Ugh. I hate it. But I'm also thankful it might be possible.
It would allow the capitalists to continue ruining the world for their own gain, while the world has to clean up after their asses or die.
this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2026
45 points (97.9% liked)
Climate
8358 readers
287 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ah right. You mean this way it might take a little bit more time be4 the fallout or hunger games start.
I know, it never should have gotten this bad but if we can get more time for idiots and those without the resources to adopt renewables it should be worth
Anything to avoid riding a bicycle and bot flying.
Love it
Or we could do something that has better long term effects, get rid of the rich, the owners of oil companies, owners of lumberyards, basically all the companies that destroy and pollute our planet and we'll see improvement within a year instead of whatever this bandaid bullshit they've come up with.
Both? Both is good.
Because if you read the article you would know that this only works to suppress another degree of global warming that is looming over our heads, one that will happen if and when we stop polluting the planet.
At worst, we could use this to smear out the effects of climate change to allow ecosystems a little more time to adapt. At best, carbon capture becomes viable at some point in the next thousand years and we can gradually stop spraying sea salt while reducing atmospheric CO2 to prevent most of the damage that extra degree would have caused.
(also, plants are the best construction material we have; lumber yards are cool even if the owners aren't).
Maybe we could try some sequestration, too. But only after we stopped flying and consuming like vultures and took the money from the rich. ++ Its equally important to stop polluting the seas with our garbage, reducing CO2 won't help anything if it's the only thing we do.
Nope, its salty rainwater for you.
I wouldn't heap lumber in with that list. They can be local, sustainable building materials. Also, trees just aren't a great carbon capture. It's when you pull carbon that has been sequestered in the ground for thousands of years and put it in the air that you create the problem.
I assume this can be done cheaply. It's relatively worth it if we can buy 5-6 years of time
Its a billions of dollars per year kind of cost
It cost ~1/5 of the price of a nuclear power plant and save around the same time to build a nuclear power plant.
Its a perfect strategy to buy time to build a nuclear power plant
Genius. Cause all the cars in the world to rapidly rust out. Then they can't emit CO2
So .... chemtrails?
/s
Snowpiercer
I too, am anxiously awaiting my next protein bar.