Crémieux Profile picture
May 25, 2024 15 tweets 5 min read Read on X
2024 is the hottest year on record, and it's been hotter than 2023 in part because of a global ban on shipping fuels containing sulfur dioxide.

Problem: SO2 causes acid rain, but it cools the globe. How can we just stay cool?

A new company might have found the solution.

🧵Image
Acid rain has been on the decline for many years, but in order to finally put the problem to rest, it'll be crucial to knock out sulfur dioxide emissions from shipping.

Globally, those emissions have been concentrated in these boxed-in regions where ships go to-and-fro. Image
When the International Maritime Organization 2020 regulation went into effect, roughly 80% of sulfur dioxide emissions from international shipping went away overnight. Image
If those sulfur emissions weren't stopped, sulfate aerosols would have acted to change the Earth's energy balance, cooling it down.

Think of this like sunscreen for the planet. Image
Because shipping-related emissions were spread out over so wide an area, their cooling effect was pretty sizable despite being only a fraction of global sulfur emissions. Image
The resulting rise in global temperatures when these went away inspired @ASong408 to think:

How can we keep the cooling while doing without the acid rain?

Watch this video.
What you just witnessed was a balloon containing sulfur dioxide.

You just witnessed a stratospheric aerosol injection, AKA, a controlled sulfur release in the stratosphere.

This part is critical: the stratosphere.Image
The reason the stratosphere is so critical is that, if you release sulfur dioxide up there, it distributes widely and makes minimal acid rain.

There's no weather that far up, so there's nothing to bring it back down right away!
Because there's nothing to bring the sulfur dioxide (+/as byproducts) back down from so far up, you can also consider this "sunscreen" extra long-lasting.

In other words, stratospherically-injected sulfur dioxide has a long "residence time."
The residence time isn't forever, it's a few years.

So in order to ensure the world doesn't face an acid rain problem, the release has to be done in controlled amounts.

Luckily, modest amounts meet our goals: they cool Earth, stabilize her climate, and produce minimal acid rain
The reason this works so well is that, when the sulfur is distributed so high up, it does better at cooling.

Accordingly, we can continue to fight sulfur dioxide emissions on the ground while moving smaller amounts into the stratosphere to keep our planet cool. Image
That's what @ASong408's company does, and, man does it work.

To hammer in just how well it works, check out these calculations:Image
If you want to learn more, you can go check out Andrew's guest post on my blog. There's a lot more info there, so I thoroughly recommend you give it a read.

Link: cremieux.xyz/p/from-polluti…
And if you're already sold and you want to start launching sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to make the planet cooler, here's a link so you can do that too:



(One balloon = 38,636 trees worth of carbon offset.)makesunsets.com/products/join-…
Other sources:







(Note: I have no financial interest in this. I just want a cooler planet and I'm a true believer.) climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/…
reddit.com/r/environmenta…
carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-l…
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Crémieux

Crémieux Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @cremieuxrecueil

Dec 7
Why do identical twins have such similar personalities?

Is it because they're reared together? Is it because people treat them alike due to their visual similarity?

Nope! Neither theory holds water. Image
Despite looking as similar as identical twins and being reared apart, look-alikes are not similar like identical twins are. In fact, they're no more similar than unrelated people.

This makes sense: they're only minimally more genetically similar than regular unrelated people.
The other thing is that twins reared apart and together have similarly similar personalities.

In fact, there might be a negative environmental effect going on, where twins reared together try to distinguish their personalities more!
Read 7 tweets
Dec 2
Society is cognitively stratified:

Smart people tend to earn higher educations and higher incomes, and to work in more prestigious occupations.

This holds for people from excellent family backgrounds (Utopian Sample) and comparing siblings from the same families! Image
This is true, meaningful, and the causal relationship runs strongly from IQ to SES, with little independent influence of SES. Just look at how similar the overall result and the within-family results are!

But also look at fertility in this table: quite the reverse! Image
Source: sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

And to learn more about this general phenomenon, see: cremieux.xyz/p/intelligence… (I've added this citation to this article!)
Read 5 tweets
Nov 25
After this article came out, several people responded, alleging that a cultural model made more sense.

Clark has a point-by-point response🧵

Let's start with the first thing: parent-child and sibling correlations in status measures are identical—hard to explain culturally! Image
The reason this is hard to explain has to do with the fact that kids objectively have more similar environments to one another than to their parents.

In fact, for a cultural theory to recapitulate regression to the mean across generations, these things would need to differ! Image
Another fact that speaks against a cultural explanation is that the length of contact between fathers and sons doesn't matter for how correlated they are in status.

We can see this by leveraging the ages parents die at relative to said sons. Image
Read 10 tweets
Nov 24
The idea:

The internet gives everyone access to unlimited information, learning tools, and the new digital economy, so One Laptop Per Child should have major benefits.

The reality:

Another study just failed to find effects on academic performance. Image
This is one of those findings that's so much more damning than it at first appears.

The reason being, laptop access genuinely provides people with more information than was available to any kid at any previous generation in history.

If access was the issue, this resolves it. Image
And yet, nothing happens

This implementation of the program was more limited than other ones that we've already seen evaluations for though. The laptops were not Windows-based and didn't have internet, so no games, but non-infinite info too

Still huge access improvement though
Read 4 tweets
Nov 22
What is the effect of having a parent get locked away on a kids' own risk of eventually committing crime?

As it turns out, basically nil.

Having a mother or a father locked away doesn't significantly increase risk, and indeed, may reduce it if it happens at an early age. Image
This is relative to no incarceration, so the result should be interpreted as... pretty shocking!

Similarly, we can look at the effects of longer versus shorter parental sentences.

There's seemingly little effect of the length of time parents are incarcerated for. Image
Compare those within-family estimates from above with these between-family results from the same study, period, cohort, etc.

Notice: the apparent 'effects' between families are significant stratified in the same way.

That's an important distinction! Image
Read 5 tweets
Nov 20
Why?

I doubt the answer is weight loss. Consider 2 other drugs for diabetes: DPP-4 and SGLT-2 inhibitors

GLP-1RAs are associated with less Alzheimer's vs. DPP-4is:

But not SGLT-2is:

Neither generates much weight loss, but SGLT-2is match GLP-1RAs on glycemic benefitsImage
Image
So, at least in this propensity score- or age-matched data, there's no reason to chalk the benefit up to the weight loss effects.

This is a hint though, not definitive. Another hint is that benefits were observed in short trials, meaning likely before significant weight loss.
We can be doubly certain about that last hint because diabetics tend to lose less weight than non-diabetics, and all of the observed benefit has so far been observed in diabetic cohorts, not non-diabetic ones (though those directionally show benefits).

Anyway, trials needed!
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(