Tuesday's Energy Absurdity: Washington Post Says the Quiet Part Out Loud About Geo-Engineering
Welp, when America’s corrupt, propaganda legacy media outlets held their weekly coordination call last week (it’s a real thing), the Washington Post editorial board apparently got the assignment of saying the quiet part out loud on the topic of geo-engineering as a “cure” for the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-causing, and all-powerful mythical boogeyman we call “climate change.”
And say the quiet part out loud the WaPo Ed Board did in a blunt, unusually long editorial in which they morph from referring to monkeying around with the world’s ability to absorb sunlight as “a forbidden subject,” to concluding it is “indispensable” and “urgent” in the course of just a little more than 1,000 words. It is truly a breathtaking transformation in so short a span, especially when such a dangerous, potentially catastrophic topic is being discussed.
What, after all, could possibly go wrong with plans to alternatively block sunlight with thousands of high-altitude balloons, spraying the upper atmosphere with billions of tons of aluminum particles, or spending trillions of debt-funded dollars to build a gargantuan shield placed in stationary orbit in outer space? The editors are so cocksure in their arrogance that they even admit the concept has already been tried out, writing, “Climate geoengineering is so cheap and potentially game-changing that even private entrepreneurs have tried it out, albeit at small scales.”
Yeah, sure. “Small scales.” You betcha.
I mean, we simply just have to “trust the science,” don’t we? Like we trusted the “science” of COVID vaccines and giant offshore wind farms built in the middle of a whale migration corridor off the northeast coast, right? Right.
These absolute ghouls even promote the idea of using chemtrails by spraying “millions of tons each year” of sulphur into the upper atmosphere in this excerpt:
Climate engineering scholars David Keith at the University of Chicago and Wake Smith at Yale think it would take no more than 15 souped-up Gulfstream jets to send up, say, 100,000 tons of sulfur per year into the lower stratosphere to block solar rays, at an annual cost of some $500 million. This could happen in as little as five years.
Such a small deployment — about 0.3 percent of the sulfur pollution emitted globally each year — would be unlikely to have a very large impact on the climate and weather systems. Mr. Keith and Mr. Smith estimate the cooling would delay the global rise in temperatures by about one-third of a year — about half the impact as from eliminating all emissions from the European Union. And, yet, they note, “it could trigger political instability and invite retribution from other countries and international bodies that would not respond well to entities fiddling with the planet’s thermostat without global coordination and oversight.”
Cooling the Earth by 1 degree Celsius for a decade would require sending up several million tons annually, in part because sun-reflecting aerosols endure only about a year in the stratosphere. Aircraft have not yet been developed to deliver that much stuff that high. Setting up a proper fleet could take more than a decade. But hard-hit countries will increasingly be tempted to try to use such a shortcut to stave off further warming. And, if they act on their own, all hell would probably break loose.
[End]
So, “all hell would probably break loose,” huh? Yeah, it sure would, and deservedly so. These religious zealots are proposing to mess with the planet’s climate in ways that no person or computer model could ever hope to accurately predict, and we’re all supposed to just sit back and take it, as Clayton Williams might have said (all you under the age of 45 will just have to Google that reference).
This is madness, plain and simple, but here we are, with the inmates fully in charge of the asylum.
That is all.
Bring back Nurse Ratched !
https://youtu.be/n0BtsH9N3pc?si=NZcxCEy8OLq2zrZM
Lemme see if I understand this correctly. Spend BILLIONS of $$$ building solar arrays to harvest sunlight, then put shade over them in the upper atmosphere. Is that right? Oh, also, wind is driven by sunlight, as well. So, we’re going to incrementally reduce our ability to produce electricity from wind farms, as well? This is pure GENIUS. Question. If we do this, do we get to go back to oil & gas, full throttle??? Something tells me, no. 🙄 As David likes to say, you couldn’t make this up in million years if you had to.