20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea
ALAN ROBOCK Rutgers University
8. Less sun for solar power. Scientists estimate that as little as a 1.8 percent reduction in incoming solar radiation would compensate for a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Even this small reduction would significantly affect the radiation available for solar power systems—one of the prime alternate methods of generating clean energy—as the response of different solar power systems to total available sunlight is not linear.
This is especially true for some of the most efficiently designed systems that reflect or focus direct solar radiation on one location for direct heating.
Following the Mount Pinatubo eruption and the 1982 eruption of El Chichón in Mexico, scientists observed a direct solar radiation decrease of 25–35 percent.
9. Environmental impacts of implementation. Any system that could inject aerosols into the stratosphere, i.e., commercial jetliners with sulfur mixed into their fuel, 16-inch naval rifles firing 1-ton shells of dust vertically into the air, or hoses suspended from stratospheric balloons, would cause enormous environmental damage.
The same could be said for systems that would deploy sun shields.
University of Arizona astronomer Roger P. Angel has proposed putting a fleet of 2-foot-wide reflective disks
in a stable orbit between Earth and the sun that would bend sunlight away from Earth.
But to get the needed trillions of disks into space, engineers would need 20 electromagnetic launchers to fire missiles with stacks of 800,000 disks every five minutes for twenty years.
What would be the atmospheric effects of the resulting sound and gravity waves?
Who would want to live nearby?
Negative Effects of Noise Pollution
Sun and Clouds in a Sunset by Parvathisri at Wikimedia Commons
Noise Pollution from http://www.noisecontrol.com/negative-effects-of-noise-pollution/
#Geoengineering #Climate Issues