It sounds like you're making an argument for slowly decreasing the aerosols from fossil fuels, so that we avoid the risk of termination shock, rather than an argument for adding more risk to termination shock by adding space bubbles.
My point is that we will have to do some sort of solar management given the fact that we are currently doing it without even putting any thought into it.
Arguably we are currently experiencing a "termination shock" given the move away from coal and other fossil fuels to clean energy. But honestly I don't even understand what "termination shock" really means. Does it matter if removing aerosols happens over the course of a decade or a century when the rise itself is the issue, not the speed of which it happens. 10 years or 100 years is too soon for any ecosystem or species.
