Fantastic points Robert, thank you for your clarity. A clear-eyed analysis of options is essential for the world to make informed decisions.
I was speaking with a long-time friend and influential climate activist last week, and I asked him what he thought would happen when the world crossed 2ºc. He said he didn't think 'things would start to get really bad until 4ºc or more'. I challenged him on this, and pointed out that climate impacts from 1.1ºc are already causing massive disruption. The disconnect between the professionals in the field and the realities of the cost of each tenth-of-a-degree can be striking. As the world wakes up to the realities of SRM, lots of new people, including long-time 'mainstream' climate activists such as myself are entering this conversation. One of the SRM options that should be researched is the planetary sunshade. This could provide the mid-term wind-down strategy for atmospheric SRM, and any sort of Bretton Woods style organization looking at SRM will almost certainly be considering this as a tool in the toolbox. Here's to the importance of balanced research! On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:54 AM 'Robert Tulip' via geoengineering < [email protected]> wrote: > This paper includes the following valuable principles that inform how to > advocate for SRM. My comments are in red. > > > > Following a number of scholars who have worked on moral frameworks for SRM > (17; 14), we propose the following broad principles: _ > > 1. Mitigation (including removals) and adaptation need to be the > primary focus of climate policy. True for the long term but not for > the short term. Also, the use of ‘mitigation’ as a synonym for emission > reduction is scientifically incorrect and should be discouraged. SRM will > do much more to mitigate climate change than decarbonisation will. > 2. SRM should at most serve as an addition to reducing greenhouse gas > concentrations. SRM will be useful for long term regulation and > management of the climate. As well, SRM will be needed well before GHGs > start to go down. The phrase “at most serve as an addition” downplays the > central climate role of albedo and its position as the most tractable lever > to deliver cooling. > 3. Knowledge and implementation of SRM must be administered in the > public interest. This entails that the provision of SRM is organised by a > globally legitimised body, and not based on private interests. _ The > Bretton Woods Institutions, the IMF and World Bank, provide a useful model > for establishing an international climate organisation tasked to increase > albedo. > 4. Legitimate governance processes must be adhered to, and societal > values such as justice and equality must be central when considering the > role SRM research can play in lessening the threat of climate change. _ > Societal > values such as justice and equality must be important, but political > perceptions in these areas carry high risk of derailing a rigorous > technical focus on albedo enhancement. An international agency tasked to > manage SRM can require justice and equality in its sphere of operation, but > not beyond it. > 5. Any decision about deployment should be taken on the basis of broad > public participation. Special emphasis should be placed on underrepresented > and vulnerable communities, such as the Global South and Indigenous > Peoples. _ This is correct. I believe public opinion can readily be > swayed to support solar geoengineering in light of the impossibility of the > IPCC’s latest call in the AR6 Synthesis Report to nearly halve emissions by > 2030. > 6. The research process should be transparent, reflective, and > cooperative (also on the international level), and provide ample space for > offramps, in case certain findings point towards undesirable outcomes of > SRM deployment. _ Mention of offramps is important, but the reality is > that benefits of solar geoengineering, implemented with sound governance, > should vastly overwhelm possible risks. Incremental deployment beginning > at small scale and volume can quantify risks and benefits. > 7. SRM research must aim to create a comprehensive body of knowledge > covering environmental, technical, political, societal and ethical sciences > and properly linking and combining these domains. _ Knowledge > management is essential but easily neglected. > 8. A solid framework for the governance of SRM should be in place > before implementation is seriously considered. This entails engaging in > research and consultations on governance parallel to studying the > environmental and technological aspects of SRM. The Bretton Woods > Institutions offer governance models that could be studied for > international management of SRM. More than consultation, advocacy is needed > to rapidly establish governance systems for SRM. > > > > Regards > > > > Robert Tulip > > > > *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> *On > Behalf Of *Geoengineering News > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2023 11:49 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [geo] Solar Radiation Modification is risky, but so is > rejecting it: A call for balanced research > > > > > https://academic.oup.com/oocc/advance-article/doi/10.1093/oxfclm/kgad002/7081048?searchresult=1&login=false > > > > *Authors* > > Claudia E Wieners, Ben P Hofbauer, Iris E de Vries, Matthias > Honegger,Daniele Visioni, Herman Russchenberg, Tyler Felgenhauer > > *Oxford Open Climate Change*, kgad002, > https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfclm/kgad002 > > > > *20 March 2023* > > > Abstract > > As it is increasingly uncertain whether humanity can limit global warming > to 1.5 degrees, Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) has been suggested as a > potential temporary complement to mitigation. While no replacement for > mitigation, evidence to date suggests that some SRM methods could > contribute to reducing climate risks and would be technically feasible. But > such interventions would also pose environmental risks and unprecedented > governance challenges. The risks of SRM must be carefully weighed against > those of climate change without SRM. Currently, both types of risks are not > sufficiently understood to assess whether SRM could be largely beneficial. > Given the already serious impacts of climate change and the possibility > that pressure from their increasing severity will trigger rash decisions, > we argue that timely, careful investigation and deliberation on SRM is a > safer path than wilful ignorance. A framework of ethical guidelines and > regulation can help limit potential risks from SRM research. > > Solar Radiation Modification, Climate Intervention, Climate > Change, Governance > > *Source: Oxford Open Climate Change* > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHJsh9-PtwYnkoQ_PGiR0ftocfB%3DSxP9UjT0JPNhq97Afm2okA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHJsh9-PtwYnkoQ_PGiR0ftocfB%3DSxP9UjT0JPNhq97Afm2okA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/073401d96003%248d16cb70%24a7446250%24%40yahoo.com.au > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/073401d96003%248d16cb70%24a7446250%24%40yahoo.com.au?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- *Morgan Goodwin* *Executive Director* Planetary Sunshade Foundation [email protected] m/ 530-562-7176 -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CACZBkCX7B915cAA8PcBvLn3baDf%2B5s-kJPCvcj5tQ4zrJ-f8NA%40mail.gmail.com.
