http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000504/full
Relevant Climate Response Tests for Stratospheric Aerosol Injection: A Combined 
Ethical and Scientific Analysis
Authors
·         Alex Lenferna, Rick Russotto, Amanda Tan, Stephen Gardiner, Thomas 
Ackerman
·         Accepted manuscript online: 26 April 2017Full publication 
history<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000504/full#publication-history>
·         DOI: 10.1002/2016EF000504  View/save 
citation<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/exportCitation/doi/10.1002/2016EF000504>
·         Cited by (CrossRef): 0 articlesCheck for 
updates<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/refreshCitedBy?doi=10.1002/2016EF000504&refreshCitedByCounter=true>
Citation tools
·
Abstract
In this paper, we focus on stratospheric sulfate injection as a geoengineering 
scheme, and provide a combined scientific and ethical analysis of climate 
response tests, which are a subset of outdoor tests that would seek to impose 
detectable and attributable changes to climate variables on global or regional 
scales. We assess the current state of scientific understanding on the 
plausibility and scalability of climate response tests. Then we delineate a 
minimal baseline against which to consider whether certain climate response 
tests would be relevant for a deployment scenario. Our analysis shows that some 
climate response tests, such as those attempting to detect changes in regional 
climate impacts, may not be deployable in time periods relevant to realistic 
geoengineering scenarios. This might pose significant challenges for justifying 
SSI deployment overall.
We then outline some of the major ethical challenges proposed climate response 
tests would face to be considered properly socially licensed forms of research. 
We consider what levels of confidence would be required to ethically justify 
approving a proposed test; whether the consequences of tests are subject to 
similar questions of justice, compensation and informed consent as full scale 
deployment; and whether questions of intent and hubris are morally relevant for 
climate response tests. We suggest further research into laboratory-based work 
and modeling may help to narrow the scientific uncertainties related to climate 
response tests, and help inform future ethical debate. However, even if such 
work is pursued, the ethical issues raised by proposed climate response tests 
are significant and manifold.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000504/full













Erik Thorstensen

Researcher

Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences Research Group on 
Responsible Innovation

Mob: +47 408 53 972

Skype: erik.thorstensen




-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to