this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
195 points (94.5% liked)

Technology

70396 readers
3950 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They won't drain the aquifers, nature will replace that much water!

They won't cut down all the forests, the trees will just regrow!

They don't have to cycle the entire atmosphere to cause havoc. Pulling the moisture out in local areas that already have lost aquifers and ice in the mountains is the obvious issue. Plus, you don't know the cost in the long run, it could end up being fairly cheap.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

People were able to (and at some places did) cut down every tree WELL before they had power tools and even saws. Just with axes. The comparison is laughable.

No, massive air moving structures can not be cheap. Neither building nor operating them.