Elon Musk, the visionary behind SpaceX, has introduced a controversial idea aimed at tackling the climate crisis. However, experts caution that this approach could lead to unforeseen complications.

Taking to X, formerly known as Twitter, Musk proposed deploying a vast, solar-powered array of satellites into Earth’s orbit. These satellites, equipped with artificial intelligence, would have the capability to make minuscule adjustments in the amount of solar energy reaching our planet, potentially offering a cooling effect.

Despite Musk’s ambitious proposal, the public reaction has been one of alarm. Critics are wary of this geoengineering concept, which Musk has reimagined from previous proposals.

A concerned user expressed skepticism, questioning, “Are we really going to let AI determine how much sunlight we receive? What could possibly go wrong?”

Others voiced strong objections, with one commentator asserting, “No individual, company, or government should have the authority to interfere with our global climate,” while another lamented, “Do we really need more people attempting to play God?”

Another posted: ‘No person nor company nor government has the right to mess with OUR collective world climate,’ while one complained that ‘we don’t need more people playing God’. 

Lili Fuhr, director of the fossil economy program at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) in Berlin, called the idea ‘highly speculative’. 

‘Solar geoengineering is inherently unpredictable and could further destabilize our already fragile climate system,’ she told the Daily Mail. 

Musk said: ‘A large solar-powered AI satellite constellation would be able to prevent global warming by making tiny adjustments in how much solar energy reached Earth’

Elon Musk (pictured) said in January: ‘Climate change risk is real, just much slower than alarmists claim.’ 

‘Any future geoengineering deployment would threaten the lives and rights of billions of people, including in the UK,’ she added. 

‘If it were ever deployed, it would not be possible to pause or halt it without risking rapid temperature spikes and an acceleration of global heating. 

‘These highly speculative technologies are a dangerous distraction from solving the climate crisis and should be taken off the table for good.’ 

On social media, many people were reminded of the episode of The Simpsons where local billionaire Mr Burns blocks out the sun forcing Springfield’s residents to use electricity from his nuclear power plant. 

Professor Gustav Andersson, a biologist at Umeå University in Sweden, said Mr Burns ‘had a similar idea some years ago.’ 

Musk was asked how the constellation would ensure ‘precise, equitable adjustments to solar energy’ across Earth while accounting for seasonal variations. 

The SpaceX owner replied: ‘Yes. It would only take tiny adjustments to prevent global warming or global cooling for that matter.’

Musk then admitted that too much sunlight being blocked could see temperatures plummet and turn Earth into a ‘snowball’.  

Many compared the idea with an episode of The Simpsons where local billionaire Mr Burns blocks out the sun forcing Springfield’s residents to use electricity from his nuclear power plant

Professor Gustav Andersson, a biologist at Umeå University in Sweden, said Mr Burns ‘had a similar idea some years ago’ 

Earth ‘has been a snowball may times in the past’, Musk said, although the last time this happened was around 635 million years ago. 

Musk did not specify exactly what role AI would be playing in his constellation of satellites, but it’d likely be responsible for determining when to make the ‘tiny adjustments’ to how much solar energy reached Earth. 

While the whole thing may sound impractical, Musk has already sent more than 8,000 satellites into Earth orbit as part of his Starlink constellation providing high-speed internet to the world.

And the cost of such a project could comfortably be covered by Musk, who is currently the richest person in the world with a net worth of about $469 billion. 

Ram ben Ze’ev, an author and entrepreneur in Scotland, said the engineering side of it ‘may be possible’, but the ‘consequences of error would be immeasurable’. 

In an X post, he said the idea ‘dangerously overestimates human control and underestimates natural balance’. 

‘Reducing sunlight doesn’t only lower temperatures, it directly impacts photosynthesis – the foundation of life on this planet,’ he warned. Even a 1-2 per cent reduction in solar energy could devastate global agriculture, forests, and oxygen production.’ 

Professor Sammie Buzzard, glaciologist and climate scientist at Northumbria University, warned there could be ‘unintended consequences’ of such a scheme. 

Starlink is a constellation of satellites that aims to provide internet access to most of the Earth, particularly underserved rural areas. Pictured, 60 Starlink satellites are seen stacked together over Earth before their deployment, May 2019

‘It shouldn’t be up to one individual or one country to decide the climate for another, especially with the risk of unintended consequences from untested methods,’ she told the Daily Mail. 

‘Some examples of things that would need to be investigated further for this method would be the carbon costs (launching satellites and AI both involve a lot of carbon) and governance.’ 

‘As this method would have global consequences that would not be equal everywhere there would need to be global agreement for it to go ahead. 

‘Ultimately we have a known, effective, method to improve our situation – decarbonising – and we should focus our energy there.’ 

Alessandro Silvano, research fellow at the University of Southampton, said it’s a good thing that ‘large-scale climate interventions are being discussed more openly’.

‘But it’s important to note that geoengineering – whether through solar radiation management or carbon dioxide removal – remains scientifically complex and carries substantial uncertainties,’ he told the Daily Mail. 

‘Any proposal would need thorough evaluation of its technical feasibility, potential impacts on weather patterns and ecosystems, and its geopolitical implications.’

Dimming the sun is an idea already floated, although instead of satellites some experts have proposed injecting reflective particles. 

However, in a recent report, a team warned that such risky ‘geoengineering’ projects could wreak havoc on the weather and actually make climate change worse.