Please first consider that there already exist financial incentives for these huge aerospace corporations to participate, such as carbon credits. (I would like to promote this in the spirit of carrots, but there are always sticks if needed.) A more altruistic carrot is saving our planet. But money still seems to reign supreme.
Second, not all jetliners are the same, so dusting applications may vary from plane model to model. And we're talking about "heavies" that operate mostly above 27,000 feet. For example, multiple insulated bleed tubes of soda lime mounted along the length of the cargo bay on one model might be substituted by uninsulated tanks in wings of another model. While there are critical differences that affect safety and performance, the overall concept shares these traits:
1) The majority of these flights occur during daylight hours. This is affords the immediate reflective effects of particulates such as soda lime powder, providing some shading both at the time of injection into the atmosphere and subsequently as the powder drifts with wind currents.
2) If soda lime is used, it also provides the same CO2 capture effect as it does when used in medical applications and scuba rebreathers (AKA CO2 scrubbers), eventually making its way back to earth as limestone (calcium carbonate). Approximately 100 grams of soda lime can absorb up to 15 liters of carbon dioxide.
3) In the US alone, the FAA manages over 10 million commercial flights a year. If only 5 million flights of "heavies" flying mostly daylight hours dispensed 2 tons of soda lime per flight, that's a potential 10 million tonsof reflective dust that also absorbs excess CO2. I sincerely doubt we would expend more than fifty billion dollars per year in American skies, but wouldn't it be worth it?
Please note that unlike mining natural basalt, the manufacture of soda lime emits heat and CO2. The key is that we have control over that CO2 and can redirect it. Whether we distribute it onto green plant life or sequester it in basalt, we can work it on or in the ground. The ultimate goal is to reduce it in the atmosphere where it insulates our clearing skies thus warming our planet faster than we can react.
Now comes the critical analysis. I've ordered the first round of test materials to evaluate and record results before reviewing a presumed abundance of data from a variety of sources (i.e. FDA, CO2 absorption research...). Join me?