• very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, there is always the option to use sunsails in orbit. These could also be motorised and adapt to the needed parameters.

    There are a ton of solutions. And the weather and climate engineering is just one of them.

    • Void_Reader@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, I like the idea of space megaprojects. I doubt sunsails in orbit would be profitable though. How would you monetise it? Put massive ads on them? Charge everyone a subscription fee?

      Now, governments could probably do something like that, and I wouldn’t be against it if safety and unintended consequences were taken into account somehow.

      Also, I thought you believed space exploration tech was useless.

      I agree there are many solutions. I don’t think markets and capital are going to make them happen.

      We can probably buy time with tech solutions. Long-term solutions will have to involve major fundamental sociopolitical change.

      • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, I like the idea of space megaprojects. I doubt sunsails in orbit would be profitable though. How would you monetise it? Put massive ads on them? Charge everyone a subscription fee?

        Well, a fee could theoretically be possible. Farmers with plants that need shadow could pay for shielding. In the end the end consumer pays the price.

        Now, governments could probably do something like that, and I wouldn’t be against it if safety and unintended consequences were taken into account somehow.

        👍

        Also, I thought you believed space exploration tech was useless.

        Let me rephrase it: it’s boring. Nada used old ass Russian rockets for years. So there is not much innovation there anyway.

        I agree there are many solutions. I don’t think markets and capital are going to make them happen.

        I think that depends on demand. Some airlines already offer climate compensation packages. An additional payment to compensate your emissions. Such money could also be invested into sun shield projects.

        We can probably buy time with tech solutions. Long-term solutions will have to involve major fundamental sociopolitical change.

        I agree on the tech solutions. Let’s see them being implemented before chopping on the foundation of our economics.

          • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I know that some people claim that. But in their mind they would rather stop airlines and flight overall.

            And since this is unreasonable, compensation should be the second best step in your mind?

            Because I don’t care. But from your standpoint it should be better than no compensation, right?

            • Void_Reader@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m actually in favour of replacing most jet airliners with rail and maybe electric airships. Most short-haul flights can be replaced by rail; it’s much more pleasant than flying anyway. Jets can be reserved for long-distance journeys. Being able to hop on a blimp would be cool, even if it’s slower. We can make them much better and safer with today’s tech.

              I don’t like the ‘green offset’ thing because it makes it look like we’re ‘doing something’ when it’s actually not doing much at all. If you want to be a utilitarian, it would be much more effective to just donate to an effective charity every time you fly.