World GDP: $105.4 trillion USD

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I don’t get it, why wouldn’t sapphire dust work? Isn’t that dirt cheap to make? And it’s carbon free!
    Seems illogical to add carbon in the form of diamond, to a problem that is mostly caused by carbon?

    • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      The carbon isn’t the problem, it’s the CO2 molecule. I would be really curious if solid carbon in diamond form is able to react with ozone in the atmosphere to make CO2, or if it would be inert, or if it would do something else.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s also Methane and CO, gasses that also contain carbon. I know diamond is pretty stable, but it does burn, and then it creates the gasses we try to avoid.

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          CO is not a significant greenhouse gas. (And N20 is…)

          Are diamond particulates likely to burn if they’re dispersed in the atmosphere?

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Are diamond particulates likely to burn if they’re dispersed in the atmosphere?

            Actually yes, if they enter the engine of a plane they will burn.

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Not quite minuscule, for every ton of jet fuel burned, 2 tons of oxygen is needed, to take that in, about 3-4 ton of atmospheric air goes through the combustion, the volume of that air is quite a lot, and is only sustained because oxygen is constantly renewed. The diamonds will not have self sustained renewal and will be burned up pretty quickly.
                Also being an aerosol increases surface and potential chemical reactions by a magnitude of maybe a billion per unit, so although we consider diamonds to be very stable in their normal form, a diamond aerosol is obviously much less so, and UV light refracted could accelerate break down of the diamond aerosol, into free carbon, which will create carbon gasses. I bet researchers have considered this, but I see no numbers for it?

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I just wonder why not use sapphire dust instead. Doesn’t it reflect sunlight almost identically?

      • Infinite@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        No reactions, just reflections. The premise is “bounce the heat before it can be trapped.”

        The main reason they looked at diamond this time is because it’s very clump resistant, which is a positive for heat deflection.