Why does every solar geoengineering project seem to pretend that decreasing solar radiation wouldn't impact photosynthesis which also binds CO2, and, uh, supports the entire food web / our civilization?
We already are massively stressing the biosphere: mass extinctions, mass destruction of habitat, mass disruption of migration patterns, warming, plastic pollution, invasive species.
And the suggestion is to reduce incoming photosynthetic energy by percentage points????????
I get that photosynthesis happens in a narrow band of frequencies compared to other solar radiation that would be absorbed then emitted back/trapped as IR radiation... but still, geoengineering should focus on methods that explicitly track the bound/removed CO2.
Note I do not for a second believe that schemes for sequestration by pumping CO2 deep underground won't have huge amounts of ignored/undetected leakage, especially since it is a petroleum industry scheme that already pretends massive methane leaks aren't occurring far more than is accounted for in current petrol extraction.
We already are massively stressing the biosphere: mass extinctions, mass destruction of habitat, mass disruption of migration patterns, warming, plastic pollution, invasive species.
And the suggestion is to reduce incoming photosynthetic energy by percentage points????????
I get that photosynthesis happens in a narrow band of frequencies compared to other solar radiation that would be absorbed then emitted back/trapped as IR radiation... but still, geoengineering should focus on methods that explicitly track the bound/removed CO2.
Note I do not for a second believe that schemes for sequestration by pumping CO2 deep underground won't have huge amounts of ignored/undetected leakage, especially since it is a petroleum industry scheme that already pretends massive methane leaks aren't occurring far more than is accounted for in current petrol extraction.