Some geo-engineering could make an immediate impact. For instance, oceanic iron fertilization could remove millions of tons of CO2 per day. Yet we are no longer even researching the idea. The problem is, the people yelling "caution, caution, caution" don't really want to be cautious, they just want to roadblock all research in geo-engineering. The cautious approach would be to explore lots of ideas, so we understand the consequences, and are able to make informed choices in the future.

This is nonsense. It is only true for sulfates and nitrates. But sulfates and nitrates are only a concern on land, where they are inhaled, or damage buildings or crops. When emitted by ships, they are funneled to the side where they stay low and quickly settle onto the ocean surface. Since the ocean already contains quadrillions of tons of sulfur and nitrates, this addition is utterly inconsequential.

If the savings from lower operating costs are higher than the amortized capital costs, then shipping rates will go down, not up. If they are not, then the ships will NOT install these devices unless someone else pays for them (e.g., taxpayers). In neither case will shipping costs go up.

People are already tinkering with the climate on a massive scale.

Every day of "cautious" delay, another 50 million tons of CO2 goes into the atmosphere.

Efficient ports can turn around a containerized cargo ship in less than 12 hours. They use multiple cranes, and load, unload, and refuel simultaneously. By comparison, the Pacific transit time from Shanghai to Los Angeles is 17 days. So the time in port is only 3%.

It is obvious that they meant the surface temperature would cool by 0.5C one time, and then stabilize and stay 0.5C cooler than it would otherwise be, as long as the system was used. I don't see how you could interpret it any other way.

The USSR didn't end in 1970. Besides, NK was not "doing well" then compared to now. There economy has continued to grow, and they are doing better economically than many other Asian countries, and better than most African countries. It is only compared to the spectacular growth of South Korea, that NK looks shabby.

The USSR never considered NK to be a reliable ally, and after 1953, gave them very little aid. Kim Il Sung (grandfather of the current ruler) had served as an officer in the Soviet Red Army, and spoke fluent Russian. But he didn't trust the Soviets, and they didn't trust him. He launched the Korean War in 1950 after the Soviets told him not to. They were trying to consolidate their gains in Europe, and rebuild from WW2. The last thing they wanted was a bloody and expensive war in Asia. During the Korean War, China helped NK way more than the Soviets did. After the war, rather than showing gratitude to his allies, Kim Il Sung purged the NK government of anyone suspected of leaning toward either Russia or China. Korea is not called the "Hermit Kingdom" for nothing.

North Korea has built compact nuclear warheads, put satellites in orbit, and (because of sanctions) independently developed a number of technologies. They would not have been able to do those things if they couldn't program.

Instead of just slurping up the propaganda that your government is spoon feeding you, learn to think for yourself. Go to Google Maps, zoom in on North Korea, and then click on "Earth". You will see paved roads with cars on them, farms with tractors, houses not much smaller than in the South, etc. North Korea is a poor and backwards country, but not nearly to the degree that you have been told. Until around 1970, it was wealthier, per capita, than South Korea.

Taiwan was not incorporated into China until 1683. From 1895 to 1945 it was Japanese, and from 1949 till today it was de facto independent. So it spent only about 200 years as part of China, not 10,000.

Nobody in modern China has ever been shot for refusing to work in a foreign owned factory.

You apparently know absolutely nothing about the labor market in Shenzhen. There are rows upon rows of factories, and ALL of them are hiring. Available workers are scarce, and wages are rising quickly. A worker can quit and find a new job as quickly as they can ride their bicycle to the next factory (about five minutes).

Pegatron is not a Chinese company.

Insisting that lots of studies support your opinion is not the same as actually citing one.

Not a SINGLE ONE of this sources says that more work is accomplished in an eight hour work day, than in a twelve hour work day. Of course shorter hours are more productive per hour, which is all these studies show. That is not the same as showing there is no incremental gain.

I think it is safe to say he is lying. He is posting as an AC, and accusing Pegatron of blatantly committing felonies, in front of foreign witnesses, based on no evidence whatsoever. I don't think so. They may be evil, but they aren't stupid.

Your ignorant blabbering is not a citation. If you say "studies showed ..." then you should be able to cite the studies.