• YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    That seems like a bad idea unless we figure out a good way to fix the albedo problem that is apparently worse than ever

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 hours ago

      https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31558-z

      The albedo decease from urbanization in 2018 relative to 2001 has yielded a 100-year average annual global warming of 0.00014 [0.00008, 0.00021] °C. Without proper mitigation, future urbanization in 2050 relative to 2018 and that in 2100 relative to 2018 under the intermediate emission scenario (SSP2-4.5) would yield a 100-year average warming effect of 0.00107 [0.00057,0.00179] °C and 0.00152 [0.00078,0.00259] °C, respectively, through altering the Earth’s albedo.

      The albedo does have an effect, but not much of one. If we were to supplement every household with the ~30% solar power this article suggests, it would be a massive improvement and far outweigh the costs of the albedo.

    • IninewCrow
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      albedo problem

      Especially when you consider looking at the average city from above … the surface is almost 70 to 80% either asphalt or concrete. The average city is literally just a giant solar heat collector. If we didn’t do anything about solar panels … it would be just as efficient if we figured out how to just heat water and use the steam power instead.