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.
🧵
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.
When the International Maritime Organization 2020 regulation went into effect, roughly 80% of sulfur dioxide emissions from international shipping went away overnight.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That's what @ASong408's company does, and, man does it work.
To hammer in just how well it works, check out these calculations:
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.
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:
FDR was the Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1913 to 1919.
During his tenure, he supported a gay entrapment operation where sailors would allow themselves to be propositioned by gay sailors so the Navy could identify them and kick them out🧵
After enough intel was gathered, twenty potentially homosexual men were rounded up and brought aboard the USS Boxer to be interrogated.
Afterwards, fourteen of them were charged with gay sex acts with the sailors that entrapped them.
When the Senate investigated FDR over this, they were furious.
They wanted him barred from holding public office because he was responsible for a bunch of innocent young sailors being sodomized.
Since he ultimately went on to become the president, we know he got off scot-free.
Here are the current best estimate of income inequality in the U.S.
🧵
If you look at the top 10%, their share of income seems to be flat after taxes and transfers.
The original Piketty-Saez estimate is based on failing to count for taxes and transfers and including capital gains, which are not part of national income, among other issues.
If we look at the top 1%, we see something similar.
Note that "Piketty-Saez" is called "Fiscal Income" here.
It shows the meta-analytic estimate of the effect of getting an additional year of education on people's IQ scores.
It almost-certainly depicts a major overestimate🧵
"Control Prior Intelligence" refers to a design to overcome selection into higher education.
The big reason why you cannot regress years of education on IQs to understand the IQ-boosting effect of another year of education is that kids with higher IQs tend to get more schooling.
So, to get to the effect of schooling, this design has you control for a measure of earlier IQs.
But here's the problem with this: if that early measure of IQs is measured with error, then you're not controlling enough.
Because Taiwan randomly assigns students to classrooms (max size = 35 kids), these researchers were able to estimate that adding one Formosan child to a classroom reduced the test scores of the other students by the equivalent of at least 0.18 IQ points.
And to get ahead of it: there was no evidence that indigenous students helped other indigenous students, as the coefficient on the interaction was anything but significant (p = 0.82).
Now look at these peer-level mediators:
Combined with these endogenous response mediators, 70% of the indigenous student effect was explained away and it became nonsignificant at even the lax 10% level.
These latter mediators are hopeful ones. If they hold up, then a sizable part of the effect could be fixed.