Flubbed climate test won't deter rich donors from altering the sky

First discussed here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=39969563">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=39969563</a><p>Feels like a hit piece against &quot;rich donors&quot;. The &quot;flubbed&quot; test only ran for 20 minutes over two weeks, hardly long enough to claim it succeeded or failed. The test was supposed to run for months.<p>The test was cancelled because the city officials were surprised that it existed, then they claimed it was unpermitted, then they claimed it was unsafe. The safety issue was rejected by the city&#x27;s own consultants.

Jesus.<p>It&#x27;s not ok to try a little local experiment about micro-climate, because it&#x27;s suddenly &#x27;dangerous&#x27;.<p>But sure, let all the polluters run day and night for decades. Not dangerous, somehow, though they represent billions of times more risk.<p>This recurring attitude, that it&#x27;s harmless to destroy the environment but terribly dangerous to try to fix it, is another of the psychoses that afflict public discourse.