23
Are Aerosols a viable option to fight global warming? (piefed.social)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/askscience@lemmy.world
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I follow this scientist on YouTube, he's made a very interesting series of videos and is looking for a research grant, here is a lot more context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvxNmStSC3M

tl;dw

  1. We've been pumping a shitload of CO2 into the atmosphere for the last 100+ years

  2. It seems extremely unlikely that the global CO2 emissions will go down in the next ~50+ years

  3. Even if the whole world became Net-Zero tomorrow, The planet will keep warming because the extra CO2 already in the atmosphere will stay there for the next 100+ years

  4. Carbon capture is basically impossible due to economics

Now here comes the scary part that that you maybe need a open mind to consider a good idea.

By adding 3% "Baking Soda" to jet fuel, it would reflect heat away to counter global warming, and would drop out of the air in ~1 year, so we can stop at any time.

Before forming a strong opinion and just down-voting let's have a constructive conversation in the comments. Even better, please watch the video

This seems like an actual viable option to buy us time to fix global warming, because what we've been trying hasn't been working nearly fast enough.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

So the reflection is essentially what the sulfur in diesel used to do. Diesel is now ultralow sulfur because it was learned that low sulfur diesel greatly reduced the particulate and ozone precursor (not good to breathe in) emission from diesel engines.

Baking soda seems safe but doing it globally where it would 1)affect clouds and rain, 2) when it falls alter water and soil chemistry and be breathed in would cause yet unknown harms. Making that much baking soda would also increase greenhouse and probably have effects on aircraft longevity-again causing more greenhouse.

Similarly corn ethanol that is added to gas in the US reduces fuel efficiency and increases greenhouse because the corn is made for purpose and subsidized rather than just excess.

The alternatives are reduced greenhouse via reduction of fossil fuel subsidies combined with renewables and infrastructure to mitigate and survive the changes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    corn ethanol that is added to gas in the US reduces fuel efficiency and increases greenhouse because the corn is made for purpose and subsidized rather than just excess

    Nonsense. Oil propaganda.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    Ethanol has about 30% less energy per liter than gasoline. So a 10% ethanol:gasoline mix has about 3% less possible energy than 100% gasoline. That carries over into the mileage. and its worse in cold weather. Newer engines do use it better but you can't beat basic energy density.

    40% of corn in the US is used for ethanol production. Its a shitton of other resources including land, fertilization, etc in order to do so.

    https://mechbasic.com/does-ethanol-in-petrol-reduce-mileage/ https://www.newindianexpress.com/business/2025/Aug/05/govt-admits-lower-mileage-in-ethanol-blended-fuel

    https://www.opensubsidies.org/analysis/ethanol-subsidy-machine https://www.taxpayer.net/energy-natural-resources/understanding-u-s-corn-ethanol-and-other-corn-based-biofuels-subsidies/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent