Posted by Eric Posner:
Geoengineering and the law, Part II.
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_30-2009_09_05.shtml#1251945140


   A number of people writing in the comments thread asked what would
   happen under international law if the United States undertook a
   massive geoengineering project that went horribly awry and wiped out
   Bangladesh or some other country. The short answer is�nothing.
   Bangladesh could complain until it is blue in its face but it would
   have no legal claim against the United States. There is nothing like
   tort law in international law; tort principles have to be put together
   from the ground up in treaties. Those treaties are few and far
   between; Bangladesh and the United States belong to no treaty that
   would create liability for a geoengineering failure. Domestic remedies
   would be unavailable because of sovereign immunity.

   This is not to say that the United States would not pay compensation
   of some sort. Americans would have to deal with world opinion and
   their own consciences. But suppose, as I suggested in my earlier post,
   that the United States alone engaged in geoengineering while the rest
   of the world merrily free rode. One can imagine Americans believing
   that if other countries are not paying for the benefits, then they
   should not complain if they end up bearing some of the costs of
   failure.

   All of this underscores the point I made in my first post: the
   potential for geoengineering does not eliminate the need for a climate
   treaty, and instead just complicates negotiations. Ideally,
   negotiators would resolve in advance how the costs of geoengineering
   would be shared, and who would be responsible for harms caused by
   failure.

   A few people asked how I could be so sure that geoengineering doesn�t
   eliminate the need for limits on emissions. The answer is: that is
   what scientists think. But common sense suggests this as well. The
   question is like asking why we don�t just eliminate all environmental
   and nuisance law with the expectation that the government will come up
   with a device that extracts all pollution from the air, rendering
   regulation of the polluting activities of individuals and businesses
   unnecessary. Geoengineering will take place at a scale that only
   governments can afford, and will require close coordination among the
   different governments that engage in it. It is hard to understand why
   people think that geoengineering would avoid top-down government
   regulation, or cooperation among governments, of the sort that they
   find so distasteful about limits on emissions.

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to