I said any because it wasn’t specifically targeted at you. But is that an incorrect label? I don’t recall seeing you in any of Pruitt threads.
Anyway. You know your article is about an experiment, eh? A first? A couple hundred grams of powder? That isn’t going to cost $1-10billion.
So your quote of the article:
The process does not have to be wildly expensive; in a report last month, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggested that a fleet of high-flying aircraft could deposit enough sulfur to offset roughly 1.5 °C of warming for around $1 billion to $10 billion per year1.
is itself a quote from a study done by Intergovernmental Panelon Climate change.
The intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations, dedicated to providing the world with an objective, scientific view of climate change and its political and economic impacts. Wikipedia
So your quote is talking in the context of a united nation’s think tank’s brainstorming of a theoretical global program that operated across both hemispheres and had an effect across the globe.
The reason why $1-10billion committed by the globe is cheap as hell in that theoretical global program…is because it is. On top of that you have to look at what the comparative losses would be if the earth warmed 1.5 Celsius.