It's not unreasonable at all and one of many engineering solutions I've seen.   As a matter of fact, there is an irony that polution also throws particulate matter into the atmosphere as it is and has likely to  have mitigated the warming somewhat.    Two environmental goals that seem to be opposed to each other.  

Human engineering has improved, but we're a long ways away from forecasting every environmental consequence to a human behaviors.    It may affect a neighborhood, If it's a major river system- several states, If it's atmopheric problem it could include nations.       And on it goes.   But trying to adjust global climate changes, it wiil be extremely hard to know all the consequences.

So we agree it's a problem, which is a good start.    It's clear you aren't alone in your skepticism, so spending and urgency still seems to be a long ways away.   We simply don't have the technology to 'solve' the problem, let alone get international consensus.   In the meantime ..