Re: [geo] Fwd: Geoengineering and Capitalism
ing and Capitalism > > > > There's a bit more: > > > > Royal Dutch Shell was funding an ocean liming study > > Steve Koonin of BP chaired an expert meeting at Novim > > And if course there was the infamous statement by Exxon's Rex Tillerson > that climate change is an engineering problem with 'engineering solutions'. > > See pp 77-8 pf Earthmasters. > > > > I haven't followed things closely for a couple of years, but I am not > aware of anything more. > > > > Clive > > > > On 2 February 2018 at 09:05, Daniel B Kirk-Davidoff <da...@umd.edu> wrote: > > The Hamilton reference points to Haroon Kheshgi at Exxon-Mobil as an > enthusiast of ocean liming as far back as 1995 and has having put out a > report on stratospheric aerosol SRM. > > > > Dan > > > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Douglas MacMartin < > macma...@cds.caltech.edu> wrote: > > Sorry, couldn’t leave this alone… I do find this sentence interesting: > > > > The second reason I’m surprised is it seems that the fossil fuel industry > is supportive of GE, given that they fund many GE supporters (Hamilton > 2013). > > > > The only connection I’m aware of between the fossil fuel industry and GE > is that Lee Lane showed up at a geoengineering meeting in 2006. Has anyone > actually had their research funded by the fossil fuel industry? Is there > any support for that assertion? > > > > I’m also not sure what a “GE supporter” looks like, or whether I’ve ever > met one (or indeed, whether such people exist in the scientific > community). I really do wish people would distinguish between “supports > doing research so we can understand it” and “supports deploying it”. > > > > doug > > > > > > *From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@ > googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Daniel B Kirk-Davidoff > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 10:11 AM > *To:* geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; > gunde...@miamioh.edu; brian.peter...@nau.edu; diana.stu...@nau.edu > *Subject:* [geo] Fwd: Geoengineering and Capitalism > > > > Hi all, > > > > I reached out to the authors of that paper on geoengineering and > capitalism. With their permission, I'm forwarding the conversation. > > > > Best, > > Dan > > > -- > Daniel Kirk-Davidoff > 35 Dove St. > <https://maps.google.com/?q=35+Dove+St.+Albany,+NY+12210518=gmail=g> > Albany, NY 12210 > <https://maps.google.com/?q=35+Dove+St.+Albany,+NY+12210518=gmail=g> > > 518-434-0873 <(518)%20434-0873> > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: *Gunderson, Ryan* <gunde...@miamioh.edu> > Date: Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:37 PM > Subject: Re: Geoengineering and Capitalism > To: Daniel Kirk-Davidoff <dkirkdavid...@gmail.com> > Cc: Diana Lynne Stuart <diana.stu...@nau.edu>, Brian Craig Petersen < > brian.peter...@nau.edu> > > Hi Dan, > > > > You’re not boring me and I appreciate your suggestions and comments. I > think this will be become one of the most important discussions of the 21st > century. Though this may have to be my last email so I don’t distract > myself from research too much. > > > > Regarding the intentions of GE advocates and GE as a fringe science: I’m > surprised by your comment that most GE advocates identify as enemies of the > fossil fuel industry. I’m surprised for two reasons. First, this is not a > common theme in the case for GE. The research on framing is fairly > consistent: economics and techno frames are core, though I understand that > there are moral cases too. I wouldn’t be surprised if the frame you’re > pushing catches on: GE-is-a tool-for-climate-justice-and- > opposition-to-it-is-a-reflection-of-privilege. Biotech pushes the same > narrative. The second reason I’m surprised is it seems that the fossil fuel > industry is supportive of GE, given that they fund many GE supporters > (Hamilton 2013). > > > > One thing worth considering is that the concrete intentions of GE > scientists are relatively unimportant. But this requires a distinction > between subjective intentions and meaning-making, on the one hand, and > unintended outcomes and social structure on the other. For example, in the > unlikely case that every current GE scientist that reads our paper were > convinced that GE is a tool for the reproduction of capitalism and > detrimental to mitigation (though from your review of the listserv's > reception, this seems very unlikely), I bet other bodies and minds will > fill their roles for reasons argued
