• mozz
    link
    fedilink
    4910 months ago

    I think this is the new phase of the bad-faith propaganda. Promote weird, outlandishly expensive but vaguely-plausible-sounding solutions to get people away from talking about the things we can actually do (but which would lead to someone making less money and so, unacceptable.)

    • Johanno
      link
      fedilink
      1510 months ago

      No you don’t understand. We just need to build a dyson sphere and we are ser in energy for ever.

      This will be cheaper than anything we can do. For only 1$ per kW we can build it eeehm next year.

      /s

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      310 months ago

      It’s not a bad idea if we had the technology to mass-produce film in the quantity required, the ability to easily and consistently place them where needed, and could maintain the array. None of those are true right now. If they were, it would be viable.

      • mozz
        link
        fedilink
        210 months ago

        Yeah. If we could do it, someone could run the numbers and find out that it’s about ten to a hundred times cheaper to just build a bunch of non-coal power plants, or find and eliminate methane sources, or, hell, I don’t know. I’m not an expert. But I definitely know that they’re not talking about this because it’s the easiest way.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    810 months ago

    Betteridge’s Law of Headlines: Any headline that ends in a yes/no question can be answered “no.”

    It could work (ignoring cost), except that tiny meteors flying around space would rip holes in such an expansive object. Just look at what happened to the JWST, and it’s much smaller than this would need to be.

    I’m sure the next big brain idea will be to cover the world in sunscreen or change the Earth’s orbit with a giant rocket.

    • Kalkaline
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      The JWST is still functioning at a very high level. It’s a poor comparison if you’re trying to argue against putting expensive stuff in space.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        310 months ago

        The point was that it got hit, despite being smaller than this would need to be. That’s where the analogy ends, because its purpose is very different from a giant umbrella.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    7
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Weirdly, I’m not completely opposed to this. Solar sail technology is a promising avenue for interplanetary travel/exploration, and we’d want to test the technology for giant solar sails somewhere near the Earth, so why not?

    Besides the fact that “block the sun” is a traditional supervillain master plan, I guess.

    • @[email protected]OPM
      link
      fedilink
      19
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      A bunch of reasons:

      • as we dump co2 in the atmosphere, much is absorbed in the oceans, acidifying them. This will kill off a big chunk of marine life
      • it’s tough, and not particularly likely to succeed at the needed scale
      • we will need to maintain this system for a few hundred thousand years. Humans don’t have a track record of maintaining civilization for that long
      • we will end up with substantially different weather patterns due to a reduced pole-to-equator temperature gradient.
  • Yewb
    link
    fedilink
    110 months ago

    I think Futuramas episode on this was awesome Diamondillium for the win!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      You’re confusing the giant space mirror with the impenetrable shield to protect from tentacles.