Poster's note : please excuse bust formatting https://www.academia.edu/3869914/Is_Aerosol_Geoengineering_Ethically_Preferable_to_Other_Climate_Change_Strategies
Is Aerosol Geoengineering Ethically Preferable to Other Climate Change Strategies? Toby Svoboda (Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Fairfield University) Published in Ethics & the Environment 17:2 (2012): 111-1351 Abstract.As a strategy for responding to climate change, aerosol geoengineering (AG) carries various risks, thus raising ethical concerns regarding its potential deployment. I examine three ethical arguments that AG ought not to be deployed, given that it (1) risks harming persons, (2)would harm persons, and (3) would be more harmful to persons than some other available strategy. I show that these arguments are not successful. Instead, I defend a fourth argument: inscenarios in which all available climate change strategies would result in net harm, we ought toadopt the strategy that would result in the least net harm. Barring substantial cuts in greenhousegas emissions, we can reasonably expect future scenarios in which all available strategies wouldresult in net harm. In such cases, there is good reason to suspect that AG would result in less netharm than emissions mitigation, adaptation, or other geoengineering strategies -- 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.
