@hankgreen: Massively under-reported science story because there's so much going on right now but...it turns out that we might have figured out what's causing this very scary spike. Quick thread, on how WE'VE BEEN A...…
Scientists have discovered that the recent spike in global temperatures may be caused by a reduction in sulfur dioxide pollution from shipping vessels. Ships have long emitted sulfur dioxide, which cools the planet by seeding clouds and reflecting sunlight. However, new regulations that limit sulfur in ship fuels took effect in 2020, leading to a loss of this cooling effect equivalent to a large volcanic eruption each year. Models show this reduction in sulfur dioxide pollution can explain the extra warming seen in the North Atlantic. While pollution is bad, the new regulations provide a natural experiment that gives insight into how intentional geoengineering could potentially combat climate change in the future.
There’s a spin campaign going on around this, just fyi. I don’t see it at play here. But there are neolib think tanks pushing the idea that:
Reductions in SOx emissions due to recent regulations are causing additional warming
while the truth is:
Reductions in SOx emissions due to recent regulations are exposing warming that is already here
When you look at it like this, you can see that SOx emissions aren’t a solution. In fact there is a very good reason these emissions were regulated. It’s because it causes acid rain and ocean acidification. Certainly, we don’t want to increase SOx emissions to further mask the warming in the atmosphere, because the oceans turning too acidic is also an existential threat. And acid rain has a real cost to society. In fact this was all driven by EU regulations, and recently they looked into the data of what the SOx emission reductions were doing in terms of warming, and came to the conclusion that the acidifying effects of SOx were far worse compared to the warming effects and that the regulations were still a good idea.
You might have heard SOx proposed for counteracting the warming effects of GHG. I think that’s probably not a good idea, but I support as much research as we can muster into these things. My understanding is that CaCO3 has a far more favorable profile than SOx. Personally I am far from comfortable with the amount of confidence we have in the adverse effects of this technology but I also believe that desperate countries are going to take desperate actions regardless.
This guy proposes using seawater. That’s an interesting idea. I’m not going to watch the video and the details aren’t in the text, but I’m not sure what exactly he is proposing and based off of what studies. He may be talking about doing this at a lower altitude for a certain effect, but in general water vapor is a key GHG.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !news@beehaw.org
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
There’s a spin campaign going on around this, just fyi. I don’t see it at play here. But there are neolib think tanks pushing the idea that:
while the truth is:
When you look at it like this, you can see that SOx emissions aren’t a solution. In fact there is a very good reason these emissions were regulated. It’s because it causes acid rain and ocean acidification. Certainly, we don’t want to increase SOx emissions to further mask the warming in the atmosphere, because the oceans turning too acidic is also an existential threat. And acid rain has a real cost to society. In fact this was all driven by EU regulations, and recently they looked into the data of what the SOx emission reductions were doing in terms of warming, and came to the conclusion that the acidifying effects of SOx were far worse compared to the warming effects and that the regulations were still a good idea.
You might have heard SOx proposed for counteracting the warming effects of GHG. I think that’s probably not a good idea, but I support as much research as we can muster into these things. My understanding is that CaCO3 has a far more favorable profile than SOx. Personally I am far from comfortable with the amount of confidence we have in the adverse effects of this technology but I also believe that desperate countries are going to take desperate actions regardless.
This guy proposes using seawater. That’s an interesting idea. I’m not going to watch the video and the details aren’t in the text, but I’m not sure what exactly he is proposing and based off of what studies. He may be talking about doing this at a lower altitude for a certain effect, but in general water vapor is a key GHG.