The proposal to block out the sun as a means to study the effects of climate change has sparked intense debate within our society. Advocated by The Science™, with prominent figures like Bill Gates supporting it, this controversial idea has been given the bureaucratic term “solar radiation modification.” Recently, the announcement of a research program utilizing a supercomputer named Derecho to delve into the feasibility and advisability of this approach has raised further concerns.
According to the White House, the research program aims to provide a better understanding of the potential risks and benefits of solar radiation modification (SRM) as part of climate policy. It is intended to complement efforts focused on greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation. By using Derecho, scientists hope to run more detailed weather models to investigate solar geoengineering, a technique that involves redirecting the sun’s rays to cool the planet.
Via the White House:
A program of research into the scientific and societal implications of solar radiation modification (SRM) would enable better-informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of SRM as a component of climate policy, alongside the foundational elements of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation.
Derecho, the new supercomputer deployed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, offers increased computational power, allowing for more comprehensive climate models. Kristen Rasmussen, a climate scientist at Colorado State University, explains that her team will study how human-made aerosols, which can deflect sunlight, affect rainfall patterns. Understanding regional changes in rainfall caused by aerosol release can contribute to a deeper understanding of the risks associated with solar geoengineering. Additionally, the supercomputer will be utilized to explore other aspects of climate change.
Via Scientific American:
A new supercomputer for climate research will help scientists study the effects of solar geoengineering, a controversial idea for cooling the planet by redirecting the sun’s rays.
The machine, named Derecho, began operating this month at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and will allow scientists to run more detailed weather models for research on solar geoengineering, said Kristen Rasmussen, a climate scientist at Colorado State University who is studying how human-made aerosols, which can be used to deflect sunlight, could affect rainfall patterns.
Because Derecho is 3 ½ times faster than the previous NCAR supercomputer, her team can run more detailed models to show how regional changes to rainfall can be caused by the release of aerosols, adding to scientists’ understanding of the risks from solar geoengineering, Rasmussen said. The machine will also be used to study other issues related to climate change.
Critics argue that this reliance on technology to examine the consequences of blocking out the sun reflects a dangerous trend of outsourcing human judgment. They highlight the essential role the sun plays in sustaining life on Earth, alongside water, nitrogen for crop fertilization, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. Some believe that the technocrats driving artificial intelligence development possess an anti-human perspective, which may influence the software they create. They contend that initiatives like the “climate change” carbon control agenda target carbon-based life forms, including humans.
In a 2010 speech, Bill Gates emphasized the urgent need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. While his comments are often cited in the context of climate change discussions, it is crucial to separate them from the current discourse on SRM research. Gates’ words should not be taken as an endorsement of blocking out the sun but rather as a call to address carbon emissions. It is essential to scrutinize the motivations and implications of any technological development or research initiative, ensuring they align with the best interests of humanity.
The concept of blocking out the sun for research purposes raises significant ethical concerns. Critics argue that interfering with such a fundamental aspect of the Earth’s ecosystem could have unpredictable consequences. The potential risks associated with solar geoengineering, such as altering weather patterns, disrupting ecosystems, and affecting agricultural productivity, must be thoroughly examined. Additionally, the concentration of power and decision-making in the hands of a few technocrats raises concerns about democratic participation and the potential for unintended consequences.
Society must carefully consider the implications of allowing technology to dictate our approach to climate change. While scientific advancements have brought numerous benefits, they should not overshadow the importance of human judgment, ethics, and a holistic understanding of complex systems. The research program exploring SRM’s feasibility and implications should be subject to rigorous scrutiny, involving interdisciplinary experts, policymakers, and public engagement.
In conclusion, the use of a supercomputer like Derecho to study the effects of solar radiation modification on climate change necessitates a critical examination of its risks, ethical implications, and potential consequences. While some argue that technological advancements enable a deeper understanding of complex issues, others warn against outsourcing our common sense to technology. It is vital to strike a balance between scientific exploration and ethical considerations, ensuring that decisions about solar geoengineering prioritize the well-being of humanity and the planet. Society must engage in a robust dialogue, empowering a diverse range of stakeholders to shape the path forward in addressing climate change without compromising our values and the delicate equilibrium of our natural systems.
Now, we put out a lot of carbon dioxide every year — over 26 billion tons… And somehow, we have to make changes that will bring that down to zero… This equation has four factors, a little bit of multiplication…
So you’ve got a thing on the left, CO2, that you want to get to zero, and that’s going to be based on the number of people, the services each person is using on average, the energy, on average, for each service, and the CO2 being put out per unit of energy. So let’s look at each one of these, and see how we can get this down to zero. Probably, one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty near to zero.” [cuts to a frame of people, audience laughs uproariously]
—Bill Gates, 2010, emphasis added
