• harmsy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Technically, physics does allow a satellite-based method to deal with climate change. Economics, on the other hand, does not. You would need to chuck an unfathomable amount of mass into orbit.

      • shane@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Do you though? I mean, a satellite orbiting the sun between the earth and the sun could cast a large shadow, right?

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 minutes ago

          Not really. Case in point - the Moon. It’s absolutely massive, like several orders of magnitude larger than any satellite we’ve ever launched, and when it happens to line up just right between the Earth and the Sun, the umbra is only like 150km wide.

        • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          If the sun was a point light source that is accurate. It is not though. You would need an absolutely enormous sat to cast a shadow that would actually affect our weather. Plus you would also need a way to keep it in position as the solar radiation would push it out of position quickly.

        • balsoft@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          That’s… Not how shadows work… Or orbital mechanics… Or economics…

          His suggestion, impossible as it is at the current stage of human development, is slightly less impossible than this.

      • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Yeah, that’s why. He must have some weird misunderstanding to think it’s actually doable.

    • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      More interestingly, if he truly announced that idea, he’d have to be admitting climate change is real in the first place.

    • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 hours ago

      psst… “climate”… and pray tell, which energy source do you think powers the atmosphere to exhibit weather or climate?

      Geothermal? Tidal? Nuclear isotope decay in the core?