Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Earth

Researchers Quietly Planned a Test to Dim Sunlight Over 3,900 Square Miles (politico.com) 81

Posted by EditorDavid from the outlook-is-cloudy dept.
California researchers planned a multimillion-dollar test of salt water-spraying equipment that could one day be used to dim the sun's rays — over a 3,900-square mile are off the west coasts of North America, Chile or south-central Africa. E&E News calls it part of a "secretive" initiative backed by "wealthy philanthropists with ties to Wall Street and Silicon Valley" — and a piece of the "vast scope of research aimed at finding ways to counter the Earth's warming, work that has often occurred outside public view." "At such scales, meaningful changes in clouds will be readily detectable from space," said a 2023 research plan from the [University of Washington's] Marine Cloud Brightening Program. The massive experiment would have been contingent upon the successful completion of the thwarted pilot test on the carrier deck in Alameda, according to the plan.... Before the setback in Alameda, the team had received some federal funding and hoped to gain access to government ships and planes, the documents show.

The university and its partners — a solar geoengineering research advocacy group called SilverLining and the scientific nonprofit SRI International — didn't respond to detailed questions about the status of the larger cloud experiment. But SilverLining's executive director, Kelly Wanser, said in an email that the Marine Cloud Brightening Program aimed to "fill gaps in the information" needed to determine if the technologies are safe and effective.âIn the initial experiment, the researchers appeared to have disregarded past lessons about building community support for studies related to altering the climate, and instead kept their plans from the public and lawmakers until the testing was underway, some solar geoengineering experts told E&E News. The experts also expressed surprise at the size of the planned second experiment....

The program does not "recommend, support or develop plans for the use of marine cloud brightening to alter weather or climate," Sarah Doherty, an atmospheric and climate science professor at the university who leads the program, said in a statement to E&E News. She emphasized that the program remains focused on researching the technology, not deploying it. There are no "plans for conducting large-scale studies that would alter weather or climate," she added.
"More than 575 scientists have called for a ban on geoengineering development," according to the article, "because it 'cannot be governed globally in a fair, inclusive, and effective manner.'" But "Some scientists believe that the perils of climate change are too dire to not pursue the technology, which they say can be safely tested in well-designed experiments... " "If we really were serious about the idea that to do any controversial topic needs some kind of large-scale consensus before we can research the topic, I think that means we don't research topics," David Keith, a geophysical sciences professor at the University of Chicago, said at a think tank discussion last month... "The studies that the program is pursuing are scientifically sound and would be unlikely to alter weather patterns — even for the Puerto Rico-sized test, said Daniele Visioni, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Cornell University. Nearly 30 percent of the planet is already covered by clouds, he noted.
Thanks to Slashdot reader fjo3 for sharing the news.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Researchers Quietly Planned a Test to Dim Sunlight Over 3,900 Square Miles More

Researchers Quietly Planned a Test to Dim Sunlight Over 3,900 Square Miles

Comments Filter:
  • They should just call their experiment a side effect of trying to money, and then keep going until/unless it is banned, while they bribe congress not to ban it. That's how it works, is it not?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by saloomy ( 2817221 )
      This is a boondoggle, and will prove to be at the end. What we REALLY should do is install a solar array / mylar array at the L1 Lagrange point to cast a shadow on the earth, and use the harvested energy to pay for it. Think of what we could do with TWh of solar energy in space.

      • Think about how many rockets we would need to get a relevant amount of stuff into L1...

        • Exactly. The best way to do it would be if the materials were available on the moon and you could manufacture the array in space. Which is a pipe dream. I for one am not in favor of dimming the sun however. But harvesting energy from space would be great.

      • Focus the energy on any point of the planet - when the time is right.
        And get away with it ...

      • What about plants?

  • Secrecy is the issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheMiddleRoad ( 1153113 ) on Sunday July 27, 2025 @06:03PM (#65549022)

    They should have been open about it, and probably aimed to do it off a third world country's coast. Vanuatu would probably say yes.

    The secrecy just pisses everyone off, not just the denier crazies.

    • Re:Secrecy is the issue (Score:5, Insightful)

      by locater16 ( 2326718 ) on Sunday July 27, 2025 @10:16PM (#65549340)
      There can't be a single person on this team that's familiar with PR at all.
      Try to hide something and the first thing people go to is the worst thing they can imaging.
      Or, (paraphrasing), you can openly shout from the rooftops that you're going to rob people and you'll develop a reputation for honesty.

    • They should have been open about it, and probably aimed to do it off a third world country's coast. Vanuatu would probably say yes.

      The secrecy just pisses everyone off, not just the denier crazies.

      Yes and no.

      There are also a lot of degrowther environmentalists who would scream about it and do everything they can to block it and demonize and cancel the researchers if it were done publicly.

