6 ms·

There are less harmful ways to accomplish it theoretically, but exactly zero of those methods are as industrialized - or as regulated - on the same scale as the

There are less harmful ways to accomplish it theoretically, but exactly zero of those methods are as industrialized - or as regulated - on the same scale as the international maritime shipping industry that already exists. Put the sulfur back in now so we have a few additional years to mobilize a safer replacement.

Carrok 2y ago
This is a completely insane take on this. Akin to saying "You pulled the knife out of my torso, and now I'm bleeding more! Put it back!" Putting it back will certainly cause more harm than just leaving it out.
- deadbabe 2y ago
  You should never pull out a knife until you’re ready to stop the bleeding that will follow.
  - Carrok 2y ago
    Well the knife has already been pulled, and they are suggesting stabbing it back in.
- rafaelmn 2y ago
  Your analogy is flawed because knife wound was the original problem that would be exacerbatedby reinsertion. A better analogy would be having some infection that's somehow preventing a cancer from metastasis - you treat the infection and now you see the cancer spike. Worth risking reinfection to slow down cancer ? Depends on how bad the infection/cancer is I guess.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    Once the knife is out, however, you don’t win points for putting it back in.
    - rafaelmn 2y ago
      But that's why the analogy is flawed - it's dealing with a single problem that gets clearly worse by the action. Global warming and sulphur pollution are two separate (but realated) problems - it's possible that by making one worse you make the other better - and then it's a cost/benefit calculation. Eg. chemotherapy is destroying a lot of your body - but it also kills cancer.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Global warming and sulphur pollution are two separate (but realated) problems - it's possible that by making one worse you make the other better - and then it's a cost/benefit calculation Sure. But I'd argue the case is being made for active cloud seeding. Versus random seeding with commercial vessels with sulphur. Restoring sulphur in ship fuel would sap the mainline argument of a lot of strength. If the ships can have their sulphur back, why not every industry their [insert ask]. It won't be scientifically valid. But it would win a decade of inaction.
- mentalpiracy 2y ago
  Your failure to understand that the knife remaining in your body is, in fact, going to keep you alive longer than if you pulled it out is exactly the problem. Leaving the knife in hurts like hell, but maybe it’ll kill you slow enough that you’ll be able to find help before you die. Pulling out the knife seems right but just means you bleed out quickly.
  - Carrok 2y ago
    > Your failure to understand that the knife remaining in your body is, in fact, going to keep you alive longer than if you pulled it out is exactly the problem. I don’t know why you assume I’m failing to understand that. I’m saying it’s already happened, so here we are.

Carrok 2y ago

This is a completely insane take on this. Akin to saying "You pulled the knife out of my torso, and now I'm bleeding more! Put it back!" Putting it back will certainly cause more harm than just leaving it out.

deadbabe 2y ago
You should never pull out a knife until you’re ready to stop the bleeding that will follow.
- Carrok 2y ago
  Well the knife has already been pulled, and they are suggesting stabbing it back in.
rafaelmn 2y ago
Your analogy is flawed because knife wound was the original problem that would be exacerbatedby reinsertion. A better analogy would be having some infection that's somehow preventing a cancer from metastasis - you treat the infection and now you see the cancer spike. Worth risking reinfection to slow down cancer ? Depends on how bad the infection/cancer is I guess.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  Once the knife is out, however, you don’t win points for putting it back in.
  - rafaelmn 2y ago
    But that's why the analogy is flawed - it's dealing with a single problem that gets clearly worse by the action. Global warming and sulphur pollution are two separate (but realated) problems - it's possible that by making one worse you make the other better - and then it's a cost/benefit calculation. Eg. chemotherapy is destroying a lot of your body - but it also kills cancer.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Global warming and sulphur pollution are two separate (but realated) problems - it's possible that by making one worse you make the other better - and then it's a cost/benefit calculation Sure. But I'd argue the case is being made for active cloud seeding. Versus random seeding with commercial vessels with sulphur. Restoring sulphur in ship fuel would sap the mainline argument of a lot of strength. If the ships can have their sulphur back, why not every industry their [insert ask]. It won't be scientifically valid. But it would win a decade of inaction.
mentalpiracy 2y ago
Your failure to understand that the knife remaining in your body is, in fact, going to keep you alive longer than if you pulled it out is exactly the problem. Leaving the knife in hurts like hell, but maybe it’ll kill you slow enough that you’ll be able to find help before you die. Pulling out the knife seems right but just means you bleed out quickly.
- Carrok 2y ago
  > Your failure to understand that the knife remaining in your body is, in fact, going to keep you alive longer than if you pulled it out is exactly the problem. I don’t know why you assume I’m failing to understand that. I’m saying it’s already happened, so here we are.