There is a classic geek reaction to such things that goes like: "There is nothin...

gizmo686 · on July 20, 2012

I would argue that only tech can get us out of this. According to the article, given the damage we have done up to this point, we are going to gain another 0.8C, putting us up to 1.6C above where we should be. Seeing as we are already observing real environmental damage, that should not be a satisfactory solution.

Any satisfactory solution would need to include some form of active cooling. These solutions are quite with are abilities. For example, prior to modern pollution regulations, we were actually cooling the planet because are pollutants reflected more heat than they trapped.

An event that I actually have figures for is 9-11. During the no-fly period following the attack, we saw a 1.8C increase in mean temperature in the USA (mean temperature tends to be consistent). Unfourtuantly, these cooling methods are short-lived and associated with long-lasting carbon, but they were accidental. I don't see any reason to believe we can not technology to actively cool the planet.