[ad_1]
There are many things the year 2022 will be remembered for.
One will concern the initiative, and even more the claim, of Make Sunsets by having launched some weather balloons to release reflective sulfur particles into the stratosphere.
Let’s talk about geoengineeringi.e. the branch of science oriented to deliberately and knowingly modify the climate of our planetreflecting more sunlight back into space.
What Make Sunsets claims they have done, releasing micro particles of sulfur into the air, it would imitate a natural process that occurs following large volcanic eruptions.
But that’s all extremely theoretical.
In reality, most of the scientists involved in tackling climate change, they refrained from carrying out outdoor geoengineering experimentseven on a small scale, because the risk of making things worse is extremely high.
For example, spraying sulfur and similar particles – as stated by Make Sunsets – in sufficient quantities could potentially facilitate global warming.
Even the side effects of such initiatives, if done on a large scale, could be dangerous: the impacts of such interventions could be worse in some regions than others, triggering geopolitical conflicts.
Before going into the story, which for now is fueled by various question and answer between Luke Iseman, co-founder and CEO of Make Sunsets, and other scientistslet’s try to reconstruct the chronology of events.
April 2022.
Luke Iseman performs two experimental weather balloon launches from a site in Mexico, precisely in California Bay, without any public commitment or scientific scrutiny.
According to his own description, these first two balloon launches they were very rudimentary and took place months before Make Sunsets was formed [ndr, la start up è stata fondata in ottobre].
Iseman claims he pumped a few grams of sulfur dioxide the weather balloons and that he added what he thought would be the right amount of helium to transport them to the stratosphere, expecting them to explodeia due to the pressure at that altitude, releasing the particles.
Eight months later it is not yet clear what happened, where the balloons ended up or what impact the particles hadbecause on board the hot air balloons there was no monitoring equipment.
Iseman acknowledged that it has not sought any approval from government authorities or scientific agenciesin Mexico or elsewhere, prior to these two launches.
“This [esperimento] rightfully fell within the territory of the scientific project” has explained “Basically, it was to confirm that I could do it”he candidly added.
October 2022.
Iseman co-founds and becomes CEO of Make Sunsets which he openly states, in home page of your site, not just wanting to carry on practical geoengineering programsbut to have already done so and to be able to sell “cooling credits”.
December 2022.
On December 24 the MIT Technology Review publish the article “A startup says it’s begun releasing particles into the atmosphere, in an effort to tweak the climate” after collecting as much data as possible on the matter, and the opinions of various industry experts.
The prevailing sentiment it is a combination of dismay and condemnation towards what Iseman has done.
“The current state of science is not solid enough… either to refuse or to accept [ndr la geoingegneria] let alone to implement” wrote Janos Pasztor, executive director of the Carnegie Climate Governance Initiativein an e-mail, referring to the Make Sunsets affair.
The initiative, says Pasztor, requires the oversight of geoengineering and other climate-altering technologies, by governments, international agreements or scientific bodies.
“Moving forward with the implementation at this stage is a very bad idea”he added, comparing what Iseman did to the decision of the Chinese scientist He Jiankui to use CRISPR to edit the DNA of human embryos while the scientific community stood still debating the safety and ethics of taking such a step. (To learn more about this story, you can read the Nature articles about it: “Genome-edited baby claim provokes international outcry”, “CRISPR-baby scientist fails to satisfy critics” and “Ten ways in which He Jiankui violated ethics”).
Shuchi Talati, a very active scholar in the field of solar geoengineering, says Make Sunsets’ actions could hinder scientific progress in the field, reducing funding, diluting government support for reliable research and accelerating applications for restriction in the field of solar energy. study.
Some observers have made matters worse by drawing parallels between Make Sunsets and an accident, which occurred ten years ago, in which an American businessman allegedly poured a hundred tons of iron sulphate into the ocean. The idea was to generate a plankton bloom that could both feed local salmon populations and absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
The fear is that what Iseman accomplished in April, being quite simple to replicate, at least on a basic level, could fear the danger of similar acts carried out by inexperienced people and not provided with adequate scientific preparation, materials and methodology.
Governments and supervisory authorities could therefore establish extremely strict and limiting rules in the field of solar geoengineering, slowing down its development.
In this regard Pasztor and other scientists have pointed out that Make Sunsets has made clear the need to establish broad supervision and clear rules for responsible research in geoengineering, aimed at determine whether or under what conditions there should be social license to go ahead with the experiments or beyond.
The start-up’s opinion is diametrically opposite e halfway between the serious and the facetious.
On the one hand, the company it is already attempting to earn revenue from the cooling effects of future flightsby putting it up for sale “cooling credits” to $10 each for the release of a gram of particles in the stratosphere, enough – he says – to offset the warming effect of a ton of carbon for a year.
“What I want to do, frankly, is create all the cooling as quickly as possible, responsibly, for the rest of my life.”argued Iseman, later adding that they will distribute, in 2023, as much sulfur as the number of customers that “we can get you to pay us”.
The company says it has picked up 750,000 $ in funding from Boost VC and Pioneer Fundand that its early investors also bought cooling credits.
The two venture capital firms they didn’t answer to the MIT Technology Review’s questions about it.
Even these claims, however, have aroused skepticism in the scientific community; several researchers MIT Technology Review spoke to have condemned the effort to commercialize geoengineering at this terribly immature early stage.
Even some potential investors and customers, once they have examined the company’s proposals, argued that this would not be a serious scientific endeavor or a credible business, but rather a way to attract attention.
Even negatively. Luke Iseman, of him, has not at all denied this impression: “we joke slash not joke that this is partly a company and partly a cult…” which we could freely translate into “we’re joking, but maybe not, about the fact that this is a bit of a company, a bit of a cult”.
The CEO acknowledged that what he did it was part entrepreneurial and part provocationan act of geoengineering activism, and hopes that moving forward, the startup will help drive public debate and advance a scientific field. “Making me look like the Bond villain will be useful for certain groups…” he retorted “…but it is morally wrong, in my opinion, for us not to”.
The important thing, he argued, is “do it as quickly and safely as possible” adding like climate change is such a serious threatand the world does both moved so slowly to address the underlying problem, which now more radical interventions are needed.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
