Progress Report on the First Antarctic Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Test
For full background, see FAST 2024: [QR Code / Link]
1. The Crisis Is Now
Click to expand: Why SAI testing is urgent...
2024 was the hottest year in recorded history. Marine heatwaves are killing coral reefs in real-time. Antarctic sea ice hit record lows for the third consecutive year. Extreme weather events are intensifying faster than models predicted.
"Net zero by 2050" is not a solution to a 2024 problem. Even aggressive decarbonization cannot reverse warming already locked in. Active cooling is no longer optional—it is necessary.
The gap between climate rhetoric and climate reality has become undeniable. Global CO₂ emissions continue rising. The 1.5°C target is functionally dead. We are on track for 2.5-3°C by 2100 under current policies.
Decarbonization is not a substitute for global cooling. Decarbonization will proceed over the coming decades, but cannot meaningfully relieve the immediate catastrophic impacts that are being inflicted right now.
Willful Blindness
Click to expand: The disconnect between rhetoric and action...
Scientists hedge with "by end of century" framing while disasters unfold now. Policy discussions focus on mitigation pathways while adaptation fails. The word "emergency" is used but not acted upon.
The climate science community has been socialized into caution. Careers are built on careful, qualified statements. But this professional conservatism has become maladaptive when the house is on fire.
Consider the disconnect: We acknowledge we're in a "climate emergency" but treat SAI research as something that might be appropriate "in the future, if things get bad enough." Things are bad enough. The emergency is now.
Refusing to test is not caution. It is recklessness dressed as prudence—gambling the planet on the hope that emissions reductions alone will be enough, against all evidence.
The Distortion of SAI
Click to expand: How SAI has been mischaracterized...
SAI research has been systematically mischaracterized:
"Playing God" — We're already doing that with 40 billion tons of CO₂/year
"Unknown risks" — Volcanoes have run the experiment; we know more than critics admit
"Moral hazard" — The real moral hazard is refusing to research options while the crisis accelerates
The de facto moratorium on outdoor SAI testing is ideological, not scientific. In 30 years, not one credible scientific objection has prevented a single small-scale test from generating useful data.
The Endless Loop of Unconstrained Modeling
Click to see the circular logic blocking research...
The objections follow a pattern:
Responses to Common Objections
Click for detailed rebuttals...
"Termination shock"
This is a term chosen to evoke apocalypse. As if interrupting aerosol injection for a single day would send a shockwave across the Earth. As if SAI were a bomb with a dead man's switch rather than what it actually is: a control system.
The Earth system responds over 1-2 years, not instantaneously. Operational systems would have multiple levels of redundancy. The "apocalypse" scenario is laughable.
And in any case, this is an argument for testing and research at small scale, initially—not a ban against all tests. SAI's reversibility is a safety feature, not a bug.
"Regulatory framework"
In virtually every case in which systems are regulated, the regulatory framework is constructed after testing has proceeded, not before. This has always been true.
The prospect of a world governing body for SAI being put in place before any SAI testing is a fantasy—and is actually used as another means for imposing infinite delay while the world burns.
"Unilateral deployment risk"
The grotesque de facto ban on all SAI testing increases the risk of unilateral deployment. It does not decrease it.
The greater risk is that desperation drives deployment without adequate research. The way to prevent reckless deployment is responsible testing now.
FAST 2025 is designed to break the 30-year taboo on even minimal SAI testing. The alternative is permanent paralysis.
2. Why Antarctica?
Click to expand: Strategic advantages of Antarctic testing...
FAST is designed to be the least objectionable possible SAI test:
Scale: Starting at tons, not megatons — detectable but not climate-altering
Duration: Pulse injection, not sustained — effects dissipate in 1-2 years
Transparency: All data public, all methods documented, international participation invited
Detailed Advantages
Scientific, political, and practical benefits...
Scientific advantages
The polar vortex provides natural containment during austral winter. Stratospheric conditions differ from tropics (where most models focus), providing novel data. Existing research stations enable logistics.
Political advantages
No nation's agriculture or monsoons at risk. Minimal population exposure concerns. Precedent of international scientific cooperation (Antarctic Treaty).
This is not geoengineering. This is atmospheric science with policy relevance.
Goals of FAST
Click to expand: Scientific questions by difficulty and tier...
FAST aims to answer specific, measurable questions:
Question
Difficulty
Tier
Dispersion: Does SO₂ spread as models predict?
Easy
01
Chemistry: What particle sizes form? SO₂→H₂SO₄ kinetics?
Medium
12
Ozone: What is the actual impact on stratospheric ozone?
Hard
23
Radiative: Can we measure the cooling effect?
Hardest
34
Off-ramps built in: "Stop and revise" is not failure—it's the scientific method working correctly. The only true failure is refusing to generate data.
3. The First Test: Tier 0
Click to expand: The $1M entry point...
