If we took all of the energy we produce in all the world we couldn't even get to 1% of the energy released by a supervolcano like Yellowstone caldera. This is completely a red herring.
What an irrelevant metric, volcanic eruptions are a horribly inefficient way to launch things into the stratosphere, most of that energy has nothing to do with how much energy it would take us to launch that mass up there. Do you really think NASA should have built a giant artificial volcano at Houston instead of choosing rocketry to reach orbit?
The same aerosols are also released by volcanoes and are what cool the planet most, not the ash. What's being proposed is literally the same thing as a volcano erupting except cleaner
Most new plans for SRM stratospheric injections I see are proposing alumina and calcite aerosols, not sulfates (which make up the vast majority of natural volcanic stratospheric aerosol ejections) anymore, for more longevity and power per pound. I guess it's technically true that a small amount of those are ejected by super volcanoes too, but on a scale we could definitely outstrip by human endeavour.
If you're afraid of geoengineering I hate to tell you this but we're doing it all the time in huge ways with industry. But unlike this proposal those other thousands of ways are being done accidentally with no study or thought to the global consequences.
And like with volcanoes all those accidental geoengineering results are a tiny fraction of the output of those activities, a concerted effort to actually geoengineer would have immediate effects that dwarf those byproducts
If we took all of the energy we produce in all the world we couldn't even get to 1% of the energy released by a supervolcano like Yellowstone caldera. This is completely a red herring.
What an irrelevant metric, volcanic eruptions are a horribly inefficient way to launch things into the stratosphere, most of that energy has nothing to do with how much energy it would take us to launch that mass up there. Do you really think NASA should have built a giant artificial volcano at Houston instead of choosing rocketry to reach orbit?
The same aerosols are also released by volcanoes and are what cool the planet most, not the ash. What's being proposed is literally the same thing as a volcano erupting except cleaner
Most new plans for SRM stratospheric injections I see are proposing alumina and calcite aerosols, not sulfates (which make up the vast majority of natural volcanic stratospheric ejections) anymore, for more longevity and power per pound. I guess it's technically true that a small amount of those are ejected by super volcanoes too, but on a scale we could definitely outstrip by human endeavour.
If you're afraid of geoengineering I hate to tell you this but we're doing it all the time in huge ways with industry. But unlike this proposal those other thousands of ways are being done accidentally with no study or thought to the global consequences.
And like with volcanoes all those accidental geoengineering results are a tiny fraction of the output of those activities, a concerted effort to actually geoengineer would have immediate effects that dwarf those byproducts