I never really considered that Hydrochloric acid and Sulfuric acid's place on the wholesome goodness charts.

Rain BTW, has acids in it, naturally. Carbonic Acid, and a bit of Nitric acid. They rain out quickly, in the atmospheric water cycle - an excellent natural cleaning process.

Aerosolizing the global atmosphere means that the aerosols get removed in some short amount of time. So that acidic rainfall gets continually refreshed.

A little investigation should show the scientifically literate why this isn't some great idea, although there will no doubt be kickstarters looking to grift off the unsuspecting.

Not sure who's side you are on, but we have been quite successfully modifying the world's environment for around 300 years now.

That was perhaps not a good thing. Trying to acid rain ourselves out of that problem is non only not a good thing, it is a remarkably stupid thing.

You might have strong opinions, but tell us - how much salt and how many airplanes are needed? Hint - the amount of aerosol injection needed will take thousands of years - and will be the largest project ever undertaken by humanity, and will need to take place globally, by most countries with ocean access.

The concept of loading up the largest cargo airplanes and dumping salt out of them? well, that's kind of a non starter anyway. That salt will simply fall, not aerosolize into the hydrochloric acid carried in water vapor that is needed.

All of this is on Wikipedia. We probably won't hear about it on "Ancient Aliens", "Love after lockdown" or "Duck Dynasty", or "Marriage Bootcamp" or "Bachelorette" or "Naked and Afraid".

But if people only get their science from those shows, that's a them problem.

People such as myself are often labeled as trolls in here (sometimes deservedly so) but just as often when I tell people things they don't want to hear. Everything I comment on is in the open literature.

This is a very bad idea.

I'm no Luddite, and I do understand the process.

There is a real problem with the aerosol injection to cool the earth idea. And it cannot be overcome by politics, liberal or conservative.

Much bad comes along with that cooling effect, indeed, the more a person understands the worse the idea.

Conversely, this is an awesome idea for people that don't look into the downsides.

So acidfying oceans is a big plus? If we are going to alter the composition of the atmosphere using aerosols, it will have to be done worldwide. Otherwise at best, you will be creating a lot of weather instability.

Now go back and investigate the coriolis effect, and what happens when localized warm and cool atmospheres collide.

Now go back and investigate acid rain. Then look up the water cycle. Now come up with the amount of time needed - remember the acid rain settles out according to the water cycle, atmospheric water cycle is measured in days.

Understand that by eliminating much of the pollution controls and burning high sulfur fuel - another aerosol - this acidification of the earth's atmosphere allows oil and coal use of the dirtiest fuels to be used, and making a claim that they are saving the planet. All the while pumping more CO2 along with sulfuring acid.

It would be nice if there was a quick fix. There is not. All of the fixes so far create as many problems as they claim to fix. They will create extinctions, kill vegetation, destroy infrastructure, and have bad health effects on wildlife as well as humans.

Finally, someone that gets it! This injection BS is not a cure, it makes things worse. To add to your list, acidification of rivers and oceans, leading to extinction of many animals, forest death and general bad health outcomes of humans and wildlife. And yeah, I suppose the huge pumps spraying seawater 24/7/265/millenia will look pretty cool. But even there, the effects on airplanes will be pretty bad.

The part I don't get is has critical thinking been so deteriorated worldwide that people would not think to investigate the side effects of making one thing so important that they would ignore that that thing will make things much worse?

They "Fear" it because so many of them are gay. It's malicious projection for some reason, when few people care who puts what thing where among consenting adults. Weird shit. Maybe the forbiddine nature of it among themselves turns them on.

One thing is for certain - they thing about gay sex much more than gay people do.

But back to the subject. A person with pecuniary interest in traditional oil and coal industries will support aerosol injection. And their likely political leanings?

Two reasons, one is that suddenly, the effects of what we do to the atmosphere become someone else's responsibility.

Second is that they can then start to burn the filthiest oil and coal products that are high sulfur, without pollution controls, and claim that they are helping fix "global warming". So indeed, supporting aerosol injections is a big thumbs up to the people who got us into this to not only continue, but increase their aerosol production.

Even just the aerosols created are a little scary. Salt is pretty tough on things. And it isn't the Sodium Chloride itself. It is what it turns into that is quite harmful.

The shore environment often has Sodium and potassium chloride sprayed into the local environment - the amount depending on the wave action. Maintenance in these areas is ongoing. Skip a year, and you could get in trouble. Ships are constantly being repainted. They look derelict in a few years if you don't.

