Several posts ago I said that several renown economists were seriously floating the idea that CO2 emissions are not the cause of global warming, but that the warming could be slowed down by spraying sulphur dioxide into the air.
Well, I’ve started to read the book – it’s only one chapter in Super Freakeconomics – but The Economist has convinced me it’s worse than a bad idea. That’s too bad because if it had been a viable solution, it was almost laughably simple and cheap.
Two big objections to this whizz idea are:
- sulphur dioxide sprayed into the upper atmosphere might disrupt patterns of rainfall with results no less drastic than global warming
- the problem with CO2 emissions isn’t just that it’s one of the greenhouse gases causing global warming. It is leading to an acidification of our oceans which will kill millions of species living in ocean. It’s already threatening our fish-and-chips, and coral reefs are dying by the mile, and is threatening bio-diversity on a huge scale.
Even if cutting CO2 emissions won’t stop climate change, we badly need to reduce our use of fossil fuels.
So I’m putting a thermal inter-lining on all our curtains. All our windows already have thermal light-filtering blinds I imported from the States. (They’re terrific, by the way.)
