Register for the @NASciences #climateintervention <https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/climateintervention?source=feed_text&story_id=789462099615> reports release event on 2/10 http://ow.ly/IqUuW
James R. Fleming Professor of Science, Technology, and Society, Colby College Research Scholar, Columbia University Editor, Palgrave Studies in the History of Science and Technology, bit.ly/THQMcd Profile: http://www.colby.edu/directory/profile/jfleming/ On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Greg Rau <[email protected]> wrote: > The full title of the article is: GUNS DO KILL PEOPLE: REASONS TO WORRY > ABOUT MORAL HAZARD IN GEOENGINEERING > > Guns do kill people, so does climate change. We don't disarm ourselves in > the face of immoral forces like ISIS, drug cartels, and N. Korea. Since we > continue to immorally emit CO2, might it be a moral hazard not to consider > the use of GE and whatever else might be effective in the interest of > trying to preserve Earth habitability? When are extreme measures in > defense of Earth habitability a vice*? Answer: when research shows that the > monetary, environmental, and societal costs and negative impacts outweigh > the benefits, or when air CO2 is stabilized at "safe" levels by other means. > Greg > *grudging nod to B. Goldwater > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Duncan McLaren <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 3, 2015 12:11 AM > *Subject:* [geo] Blog posting on moral hazard at FCEA > > Andrew asked me to post this to the list. Please feel free to give > feedback or comments - ideally on the FCEA site. > > As FCEA (formerly WGC) introduced it on their FB page: > > 'Moral hazard' is a term used more and more as people talk about whether > or not we should be doing climate engineering research. It is most often > understood to express a concern that if climate engineering research moves > forward, political leaders and citizens will feel less need to act quickly > to reduce emissions of carbon and other GHGs. > Many advocates of climate engineering research dismiss the term 'moral > hazard' as misapplied, and the notion it describes as wrongheaded speculation. > In a guest post, Duncan McLaren of Lancaster University responds that while > "research into climate engineering is justified, dismissing the risk of > moral hazard is not." > He says "we must properly recognize the social implications of technology, > and therefore should already be gravely worried about the moral hazard > effects of geoengineering." > What do you think? > > http://dcgeoconsortium.org/2015/02/01/guns-do-kill-people/ > > > -- > 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.
