Cloud-forming isoprene and terpenes from crops may drastically improve climate

Here's a summary of the themes discussed in the Hacker News thread, with direct quotes:

Geoengineering vs. Emission Reduction

A central tension in the discussion revolves around the necessity and advisability of geoengineering as an alternative or supplement to traditional emissions reduction strategies. Some users express skepticism about geoengineering, framing it as a distraction from the fundamental need to cut emissions, while others see it as a potentially necessary, albeit risky, pursuit given the urgency of the climate crisis.

"It really does seem like it’s going to be impossible to stop rich lunatics from having a go at geoengineering instead of just actually helping to slash emissions." - bananapub
"The word just here hides a lot of complexity and difficult tradeoffs." - ch4s3
"We’re not putting out the fire by putting the wood back in a pile." - zemvpferreira
"There’s obviously some need to experiment to see if we can find solutions, but historically our track record for engineering complex systems has not been great." - sorcerer-mar
"Cut carbon emissions to zero tomorrow and we’re still in a great deal of trouble. Earth is a lagging system and the damage has been done 10 times over. I don’t blame anyone for looking at radical solutions." - zemvpferreira

The Role and Obligation of Wealthy Individuals

The discussion vigorously debates the disproportionate impact of different socioeconomic groups on carbon emissions and their respective obligations to address climate change. There's a clear sentiment that the wealthy have a larger per capita footprint and thus a greater responsibility, though the effectiveness of targeting individual wealthy emissions versus systemic issues is also questioned.

"Don't know what rich assholes have to do with it, when all things I've seen proposed hurt poor people the most. Make meat unaffordable, make private transportation unaffordable, make travelling by plane unaffordable, make new clothes unaffordable, and the list goes on forever." - mslansn
"Do you think carbon emissions are coming from poor people’s consumption?" - tonyedgecombe
"Even in the US only half the population will fly in any year and you can be sure it’s not the poorer half." - tonyedgecombe
"Yes. Poorer people buy things made overseas that requires a lot of shipping, and are lower quality that require more frequent replacement. They tend to have more children. They usually have more polluting energy sources. And there are many orders of magnitude more of them than rich people. None of this is their fault, but ignoring it isn't good either." - throwaway5752
"The numbers are what they are. Rich people have much greater obligation to reduce their emissions. They benefit most from economic activity and they cause the most emissions per capita." - throwaway5752
"MildlySerious: That's exactly what rich assholes have to do with it. Why do you believe all the consequence falls onto the working class and the poorest, when the richest have per capita the largest emissions, by whole orders of magnitude?" - MildlySerious
"IncreasePosts: Who cares about per capita emissions? Billionaires could have 1000x the emissions as normal people, but there are so few of them, cutting their emissions down to zero would have absolutely no impact on climate change." - IncreasePosts
"What do you suppose is the net worth of the people spearheading efforts in solar power and electric vehicles?" - zahlman

The Complexity of "Just Slashing Emissions"

Several participants highlight that simply "slashing emissions" is not a straightforward solution and involves difficult trade-offs, particularly for lower-income populations. The idea that climate policies might disproportionately burden the poor is a recurring point.

"The word just here hides a lot of complexity and difficult tradeoffs." - ch4s3
"Don't know what rich assholes have to do with it, when all things I've seen proposed hurt poor people the most. Make meat unaffordable, make private transportation unaffordable, make travelling by plane unaffordable, make new clothes unaffordable, and the list goes on forever." - mslansn
"MildlySerious: That's exactly what rich assholes have to do with it. Why do you believe all the consequence falls onto the working class and the poorest, when the richest have per capita the largest emissions, by whole orders of magnitude? Yeah, the changes required are systemic and go from the top all the way to the bottom, and the things you mention are part of that process, but pricing people out of everything without offering an off-ramp is sadistic bullshit, and the only reason it's a thing is because rich people and stock prices have more representation in politics than the poor and the environment." - MildlySerious

The Impact of Population Growth and Individual Actions

A side discussion emerges regarding the carbon intensity of having children and the broader impact of population versus individual consumption. While one user highlights procreation as a significant carbon act, another user questions the focus on this and suggests that all life carries a carbon impact and that historical climate changes have occurred without human intervention.

"Having a child is on of the most carbon intensive actions any given person can make." - throwaway5752
"What about continuing to live at all? That is a decision people make every moment of the day and are not being held accountable for it at all." - adolph
"If there were zero people tomorrow there would be still be an ongoing problem for the climate from the changes wreaked already." - adolph
"throwaway5752: I indelicately started a contentious topic that didn't have to exist. If I were given a fresh chance, I'd have just said that carbon emissions and the changes they are causing to the planet are a bigger problem than any single economic class or nation." - throwaway5752

The Mechanics and Misunderstandings of Clouds and Emissions

There's a technical digression into the properties of different cloud types and their effect on Earth's temperature, as well as contributions to global warming. This also touches on the emissions generated by various sources, including aviation.

"This is exactly backwards from what I would think: 'Bright ones at low altitudes generally reflect solar energy away, whereas wispier ones up to 20,000 feet tend to trap heat.'. I would have guessed high ones reflect it before it gets lower into the atmosphere." - fred_is_fred
"You might be surprised to learn how much global warming impact from jet aircraft is actually from creating "high-up wispy clouds" in the form of contrails (which are just water vapor)." - jvanderbot
"pfdietz: Contrails condense from water vapor, but are not themselves water vapor." - pfdietz
"The whispey ones are largely transparent to incoming shortwave radiation but largely opaque to outgoing longwave radiation. You just need to put on your ~10 micron wavelength goggles." - roter
"Industrial production of isoprene is about 800,000 tons/year. Global emission from plants of the chemical is about 600 million tons/year." - pfdietz