Agreed. The primary path dependence and socio-technological lock-in of concern is the very real dependence and socio-technological (and cognitive) lock-in to using the atmosphere as a waste dump for our greenhouse gas pollution.
I am far more worried about socio-technoloigcal (and'cognitive) lock-in associated with current emission practices than I am worried about cognitive lock-in associated with, at this point, purely hypothetical responses to hypothetical situations. My impression is that the research community and interested public has been quite vigorous in challenging framings for various CDR and solar geoengineering scenarios. _______________ Ken Caldeira Carnegie Institution for Science Dept of Global Ecology 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA +1 650 704 7212 [email protected] http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira Assistant: Dawn Ross <[email protected]> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Greg Rau <[email protected]> wrote: > On the other hand, wouldn't it be a good idea to get locked in to some > safe, cost-effective, environmentally and ethically acceptable > socio-technical climate solutions; the sooner the better? Are we really > going to make the risk of "lock-in" a negative in evaluating any potential > action? Or just apply this bar to the actions we don't like to magnify the > their risk profile relative to our favorites? > Greg > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> > *To:* geoengineering <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, August 14, 2014 12:21 PM > *Subject:* [geo] Climate geoengineering: issues of path-dependence and > socio-technical lock-in - Cairns - Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate > Change > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcc.296/abstract > Climate geoengineering: issues of path-dependence and socio-technical > lock-in > Rose C. Cairns* > 27 JUN 2014 > Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change > As academic and policy interest in climate geoengineering grows, the > potential irreversibility of technological developments in this domain has > been raised as a pressing concern. The literature on socio-technical > lock-in and path dependence is illuminating in helping to situate current > concerns about climate geoengineering and irreversibility in the context of > academic understandings of historical socio-technical development and > persistence. This literature provides a wealth of material illustrating the > pervasiveness of positive feedbacks of various types (from the discursive > to the material) leading to complex socio-technical entanglements which may > resist change and become inflexible even in the light of evidence of > negative impacts. With regard to climate geoengineering, there are concerns > that geoengineering technologies might contribute so-called 'carbon > lock-in', or become irreversibly 'locked-in' themselves. In particular, the > scale of infrastructures that geoengineering interventions would require, > and the issue of the so-called 'termination effect' have been discussed in > these terms. Despite the emergent and somewhat ill-defined nature of the > field, some authors also suggest that the extant framings of geoengineering > in academic and policy literatures may already demonstrate features > recognizable as forms of cognitive lock-in, likely to have profound > implications for future developments in this area. While the concepts of > path-dependence and lock-in are the subject of ongoing academic critique, > by drawing analytical attention to these pervasive processes of positive > feedback and entanglement, this literature is highly relevant to current > debates around geoengineering. > -- > 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. > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
