There is no computer model that can calculate what will happen when a layer of SRM coats our skies. There is no man smart enough to come up with all the variables to put into the aforementioned computer model, let alone be able to accurately predict who the winners and losers will be in the "targeted spraying" campaigns.
However, let's say for the sake of argument that you do manage to predict everything, and the SRM campaigns are underway. You can now congratulate yourselves on helping the US military with its goal to create cirrus cover for defense from space based directed energy weapons and spy optics. Link & Link You'll probably all get jobs working for the Air Force to make tornadoes and hurricanes: Link & Link
The baby steps you gentlemen take today, ensure controlled weather in the future. I oppose this. If would much rather see iron fertilization, tree bombs, or carbon sequestration than SRM. The global backlash from your successful SRM campaign will brand you a villian in the public eye, mark my words. Don't believe me, google "chemtrails" if you haven't already. People are bordering on hysteria over alleged geoengineering covering their skies, just wait till they see the real thing.
And if for no other reason consider this, the entire planet needs sunlight to grow. Why would you even consider blocking the sun? As stated by David Keith, the Amazon showed extremely low river levels during Pinatubo's eruption; so is the plan to dry that bad boy up?
SRM is a dangerous plan, you men are not gods, and your choices will affect us all, which is why you are to be feared and watched carefully.
I intend to shed light on your decisions, and those of the corporate owned public representatives you seek approval from. I also would like to extend an offer to discuss the pros/cons of SRM with any of you, in any format you like.