Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
Here is a link to the paper's abstract http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6065/204.abstract
If I'm not mistaken, they aren't cleaning up the atmosphere, but rather inducing cloud formation. The idea is that they could make it cloudier to cool the planet.
The researchers found that the Criegee biradicals react more rapidly than first thought and will accelerate the formation of sulphate and nitrate in the atmosphere. These compounds will lead to aerosol formation and ultimately to cloud formation with the potential to cool the planet.
Personally, I think climate engineering is a bad idea, and a false choice in the climate change debate. Due to the complexity of the Earth's climate, and the complexity of relations of ecosystems to it, I think any major effort to shift the climate by artificial means will probably do as much harm as good. Any particles we add to the atmosphere in great quantities are bound to have effects beyond those that we intend.
–
Sulfate and nitrate formation, back when I was a kid, were bad things. They lead to acid rain:
–
crackedmonocle · 4849 days ago · link ·
This was my thought as well. The second paragraph says that the intermediates oxidize pollutants and can naturally clean the atmosphere, but it was my impression that the oxidation of nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide causes acid rain. I can't find much information on sulfate aerosols other than they have a cooling effect and can lead to cloud formation. I thought the author was suggesting that while sulfur dioxide is a pollutant, sulfate aerosols are not or are at least more favorable in that they could reduce global warming.