It looks like the article you linked discussing the potential effect aerosols have on storms and the heat gradients don’t really change in the northern hemisphere with or without the aerosols. The southern there is a slight change but I’m not sure what conclusions can be made from that. They also are assuming either quadrupling or doubling of current CO2 levels which doesn’t sound realistic considering renewables and batteries are either cheaper or at price parity in many situations and only getting cheaper by comparison. With most of transportation, energy generation, industrial heat, and space heating greatly reducing their carbon footprint in the next 5-10 years I don’t see us doubling our CO2 concentration. Does SO2 cause problems yeah, but in the low concentrations that it would be at and in the upper atmosphere where it would spend less time raining down to earth it’s better than the alternative. Are there possible strategies of releasing aerosols in certain locations to minimize the negative externalities idk but that’s why the research needs to be done.
That makes sense I hadn’t thought about the added weight and cost for higher speed crashes and such. I wonder if the law could be changed since it is a government backed product just to slightly increase the speed since I think that’s a hard sell since it would greatly reduce the amount of routes you could take. The range I think is also a huge disadvantage since most people only want their car battery to go between 10-90% at the most really 20-80% is most people.