There's a logic fail in my old friend @billmckibben's effort to derail @DKeithClimate's plan to loft a balloon in Sweden. Arguing even this tiny step toward assessing #SRM must wait until '30 misses how long it takes to do anything related to climate. newyorker.com/news/annals-of… 
Every facet of the global climate challenge is super tough and requires years (generations even) of effort. Today's photovoltaic, LED, and battery successes did not arise from Musk-style entrepreneurship. They started with grinding basic study, like lofting a first balloon. 2/
And I'm no #SRM fan. I see no prospect this tech will used at scale in my or Bill's lifetimes (there's no plausible "lone actor" scenario & governments will never agree on full-scale deployment). But I do see merit in understanding what's possible. dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/mor… 3/
In 2016, as #DotEarth came to a close I noted research showing that humans have *already* been influencing climate by changing flows of particulate pollutants with both warming and cooling influences (as well as direct health effects). dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/can… 4/
I see @DKeithClimate et al's argument for feathered, reversible tailoring of humanity's particulate contribution to the atmosphere & climate as reasonable work that's in line with Bill's longtime notion of "silver buckshot" more than bullets. That has to include tech. 5/
Maybe this is all moot. New @NCAR_CGD research on #covid19 pollution drops & 2020 climate found continued warming was substantially driven by a *drop* in cooling aerosols - demonstrating the #SRM effect now being so hotly attacked as a "hack." scitechdaily.com/covid-19-lockd… 6/
A last point. Bill's argument is that #SRM (still a tiny corner of climate conversation) could hinder action on emissions policies harks back to @algore's early argument against adaptation. Just because bad actors exploit things doesn't mean they're wrong. Gore changed later.7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
