• HubertManne@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      It is if it involves using fossil fuels to run aircraft to do it or the cost would result in better returns elsewhere like with insulation or if the process is putting chemicals in the air not naturally there or if it increases we bulb temperature. etc. etc. fucking with things in hopes of effect as not as effective as doing things with known actual beneficial effects. Its like carbon capture. If it produces more co2 than it captures it is a non starter.

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Guy pushing chemical-industry paint subsidy performatively strokes chin.

        The fuck is insulation supposed to do for greenhouse gases?

          • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            My guy. Nudging your thermostat is not gonna make the wiggly line in the sidebar go back down.

            Stopping sunlight from reaching the ocean, will.

            • HubertManne@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              8 billion people nudging the thermostat will have a much greater effect than artificially increasing clouds and won’t cost any energy and cause more global warming as part of the process. Its a one and done. Even at 1 billion and even at 100 million.

              • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Increased cloud cover could cause another ice age.

                If we stopped all human energy use, immediately - the climate’s still in deep shit.