You just made previous comments advocating for it though, so I was pointing out the biggest danger of it, but now you’re acknowledging this issue?

I mean, this is literally going to be Termination Shock by Neal Stephenson.

Look up termination shock. I worked on SAI (detection and attribution management) for a project for about 6 months, so I know more than the average person on this.

1. They already do this with marine cloud brightening, which doesn’t inject sulfur dioxide high up into the atmosphere, so it’s lower risk and more local

2. This would give a pass to the polluters to continue full speed ahead, but will cause unequal effects across the globe. This will lead to more geopolitical conflict, possibly wars, as one state can cause another to go through a drought and potentially kill millions of people. At the same time, another area can get monsoons and similarly kill a bunch of people. And termination shock will almost certainly cause the entire biosphere on earth to collapse. If SAI is stopped, then that sun energy coming in and interacting with the existing high levels of CO2 will cause all of the negative climate change effects in a matter of months or years, instead of several decades.

It’s been done on very small scale tests like the SCOPEx test. It’s done with marine cloud brightening (MCB) which is a different thing.

However, SAI is absolutely dangerous and if it’s not continued indefinitely it will lead to termination shock. Because all of the CO2 emissions remain and will even increase, if you suddenly let that sun energy in again, all of the bad climate change effects will happen in months to several years, instead of many decades like it would normally. That would absolutely lead to war, billions dead, most agriculture dead, and near a complete collapse of the entire biosphere.