      So... if you know that your research will get shut down if you don't keep it quiet, and you know that it will get shut down if you try to keep it quiet but fail, your only options are (a) don't bother or (b) try to keep it quiet and hope that you can succeed for long enough to gather useful data.

    • I may be too old to understand all the new fancy meanings of the word "Secret". In my backwards and tired mind if something was posted on the internet [uw.edu] it does not qualify as a secret. Being unaware of information [youtu.be] that has been out and about for years [barrierreef.org] does not mean that said information was secret. It only means that the people calling it a "secret" were ignorant.

  • I plan to do the next-best thing: block it out!

  • If we're going to need to scorch the sky, we'd better start planning now.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

  • More than 575 scientists have called for a ban on geoengineering development," according to the article, "because it 'cannot be governed globally in a fair, inclusive, and effective manner.'"

    Some scientists believe that the perils of climate change are too dire to not pursue the technology

    Utter insanity to believe we can control something at planet scale.

    We also may have to do things at planet scale that we can't control.

    • 774â"775 carbon-14 spike. worldwide; aka global.

      We hardly control anything; most of us act more like animals with a mask of intelligence.

    • Re:Both things can be true (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SoftwareArtist ( 1472499 ) on Sunday July 27, 2025 @08:23PM (#65549218)

      I would totally support a ban on activities that alter climate or weather on a global scale. Like, for example, increasing the CO2 content of the atmosphere. Shall we start enforcing it?

      We're already changing the climate. If we're not going to ban all geoengineering, it doesn't make sense to ban only the carefully thought out interventions that have a chance of helping, while continuing to allow the ones we know are catastrophically harmful.

      • By all means let unregulated billionaires execute projects with globe-impacting potential? Is that what you're going with?

        • By all means let unregulated billionaires execute projects with globe-impacting potential? Is that what you're going with?

          In the absence of proper government-funded research, I'm all for unregulated billionaires who are willing to use their own resources to work on the problem. Yes, it would be far better for this to be done properly, but the science funding agencies have been pretty thoroughly captured by degrowth-focused environmentalists who would shut it down immediately.

        • No, it isn't. You aren't replying to what I said.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      "because it 'cannot be governed globally in a fair, inclusive, and effective manner.'"

      Did Norway [slashdot.org] get world-wide buy in to pump CO2 into "our" planet?

  • They should do this over the San Joaquin (Score:3)

    by usedtobestine ( 7476084 ) on Sunday July 27, 2025 @07:23PM (#65549136)

    I'm sure covering the San Joaquin in salt would be wonderful for vegetable growing. Perhaps they should test this over Great Salt Lake, or Bonneville Salt Flats.

    • I'm sure covering the San Joaquin in salt would be wonderful for vegetable growing. Perhaps they should test this over Great Salt Lake, or Bonneville Salt Flats.

      The proposal is to do it over the ocean, spraying saltwater from the ocean into the sky over the ocean. It's crucial to do it far enough from land to be sure that the minerals that will fall after the water evaporates out fall into the sea rather than being blown over land. A little salt from the ocean falling into the ocean shouldn't do any harm (though this needs to be tested), while the same salt falling on land could be quite harmful.

      • It also says, "off the West coast of California, ..."; which is from the start the wrong place! If you want to make sure it all falls in the ocean, do it off the East coasts of the Americas so the prevailing winds keep the salty rain over the ocean.

        • As a sailor who often sails in Southern California, the prevailing winds run parallel to the coastline, from the north. Sailing up the California coastline is rough going because you're beating into the wind. If you're familiar with the LA/San Diego area you probably notice that the prevailing winds are onshore there, but this is a localized anomaly in the lee of Point Conception. The point creates a large eddy from Santa Barbara to Ensenada in which the wind curves eastward, onshore. But this eddy only

          • I think we're talking about different altitudes. I look at the weather and see clouds move from the West to the East. If those clouds are salty, that's bad for anything to the East.

            • I think we're talking about different altitudes. I look at the weather and see clouds move from the West to the East. If those clouds are salty, that's bad for anything to the East.

              Well, the spray only goes up a few hundred feet. I suppose it's possible that the minerals get lifted higher in some cases, but I don't think it would be lifted thousands of feet, up to where the wind direction shifts. Looking at aviation wind maps, it looks like you have to get up about 3000 feet above sea level before the wind over So Cal shifts.

              Still, it's a valid point that research is needed to see how far the salt might be carried. Maybe they need to be 100 nm offshore, or 200 -- keeping in mind

  • Already testing it in Australia (Score:5, Informative)

    by caseih ( 160668 ) on Sunday July 27, 2025 @07:40PM (#65549164)

    As seen right here on slashdot:

    https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]

    They've been testing this for quite a while and on a small scale it seems to work. The pictures are actually quite spectacular. These very low-level artificial clouds were carried up by the breeze and joined with natural low-level clouds.

    • Winner. The concept could help coral reefs. Sweltering summer , clouds bring relief. Non black top roofs and roads also help a very tiny bit but limited. So worth exploring other alternatives. In parallel work on an almost perpetual train.
    • Except that at night, the clouds reflect the heat that would usually radiate into space. So, while it is cooler during the day, the average temperature may increase.

      • Fortunately low clouds have been measured to have a net cooling effect.

      • Except that at night, the clouds reflect the heat that would usually radiate into space. So, while it is cooler during the day, the average temperature may increase.

        This is why research is needed. That said, the models show that increased albedo overpowers the thermal blanket effect by a large margin. This also tracks with everyday experience; temperatures fall during long periods of sustained heavy cloud cover. But perhaps there's something about these particular clouds that is different -- research is needed.

  • 10000 square kilometres (Score:3)

    by VaccinesCauseAdults ( 7114361 ) on Sunday July 27, 2025 @07:56PM (#65549176)
    The proposal was literally for 10,000 square kilometres. This is why it appears as 3900 square noddy units.

  • ... cannot be governed globally ...

    Strange, how this isn't a problem when a country restarts 10 toxic coal-burning power-plants. Anything that wins the global profit-making pissing-contest is the magically unavoidable price of modern life.

  • Seriously? Decades of promoting solar power... and now that it has some good support and adoption, you want to blot out the sky? Sounds like some evil psychopaths.

    • Seriously? Decades of promoting solar power... and now that it has some good support and adoption, you want to blot out the sky? Sounds like some evil psychopaths.

      Since the beginning of time, man has yearned to destroy the sun. I shall do the next best thing: block it out. (Monty Burns)

  • Why don't they humidify the atmosphere off the cost of the southwest us and make it rain more often. Could use more water in the atmosphere upstream from dryer parts of the southwest.

  • I can envision this negatively affecting photosynthesis. Hopefully we can buy food from Bill Gates and his food factories.
    • No doubt that's the goal. And it'll only be ultra processed, guaranteed to give you a good long life of 45 years.

  • This may just do wonders for agriculture...

  • HQ (Score:2)

    by cstacy ( 534252 )

    "At such scales, meaningful changes in clouds will be readily detectable from space" said a 2023 research plan The program does not "recommend, support or develop plans for the use of marine cloud brightening to alter weather or climate," Sarah Doherty. There are no "plans for conducting large-scale studies that would alter weather or climate," she added, speaking from a large white control room with a gigantic display screen showing a globe of the earth, and surrounded by vintage 9-track mainframe tape dri

  • Idiots (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Monday July 28, 2025 @01:25AM (#65549496) Homepage
    Local effects, great. But doing this on a large scale? H2O is a much stronger global warming gas than CO2. You do *not* want to muck around with this on a global scale.

    • Local effects, great. But doing this on a large scale? H2O is a much stronger global warming gas than CO2. You do *not* want to muck around with this on a global scale.

      That's why testing is required. Models and everyday experience indicate that increased albedo overpowers the warming effect, so cloud cover lowers temperatures. But there is a possibility that something could be different about cloud cover created by spraying water into the air, so we need to test it at gradually-increasing scales, carefully measuring and monitoring the results.

  • Dimming sunlight is an idiotic idea (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MihaP ( 6389750 ) on Monday July 28, 2025 @01:37AM (#65549500)
    Dimming sunlight is an idiotic idea because it is not only about energy balance. It is also about entropy balance and by dimming sunlight we dimm low entropy energy thus reducing planet's ability to support highly entropic processes. With other words: by dimming sunlight we reduce Earth's ability to support life. A much better strategy would be to use sunlight to desalinate water and irrigate forests in arrid areas.
    • I like the idea of building artificial lakes on the east side of the Atlas mountains by pumping in water from the Mediterranian. I think that would do exactly what you're talking about.

  • This civilisation has a 5% chance of changing trajectory to one which doesnt lead to our extinction. This absurd idea is just one of many ill conceived ideas that serve to strengthen this assertion.

    • Every species  ( except crocodiles ) goes extinct.  No different for HOMO. The only question is how much joy a species can experience --- and how far into bitch-Gaias eye can we force our opposable thumbs --- before the extinction event.
  • California researchers.......yup !
  • ...or does it sound like they want to salt the earth from the sky instead of perhaps, maybe, considering, not reducing fossil fuel usage even just a little?

  • Same thing we do every day, Pinky. Try to take over the world.

  • Slashdot, I'm so disappointed. All these comments about blocking out the sun and not a single reference to Mr Burns?

    sad...

Slashdot Top Deals

"Facts are stupid things." -- President Ronald Reagan (a blooper from his speeach at the '88 GOP convention)

Close