans), and we don't really know what the impact will be, b/c it'll reflect conditions the oceans haven't seen in a loooong time (and I'm not talking 1000 years. If memory serves, it's been several hundred thousand to millions of years. We do know that calcifying species will likely not be so happy, which some might argue is a problem. But hey, we couldn't possibly harm the planet, could we?

      --
      Simple Unexpected Concrete Credible Emotional Stories
    4. Re:Or.. by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How is this any different?

      That we're here to worry about it, for one. Climate changes that occurred 50 million years ago didn't affect human civilization; the one we're undergoing now, will.

      Today's CO2 concentration is the highest seen since the emergence of Homo sapiens, and likely the highest in the past 20 million years.

      do you guys really think that 'man' is actually doing enough harm to this planet??

      It is the scientific consensus that human activity is likely a significant factor in global climate change, yes.

      There are a few, mostly industry shills, who argue very loudly that this consensus is wrong. Unfortunately they receive press coverage far out of proportion with their numbers.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  3. Band aid fix? by Alioth · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The trouble is with things like that are the unintended consequences that it'll undoubtedly have. The real fix is that we start living sustainably. The sunshade won't fix problems such as that which will be caused because we're using 4 barrels of oil for every new one discovered.

  4. Re:Um, idea... by init100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the problem has got really bad - a lot worse than most people care to think.

    I agree. One problem is called global dimming, and means that our earlier pollutants (such as soot) have been reflecting sunlight out of the atmosphere and thus hiding the effect of the greenhouse gases. When we move to cleaner energy systems (not in terms of CO2, but other light-reflecting pollutants) the hidden effects due to global dimming might accelerate global warming faster than our current CO2 emissions can account for.

    Another factor is the sea. The sea is currently acting like a buffer solution, taking up a certain amount of the emitted CO2. This may not last forever. And besides, the effect the more and more acidic oceans has on the seaborne species are still mostly unknown. One should worry, since the oceans are the primary supplier of oxygen on this planet (as opposed to the Amazon rainforest that some people think) and a critically important source of food.

  5. Re:Sounds bad, but cool 1rst step to Dyson sphere by Helmholtz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...It's like making a complex solution to a simple problem ..."

    The weather system of the planet is about as far from "simple" as you can get. We have no clue about how the ecosystem of our world actually works. All this rancor about the "problem" of global warming and possible "solutions" are built upon an alter of such vast ignorance that I often find the discussion and "debate" of the topic to be the epitome of absurdity. The one prevailing predicate of almost every discourse about global warning and/or global climate change, is an unspoken implication that we (the human race) understand how the environment we live in works. WE DO NOT. And there exists a vast amount of historical evidence demonstrating that very notion.So the proposal of building a "shade" system for the planet to "cool it down" is so laughable due to the vast amount of hubris required to give it any consideration at all.

    Perhaps we should work first on understanding the problem before coming up with solutions. Yeah, that means that the "I said it first" mentality will be hamstrung, but that, in my opinion, would be a good thing.

    --
    RFC2119