Not clicking Gizmodo, but if this refers to the sulfur dioxide aerosol strategy, it really is not a terrible field dressing for an otherwise mortally wounded climate and shouldn’t be dismissed just because some billionaire talks about it.
First it is not a billionaire plot. Scientists have driven the research for decades now. Global warming causes further global warming, a runaway cycle that worsens exponentially over time.
So yes this strategy is a bandaid, and not meant as a permanent solution, but the fact that it can flexibly and reversibly halt the otherwise runaway cycle — buying us time for recapture and reversal with less permanent ecological damage — shouldn’t be dismissed simply because a billionaire tries to attach their name to it.
Anything besides consuming less. Fucken idiots.
You’re not wrong, but to be fair have you ever managed to persuade a billion odd people to have less for the betterment or the other 7 billion and themselves?
It’s less than that. Closer to a few thousand, IIRC.
Each person capable of reading this post contributes above our earths carrying capacity and support fossil fuel exploitation, exploitative mining and environmental degradation just by owning electronic goods.
We are also well above where we should be. Billionaires use our lifetime of carbon emissions nearly daily, but we do the same compared to 3rd world countries we also dump our waste on.