Tier 0 is the immediate goal. Everything else follows from this.
Tier
SO₂ Mass
Sensor Budget
Total Cost
What We Learn
0
1-10 tons
$100K
~$1M
Can we deploy and track?
~$1M
Total Tier 0 Cost
1-10 tons
SO₂ or Calcite
2026
Target Year
Tier 0 Budget Itemization
Full cost breakdown...
Category
Tier 0 Cost
Aerosol materials (SO₂)
$1.5K
Aerosol materials (calcite)
$5K
Aircraft operations
$400K
Sensor network
$100K
Balloon systems
$50K
Antarctic logistics
$200K
Personnel & analysis
$150K
Contingency (15%)
$135K
4. Adaptive Timeline
Click to expand: Strategy and scaling...
The First One Ton Is the Hardest
The primary purpose of Tier 0 is not scientific discovery. It is breaking the taboo.
For fifty years, opponents of SAI research have maintained an absolute ban — not because a total ban on testing is morally or scientifically justifiable, but because those who oppose SAI under any circumstances understand the tactical value of absolutism. Any upper limit necessitates negotiation, rather than dictatorial fiat, going forward. Any permitted test invites comparison: "If 10 tons is safe, why not 100? Why not 1,000?" Once they concede that some testing is acceptable, they must defend a specific boundary scientifically — and no scientifically defensible boundary exists that forbids small-scale research.
So they defend zero. Not because zero is rational, but because zero is the only position that doesn't require justification.
A successful Tier 0 test — at ~$1M — breaks this forever. It transforms SAI from "forbidden" to "already done." The silent majority who privately support research gain political cover. Funders who feared the stigma see that the sky didn't fall. The absolutists are forced onto terrain they've spent decades avoiding: arguing about scale, not principle.
The first test is the hardest — not technically, but institutionally. After that, the path opens.
The Path Forward: Tiers 1-4
Tier 0 will succeed. Not because we're certain of every technical detail, but because success means learning — and we will learn. If dispersion doesn't match models, we adjust. If sensors fail, we build better ones. If the first aerosol underperforms, we try another. This is engineering, not prayer. A volcano doesn't need a PhD to cool the planet. Neither do we — we just need to start.
Guiding principle: Maximum safe speed. Delay in proceeding with tests must be minimized.
FAST is a series of scientific tests. If no problems emerge, we scale up. If problems emerge, we adapt, correct, innovate, and press forward. We don't delay without an engineering or scientific reason. SAI will always remain in beta, even as we scale up.
The climate crisis does not wait. Neither should we.
Tiers 1-4 Overview
Tier
SO₂ Mass
Sensor Budget
Total (SO₂)
Total (Calcite)
What We Learn
1
50-200 tons
$400K
~$4M
~$4.1M
Can we detect aerosol formation?
2
500-2,000 tons
$1.5M
~$21M
~$22M
Can we characterize the plume?
3
5-10 kilotons
$8M
~$87M
~$94M
Can we measure radiative effects?
4
40 kilotons
$25M
~$294M
~$322M
Can we validate the full SAI thesis?
~$26M
Tiers 0-2 (Philanthropist-fundable)
~$400M
Full program (SO₂ path)
Tier 4 Cost Breakdown
Where the money goes at full scale...
Decision Points Between Tiers
What we evaluate before scaling...
Tier 0 → 1: Did equipment survive? Did data link work? Were balloons recoverable?
Tier 1 → 2: Did we detect enhanced aerosol? Did dispersion match models?
Tier 2 → 3: Did particle size distribution match predictions? Any unexpected chemistry?
Tier 3 → 4: Did radiative measurements show expected signal? What were ozone impacts?
If something doesn't work, we don't stop — we fix it. That's engineering. That's what humans do.
Aerosol Selection
Click to expand: SO₂ vs Calcite comparison...
The SO₂ problem: Sulfur dioxide has been the default SAI aerosol for decades. But "sulfur" evokes acid rain, pollution, industrial contamination. The optics are terrible, regardless of the science.
Flight trajectories inject SO₂ load first, calcite load second at different locations
Identical sensor coverage for both plumes
Head-to-head empirical comparison under identical conditions
Tiers 1-4: Aerosol choice pending Tier 0 results. If calcite performs comparably or better, it becomes the default. Data decides—not ideology, not aesthetics.
Sensor Network: "Sensor Gas"
Click to expand: Distributed sensor approach...
Traditional atmospheric science uses a few expensive instruments. FAST inverts this:
"Sensor gas": Hundreds to thousands of cheap, lightweight sensor packages distributed through the atmosphere. Trade individual precision for statistical power and spatial coverage.
Tracer nodes: GPS + satellite modem only, 150g, ~$300 each
Sensor nodes: + particle counter + IMU, 500g, ~$8,400 each