Re: [geo] Fwd: Geoengineering and Capitalism
Hi Doug, Along with Earthmasters, this is worth a read: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0096340214531173 Regarding your other question, our paper does make a distinction between support for research and support for deployment. Note that our paper is more precise than my email exchange with Dan. Take care, Ryan -- Ryan Gunderson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Sociology & Gerontology Miami University rgsoc.blogspot.com On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Daniel B Kirk-Davidoff <da...@umd.edu> wrote: > The Hamilton reference points to Haroon Kheshgi at Exxon-Mobil as an > enthusiast of ocean liming as far back as 1995 and has having put out a > report on stratospheric aerosol SRM. > > Dan > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Douglas MacMartin < > macma...@cds.caltech.edu> wrote: > >> Sorry, couldn’t leave this alone… I do find this sentence interesting: >> >> >> >> The second reason I’m surprised is it seems that the fossil fuel industry >> is supportive of GE, given that they fund many GE supporters (Hamilton >> 2013). >> >> >> >> The only connection I’m aware of between the fossil fuel industry and GE >> is that Lee Lane showed up at a geoengineering meeting in 2006. Has anyone >> actually had their research funded by the fossil fuel industry? Is there >> any support for that assertion? >> >> >> >> I’m also not sure what a “GE supporter” looks like, or whether I’ve ever >> met one (or indeed, whether such people exist in the scientific >> community). I really do wish people would distinguish between “supports >> doing research so we can understand it” and “supports deploying it”. >> >> >> >> doug >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googleg >> roups.com] *On Behalf Of *Daniel B Kirk-Davidoff >> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 10:11 AM >> *To:* geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; >> gunde...@miamioh.edu; brian.peter...@nau.edu; diana.stu...@nau.edu >> *Subject:* [geo] Fwd: Geoengineering and Capitalism >> >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I reached out to the authors of that paper on geoengineering and >> capitalism. With their permission, I'm forwarding the conversation. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> Dan >> >> >> ------ >> Daniel Kirk-Davidoff >> 35 Dove St. >> <https://maps.google.com/?q=35+Dove+St.+Albany,+NY+12210518=gmail=g> >> Albany, NY 12210 >> <https://maps.google.com/?q=35+Dove+St.+Albany,+NY+12210518=gmail=g> >> >> 518-434-0873 <(518)%20434-0873> >> >> >> >> -- Forwarded message -- >> From: *Gunderson, Ryan* <gunde...@miamioh.edu> >> Date: Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:37 PM >> Subject: Re: Geoengineering and Capitalism >> To: Daniel Kirk-Davidoff <dkirkdavid...@gmail.com> >> Cc: Diana Lynne Stuart <diana.stu...@nau.edu>, Brian Craig Petersen < >> brian.peter...@nau.edu> >> >> Hi Dan, >> >> >> >> You’re not boring me and I appreciate your suggestions and comments. I >> think this will be become one of the most important discussions of the 21st >> century. Though this may have to be my last email so I don’t distract >> myself from research too much. >> >> >> >> Regarding the intentions of GE advocates and GE as a fringe science: I’m >> surprised by your comment that most GE advocates identify as enemies of the >> fossil fuel industry. I’m surprised for two reasons. First, this is not a >> common theme in the case for GE. The research on framing is fairly >> consistent: economics and techno frames are core, though I understand that >> there are moral cases too. I wouldn’t be surprised if the frame you’re >> pushing catches on: GE-is-a tool-for-climate-justice-and-o >> pposition-to-it-is-a-reflection-of-privilege. Biotech pushes the same >> narrative. The second reason I’m surprised is it seems that the fossil fuel >> industry is supportive of GE, given that they fund many GE supporters >> (Hamilton 2013). >> >> >> >> One thing worth considering is that the concrete intentions of GE >> scientists are relatively unimportant. But this requires a distinction >> between subjective intentions and meaning-making, on the one hand, and >> unintended outcomes and social structure on the other. For example, in the >> unlikely case that every current GE scientist th
