Hacker News Reader

Climate scientists have historically maintained a tacit agreement to not discuss other solutions publicly, because they think reducing emissions is the best way to go and they don't want to distract politicians by telling them about other options. This has changed a bit in recent years (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/solar-geoengineer...), but the change largely hasn't filtered to the public consciousness.

View on HN

That article is not about saying it's a solution. It's about saying it merits research, in case it's needed as a result of all of these other efforts being insufficient or poorly managed. Because for all we know, we'll need it and it won't work.

The researchers are emphatic that it shouldn't be framed as a solution, but all of the concerns mentioned in the article (and elsewhere that I've seen) are about potential side effects or moral hazards. There doesn't seem to be any dispute that solar geoengineering could be implemented and would rapidly reduce global temperatures.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com