It's only about twice the mass of what's in orbit now (according to the paper)
and considering how launch rates are increasing recently it's hardly the most problematic aspect of this proposal.
I quite like the idea of launching shit-tonnes of ash to L1, seems like a thing we could do rapidly.
(
brb Monkhouse Stampede, Mon 24 Jun 2024, 22:43,
Reply)
We could try annoying N Korea until they snap and launch a nuke.
Plenty of ash to reduce solar energy, most wildlife seem to cope with the radiation, population reduction and low cost.
(
FeralCatMan Unusual disease collector., Tue 25 Jun 2024, 20:28,
Reply)
We could do that without the nuclear war and radiation
by releasing ash or some other reflective/sunlight-filtering dust into the upper atmosphere.
I wouldn't rely on North Korean bombs riding Russian rockets to do the job either way. Might as well put your faith in fucking Trident.
(
brb Monkhouse Stampede, Wed 26 Jun 2024, 19:16,
Reply)
I'm not sure I trust humans to do it safely.
Before they find a way of commercialise/weaponise it.
(
FeralCatMan Unusual disease collector., Wed 26 Jun 2024, 22:01,
Reply)
So we let the planet burn because we can't guarantee safety?
These ideas are last-ditch contingency plans *just in case* we don't manage to save the environment through political and economic cooperation (lol). We are already commercially tartaruforming/gehennahforming/hellscaping the planet. These proposals at least offer a kind of terraforming that benefits life on Earth. Surely worth a shot.
(
brb Monkhouse Stampede, Fri 28 Jun 2024, 17:54,
Reply)
Probably worth a shot certainly.
The obscene destruction is one of the reasons I didn't breed. Sometimes it occurs to me that they deserve it.
Then I watch 'Crime pays but botany doesn't' as we are kindred spirits.
Cheer up, 99% of all species have disappeared before and still came back.
(
FeralCatMan Unusual disease collector., Fri 28 Jun 2024, 19:47,
Reply)