Suppose we were to cover alarge area of the earth with a highly reflective surface (like aluminum foil). This would reflect a huge amount of heat back into space-could we cool the planet in this way? Or how about painting our roadways white?
No.
It’s gotta be New Jersey.
If we’re covering a State, with Aluminum foil or anything else, it’s gotta be New Jersey.
It’s the right thing to do.
This theory brought to you by the Jiffy-Pop corporation.
If my math is right, Arizona covers .005% of the Earth. Even if you manage to reflect all of the sunlight, you aren’t going to put a dent into the warming of the earth.
You’re better off putting up something between the earth and sun. The majority of energy is already trapped once it is at ground level. The best solution is a drastic reduction in the population and less resource consumption by the remaining population. We know none of it’s going to happen, don’t we.
I’ll go for heat radiating fins reaching into space as a thermal sink, if
talking expensive solutions that won’t happen.
[checks out this thread, reads the above] “HEY! I resent th…” [/cott,rta]
[**The Scrivener ** is squashed and silenced by an enormous roller/dispenser of tin foil, looking like a cross between a leveller and a Zamboni icing machine, driven by ralph124c.]
How about we just set off a few big nukes in some corner of the world we don’t give a crap about? Kick up enough ash into the atmosphere to even out global warming with nuclear autumn—hell, the Russians were developing fairly “clean” nukes for excavation a few decades back, we might dust some off, or try to improve the design, to reduce any radioactive fallout (assuming we want to—we may want a lot fewer survivors in the areas we set off Operation Dark Storm).
What, would you rather have hundreds of millions die, or billions die if the ice caps melt? Two admittedly regrettable but nevertheless distinguishable future environments . 
Can’t we just build little boats?
ETA: Rhode Island would be smaller but easier to wrap.
I was wondering why there were only responses from the peanut gallery so far, but then saw this was posted in the peanut gallery (MPSIMS).*
But I think there’s a fairly serious and interesting question at stake here. What would it take for humans to significantly alter the earth’s albedo, and what would be the consequences.
I remember reading an essay by Isaac Asimov years ago wherein he speculated that there was a specific tipping point for albedo that was a factor in past ice ages. (Not sure, it might have been part of the 70s “global cooling” scaremongering.)
Anyway, I think there may be a serious question at stake. Could the thread be moved, or would it be all right for me to start a new thread in GQ on the same subject?
I did provide an answer.
You seem confident that .005% is insufficient. What percentage would be sufficient? Does the location make a difference (closer to the equater)? Once we did reach a point where we could significantly alter the earth’s albedo, what would be the consequence?
I recently re-read an old collection of Asimov’s essays from the 60s and he was expressly concerned about CO2 and global warming. I know of no essay he did that tilted towards global cooling outside of unusual events like nuclear war.
As to the OP: I am again astonished that people somehow think desert areas are “wastelands” that can be treated with impunity. They are wonderful and beautiful regions that need to be treated with respect and care.
Since the beginning of time, man has yearned to destroy the sun…
I’m all for it.
Earth does have the capacity for self-correction, even for humans. The tipping point just hasn’t been reached yet.
Does that mean New Mexico would get that shimmery disco-ball effect in the afternoons? If so, I’m buying some land in Taos.
. . . I for one, welcome our new Reynold’s Wrap overlords.
Tripler
I’ll fill in the Grand Canyon with construction foam, to provide a seamless, mirror-like finish for the foil.
We’re already doing it with contrails according to some.
In Asimov’s FOUNDATION trilogy, he relates how the planet TRANTOR is covered by a metal skin. Sriuosly, if we start building solar arrays on a large scale, we will be changing the energy absorption of the earth. Any idea if this will reduce global warming?
Has anyone calculated how much of the earth’s surface area has been covered in asphalt and dark-colored roofs?
I’ve read that if only 2% of the Sahara Desert was covered in solar cell arrays, it would generate the earth’s demand (in the economic sense – what people are paying for now) for electricity. Unfortunately, that’s a mighty big desert.