I'm sorry if I was unclear.
Intent and attribution are of course independent of each other, but both would
be relevant to attempts to secure compensation for post/mid-CE weather
disasters. Of the two, intent will be the far easier one to determine.
Again: Are there fundamental differences in
Jesse, thanks for posting the Svoboda and Irvine article as well as all
four commentaries (including mine!).
The question of intent may be misplaced here, because the standard for
international liability is usually strict, no-fault liability, which would
almost certainly apply to SRM in
http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/100042/1/791917835.pdf
Conclusions
Even though it is frequently said that the climate engineering
strategy has yet to reach technical and institutional maturity and
that it poses both many and extensive risks, and even though
environmental policies remain
Andrew,
Interestingly, similar small scale spills (litres up to I think about 1
cubic metre) of oils and chemicals used to take place (1970's to 1990's)
off the East coast of England in order to understand what happened when
they were spilt and to test clean up methods. These tests were
This thread highlights the central challenge thrown up by these
consequentialist arguments, namely the difficulty (perhaps even,
impossibility) of making politically viable a priori judgements about the
relative risks and benefits of SRM. If we assume that SRM would not be
deployed for 20 to
Fighting global warming by climate engineering: Is the Earth radiation
management and the solar radiation management any option for fighting
climate change?
- Tingzhen Ming
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032113008460#\,
- Renaud de_Richter
