• over_clox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah, that’s brilliant!

    In a society trying to push electric vehicles out that can’t even make it through a car wash, yeah let’s see if we can make them rust even faster!

  • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Watch it work and cool the planet…but then we get salt water rains and it kills all vegetation that it touches resulting in an even worse fate.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I agree that the focus needs to be on cutting emissions, and I share the concern for unintended consequences. But I don’t know if that concern justifies shutting down an experiment intended to identify any such consequences.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s the WaPo. They report to you the republiQan talking points in their best liberal-npr-radio voice.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Genuine answer: This is controversial because it is to intentionally alter the climate. We use fossil fuels for energy, not to alter the climate. The climate stuff is a negative side effect of fossil fuels.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Once you know the side effects of something, if you continue doing it, that’s intentional. So I don’t think that distinction makes much of a difference.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Because we’re being wise enough to question if this might have unintended consequences. For example, it might just shift the problem elsewhere and cause more severe draughts for someone else. Just a hypothetical to point out why people might not be immediately onboard with this.

      Tho, fun fact, California has been doing this kind of stuff since at least the 60’s. It’s called cloud seeding and we’ve had numerous programs running. They just never got much attention. But technically, the chem trails conspiracy is based in a bit of truth. It’s just not every airplane, but it’s happening. A quick Google search will give you tons of government pages about it. It’s not a secret.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The idea is to increase the amount of salt in the air over the ocean. It probably won’t kill all plants.

      • over_clox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Clouds move ya know. I’m not exactly sure why, but I’ve heard people on the television call it ‘weather’, or something like that.

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          They do. And done right, it’ll come down over the ocean, and have a rather minimal impact in the amount of salt being transported to land.

          There are other reasons this is a really bad idea; this is one where the harm is probably limited.

          • Akasazh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            And done right…

            See, we don’t have the best track record on that particular aspect of this.