So far, it's a program to study it, not to do it. Unilateral action to learn stuff is fine.

Nobody wants to block the sun. But ecological, climate, and humanitarian disaster are inexorably headed our way already. If positive feedbacks seriously kick in, this has a chance of buying us some time until we can reduce carbon levels.

Besides, we've already seen this employed, by volcanoes, with global effects lasting one to two years. Disaster did not ensue.

I'm surprised to learn less than $2M per year goes into this type of research in the USA. Given the massive unknowns, it's something we certainly need to better understand.

Kind of like research on deflecting asteroids.

"the U.S. Government and Accountability Office (GAO)"..."estimated that about $2 million were directed to “albedo modification and less conventional CDR approaches,” so less than 0.1% of the U.S. climate change budget focused on the strategies discussed in our report." (page 185 of the report)

I never thought it would be so difficult to convince people that arming robots and blocking out the sun is a bad idea. Didn't anyone see the matrix?!

Maybe they are thinking more about the subsription model?

Even assuming that an experiment is done for, say, twenty years, I don't know how accurately we can forecast longer- term changes (over a scale of centuries) from this move. Heck, making these forecasts without the sun being blocked out is hard enough.

Completely agree. My statement was made in jest (I don't know how else to deal with this completely bonkers situation, except with humor). It terrifies me how the same individuals who claim/promise to want to save humanity are also the ones locking up our shared inheritance. [1]

[1] https://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable...

Totally! As a different commenter noted, it seems that people will consider any technological solution to warming except politically unpalatable ones.

The spectre of job losses and so on are frequently raised when it comes to transitioning away from fossil fuels --- as though the economic catastrophe from continued global warming would be lower.