I see two viable outcomes.

1 The plane sits there until the public screams for it to fly. Politicians
pay for it.
2 A Greenfinger philanthropist pays for it to fly. Having judged the mood
correctly, nobody shoots it down. But the politicians make a big fuss
because it's a threat to their authority. - so they come up with an actual
governance regime (one that actually governs stuff). They probably pay for
it, then too.

A
On 3 Aug 2014 20:36, "Jamais Cascio" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Aug 3, 2014, at 7:56 AM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I think the true governance work has a clear start date.  It's when we
> > have a shiny aerosol plane sitting on the runway, full tested and
> > ready to deploy - with its performance well studied.
>
> So, let’s run a little thought experiment here.
>
> Your shiny aerosol plane (and corresponding systems of planes, source
> materials, monitoring networks, etc.) gets the go-ahead, and begins our SSI
> effort.
>
> Shortly thereafter, for reasons explained by “it’s the Earth’s climate,
> stuff like this happens” an especially large (but not unprecedented)
> hurricane hits Central America. Coincidentally, drought conditions in
> western China worsen, as predicted rainfall doesn’t happen. Again, stuff
> like this happens, and in fact the models that you’ve used and tested offer
> a strong argument that these events (and similar minor to moderate weather
> problems) really have little to do with the SSI program.
>
> Do you expect:
>
> 1) The global public will say “these are tragedies, but the science just
> doesn’t support these events as being triggered by solar geoengineering,”
> and focus on clean-up and carbon reduction while the geoengineers continue
> their work.
>
> or
>
> 2) The global public will be screaming for the heads of whichever
> countries, companies, and universities “did this to them,” no matter what
> the science says, with the added bonus of accusations that this was all
> carried out “behind the backs of the public” because of a lack of serious
> civil society/governance work beforehand.
>
> You’re almost certainly correct that there are people advocating for more
> governance research, conferences, blah blah blah in order to deflect,
> delay, and avoid making hard decisions about both climate and
> geoengineering (of all stripes, with solar/SSI being the lead boogeyman).
> But that’s not the only reason there are people calling for more governance
> work. There are some *very* difficult dilemmas that will arise around any
> kind of geoengineering, especially solar/SSI, dilemmas that can’t be easily
> modeled.
>
> Let’s imagine about another, related, thought experiment:
>
> Your shiny aerosol plane (etc.) is ready to go, but the governance and
> oversight groups decide to hold off for now. Maybe that’s because they want
> more time to study the economic/political complexities, maybe they truly
> believe that the benefits aren’t worth the risks, but no matter: they said
> NO.
>
> And while I’m sure most climate scientists involved in the research will
> be good global citizens and be willing to put this on the shelf until
> conditions change, not everyone is so compliant. You have at least one,
> possibly several, “rogue” SSI projects get underway, run by good-hearted
> people who truly and honestly think that the global oversight groups got it
> wrong, and that they need to do this to save the world. There would likely
> be quite a bit of sympathy from the more compliant scientists, too.
>
> What happens then? You won’t even have the cover of “the science says it’s
> safe” if the governance groups (who, in this scenario, followed all of the
> conditions of letting experiments work) have concluded that the risks are
> greater than the benefits, or that the conclusions aren’t yet clear enough
> to say yes.
>
> Governance isn’t about the ignorant masses stopping the sober, wise
> scientists from doing what needs to be done to fix the planet, it’s about
> trying to defuse and spread the blame and fear those ignorant masses will
> generate when problems (related to the project or not) happen afterwards.
> Think of governance as “desperation management.”
>
> -Jamais Cascio
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to