Hi All
It is amazing that Germot Klepper can publish a paper on the costs of
geo-engineering without asking any questions about the design of the
engineering hardware.
Stephen
On 31/12/2012 23:36, Andrew Lockley wrote:
http://www.sicherheit-und-frieden.nomos.de/1/current-issue-and-archive/2012/issue-4/
Archive | 2012 | Issue 4
Get information on the No 4 of 2012.
Geoengineering: An Issue for Peace and Security?
Michael Brzoska, P. Michael Link und Götz Neuneck
The international debate on deliberate large-scale interventions to
counter climate change is gaining prominence. Two types of measures
targeting different basic features of the climate system have been
suggested. One is solar radiation management; the other is the removal
of carbon from the atmosphere. Particular approaches have been
proposed for both types of measures. Recent research on these
approaches shows large gaps in knowledge regarding scientific and
technical issues, but even more on consequences for the environment
and human societies. This article provides an overview of the main
issues related to geoengineering.
Keywords: Geoengineering, earth system, climate change
Climate Conflicts 2.0? Climate Engineering as a Challenge for
International Peace and Security
This article reviews the conflict potential of climate engineering
(CE) against the background of possible security implications of
climate change. A conceptual framework is used to compare the
technologies for carbon removal and solar radiation management
regarding different characteristics and to assess the causes and
drivers of potential conflict. Although CE measures may possibly
reduce climate-related conflicts, they could also intensify already
existing international conflict structures or add new dimensions of
conflict, in particular if their impacts are highly uncertain, quick,
strong and heterogeneous, where the severity can vary regionally.
While carbon engineering requires large resources and thus may
contribute to resource conflicts, solar engineering is usually less
costly and more efficient, but has numerous anticipated side-effects
that could cause novel conflicts and security implications in the
international system. To avoid serious conflicts, regulative
mechanisms and institutional structures are needed, building on the
ENMOD-Convention that restrains military or hostile use of
environmental modification. Given the high uncertainties, anticipative
and adaptive governance structures that involve stakeholders and their
perspectives are necessary.
Keywords: Climate conflict, climate engineering, security risks
James Rodger Fleming
Will Geoengineering Bring Security and Peace? What does History Tell us?
Ours is not the first generation to ponder geoengineering. Intentional
weather and climate manipulation has a checkered history linked, in
many cases, to militarization of the atmosphere. This paper examines
proposals, practices, and warnings about geoengineering from the Cold
War era in order to derive lessons applicable to today’s situation. In
the two decades following 1945, the new transformative technologies of
nuclear power, digital computing, chemical cloud seeding and access to
space emboldened a generation of scientists and engineers seeking
control of nature and dominance over their superpower rivals. If
today’s would-be geoengineers are seeking security and peace, they
need to study this history.
Keywords: Geoengineering, history, military, weather change
Alexander Proelss
Geoengineering and International Law
Due to the largely transboundary nature of technologies concerned, the
legality of geoengineering ought to be examined in accordance with the
rules of public international law. This legal system does not contain
norms that were specifically developed and comprehensively made
applicable to the research and use of geoengineering. This is why the
legality of geoengineering testing or deployment must be judged
separately for each individual technology on the basis of
international treaty and customary law. Despite persisting legal
uncertainties, there is a good case to argue that a general
prohibition of geoengineering does not exist in international law.
Furthermore, a closer examination of individual geoengineering
technologies supports the conclusion that carbon dioxide removal tends
to meet with fewer legal objections than solar radiation management.
Testing or deployment of geoengineering generally requires that due
regard be paid to the existing rights and territorial integrity of
other states or the areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.
As this cannot normally be assumed in the case of purely unilateral
action, a disputable presumption of illegality exists for such
measures. Finally, the legal assessment of geoengineering to a large
degree depends on how the phenomenon of conflicting environmental
objectives is managed in the future.
Keywords: Climate change, principle of prevention, precautionary
principle, risk assessment
Gernot Klepper
What are the Costs and Benefits of Climate Engineering? And Can We
Assess Them?
Climate engineering is discussed as an alternative to the control of
greenhouse gas emissions because it is perceived that there will be no
sufficiently strong international agreement on effective climate
policy measures and that many climate engineering technologies can be
implemented at very low cost compared to emission control. We argue
that the costs and benefits of climate engineering are so far
essentially unknown and in many cases no adequate concept of the costs
is used. Economic cost concepts are likely to show that the cost of
climate engineering will be larger than currently perceived. However,
many costs will be very difficult to quantify, thus making a full
cost-benefit analysis essentially impossible and requiring a debate
that goes beyond purely economic arguments.
Keywords: Climate engineering, economic cost, unintended side-effects
Sylvia Hiller and Ortwin Renn
Public Perception of Geoengineering
The paper provides an analysis of the present situation of public
perception and develops normative guidance for public debate regarding
geoengineering from a social science perspective. The article includes
a description of the concerns and perceptions of the general public
based on a literature review and a media analysis. It furthermore
addresses the prospects for a potential information and communication
process in structuring future public debates on geoengineering. Its
main target is to provide a protocol for risk managers and regulators
on how to address the concerns of the public and how to design more
effective risk communication programs.
Keywords: Geoengineering, public perception, risk perception
Sebastian Harnisch
Minding the Gap? CE, CO2 Abatement, Adaptation and the Governance of
the Global Climate
The current discourse on Climate Engineering (CE) lacks a thorough
understanding of the complex interaction between CE and CO2 abatement
and adaptation measures. Too often, the debate has become deadlocked
between scholars who fear CE may supersede substantial
abatement/adaptation and those who favour CE supersession for economic
benefits. This paper examines how plausible standards for a legitimate
test of solar radiation management techniques (SRM) change the scope
and sequence of CE and CO2 abatement and adaptation measures. The core
argument is that a “window of responsibility” for legitimately testing
SRM techniques may be smaller and may appear sooner than conventional
wisdom has it.
Keywords: Climate engineering, climate politics, governance,
international cooperation
Alan Robock
Is Geoengineering Research Ethical?
Among the many ethical issues involved in the subject of
geoengineering is the fundamental question of whether geoengineering
research itself is ethical. This article focuses on solar radiation
management and argues that, in light of continuing global warming and
dangerous impacts on humanity, indoor geoengineering research is
ethical and needed to provide information to policymakers and society
so that we can make informed decisions in the future to deal with
climate change. This research needs to be both on the technical
aspects, such as climate change and impacts on agriculture and water
resources, and on historical precedents, governance, and equity
issues. Outdoor geoengineering research, however, is not ethical
unless subject to governance that protects society from potential
environmental dangers.
Keywords: Geoengineering, solar radiation management / SRM, ethics,
governance
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
--
Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design School of Engineering
University of Edinburgh Mayfield Road Edinburgh EH9 3JL Scotland
[email protected] Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704 Cell 07795 203 195
WWW.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
