This could only be an emergency approach.
It assumes that sunlight is only heat!  Remember that the earth relies on the current level of solar energy to produce energy in everything from plants to plankton.  Shielding the amount of incoming sunlight will cause a different set of enviromental problems.

This sounds interesting, a radical step but perhaps
a productive one. My thought is wouldn’t sulfur
further acidify rain? I’m not a chemist but I
vaguely remember sulfur emissions as being a
component of acid rain.

Was this proposal “toungue in cheek”?

I’m no chemist but to send up more pollutants to combat the effects of the ones already there sounds like a tactic that needs VERY close examination BEFORE implementation.

I understand that refineries and smelters, etc., around the world have invested heavily in filtration systems specifically to REMOVE sulphur from their emissions… because the sulphur that goes up eventually mixes with the rain to pour down on the countryside as SULPHURIC ACID, killing almost all living things it touches! I have to assume that a Nobel prizing-winning chemist would know this, so I guess I’m missing something.

NASA used the area around Sudbury, Ontario, Canada (huge sulphur-belching nickel mining operations) to test equipment prior to the moon landing because it was the closest equivalent to the real MOON topography to be found on earth!

I don’t think elemental sulphur “stinks.” I understand a compound called hydrogen sulphide - a GAS - smells like rotten eggs (there’s sulphur in the yolks).