When I return from vacation, I get my car detailed and get the undercarriage really cleaned up.

And people are proposing this on a worldwide scale. What could go wrong.

Yes, it will be very bad. Part of this whole thing is generating the aerosols that would keep the average temperatures down.

The aerosols drop out of the atmosphere with the water cycle, the rain becoming acidic. Rain is normally a bit acidic with carbonic acid. But the new acids will be hydrochloric acid (with NACL) or Sulfuric acid (with petrochemical or coal sulfur containing fuels)

So we're looking at altering the atmosphere globally for a long time, killing water lifeforms, both on land and the oceans, killing forests, destroying buildings. Harming animal and human health.

I warn people about this, the oil and coal industries will support it wholeheartedly, it will allow them to pump as much pollution into the air as they wish, claiming they are helping the planet.

I know, those stupid fucking 'Murricans, who the world would be much better off if we didn't exist. I mean, every subject in here has you or some or another anti-Americans blaming them for it.

The rest of the world should step up and show us how in your countries, you have solved the problems of manipulative politicians.

Let's start with your country. tovaritch.

The cool part is if we decide that all of the problems of acidifying the atmosphere are a good thing, the future of no emission control, burn the poorest quality coal and petroleum products will start. Pumping too much CO2 into the atmosphere? Fea rnot, we'll just Use more high sulfur coal, and let 'er rip. Eliminate those baghouses and scrubbers and make burning high sulfur oil and coal mandatory. We're savin' the earth!

But atmospheric salt and it's products aren't harmless.

You bring up an interesting thing. People who have no concept of chemistry are coming up with so called solutions that involve altering the atmospheric chemistry of earth for thousands of years without having any understanding of what they are proposing.

They are worried about only using "organic" salt without one iota of understanding that salt is a chemical.

The "Let's inject aerosols" people aren't a whole lot brighter. When you point out the worldwide destruction this would entail, and the thousand or so years it will have to happen, the changes in the atmosphere that will kill things, and the fact that since we decide to inject those aerosols, we'll be able to pump as much greenhouse gases as we want into the atmosphere - the answer is "Well we have to do SOMETHING!"

When a little education would help, probably not as much as we might think. We're trading a big problem for a bigger one.

And in a bit of irony, the oil industry will approve of this plan. They'll be able to use the crappiest, most sulfur ridden bunker oil, and claim they are saving the earth from global warming. Probably even charge a premium for it, since they are doing the lord's work.

Sodium Chloride is definitely a salt. Now, as for the nimby thing, there is a chemical reaction going on at places where this aerosol injection takes place. Like the seashore. The hydrochloric acid aerosol production can and does destroy objects it lands on.

So let's decide that we really really want to inject sodium chloride into the atmosphere on a global scale in order to combat AGW.

First off, it will work after a fashion. Aerosol injection does indeed serve as a sort of anti-greenhouse gas.

One of the first things to understand is that the aerosol injection does not remove Carbon Dioxide or methane, it masks it.

This is all to say that there are people who will have a side benefit of not having to pay any attention to greenhouse gases. The aerosols will mask them. Better not ever stop however, because while we were happily pumping more CO2 without worry, if people think that weather is unstable now, just wait until the last aerosol particles rain out. an almost instantaneous reversion, made worse by us pumping more greenhouse gases - remember? the Aerosols make it possible to ignore the radiative forcing those silly greenhouse gases provide with the savior of the world - aerosol injection.

But should we go down this path, we will be accepting acid rain and its effects. We will have accepted ocean acidification and resulting extinctions. Most shellfish will join the no longer on earth status. We will accept that breathing in Hydrochloric acid or Sulfuric acid laced air is a good thing, and not at all harmful. We will have decided that destruction of buildings and other infrastructure is not a problem. We will have decided that forest and vegetation destruction for thousands of years - probably many plant species will go extinct - is perfectly acceptable.

I'm not certain what prompts these not so bright, so called "solutions". Maybe someone read a page on Wikipedia about anti-greenhouse gases, and caught warm and fuzzy feelings about how they were going to save the earth from AGW. Maybe they read about how cargo ships using bunker fuel helped keep the temps down for a while. Maybe they didn't read enough.

Thing is, there is a lot more than just average temperatures going on. And globally acidifying of our atmosphere for thousands of years, could end up being worse than rising average temperatures. And there is no NIMBY - the effects will be worldwide.