scholarly journals Solar Geoengineering and Democracy

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 5-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua B. Horton ◽  
Jesse L. Reynolds ◽  
Holly Jean Buck ◽  
Daniel Callies ◽  
Stefan Schäfer ◽  
...  

Some scientists suggest that it might be possible to reflect a portion of incoming sunlight back into space to reduce climate change and its impacts. Others argue that such solar radiation management (SRM) geoengineering is inherently incompatible with democracy. In this article, we reject this incompatibility argument. First, we counterargue that technologies such as SRM lack innate political characteristics and predetermined social effects, and that democracy need not be deliberative to serve as a standard for governance. We then rebut each of the argument’s core claims, countering that (1) democratic institutions are sufficiently resilient to manage SRM, (2) opting out of governance decisions is not a fundamental democratic right, (3) SRM may not require an undue degree of technocracy, and (4) its implementation may not concentrate power and promote authoritarianism. Although we reject the incompatibility argument, we do not argue that SRM is necessarily, or even likely to be, democratic in practice.

Author(s):  
Jesse L. Reynolds

Although solar geoengineering (alternatively ‘solar radiation management’ or ‘solar radiation modification’) appears to offer a potentially effective, inexpensive and technologically feasible additional response to climate change, it would pose serious physical risks and social challenges. Governance of its research, development and deployment is thus salient. This article reviews proposals for governing solar geoengineering. Its research may warrant dedicated governance to facilitate effectiveness and to reduce direct and socially mediated risks. Because states are not substantially engaging with solar geoengineering, non-state actors can play important governance roles. Although the concern that solar geoengineering would harmfully lessen abatement of greenhouse gas emissions is widespread, what can be done to reduce such displacement remains unclear. A moratorium on outdoor activities that would surpass certain scales is often endorsed, but an effective one would require resolving some critical, difficult details. In the long term, how to legitimately make decisions regarding whether, when and how solar geoengineering would be used is central, and suggestions how to do so diverge. Most proposals to govern commercial actors, who could provide goods and services for solar geoengineering, focus on intellectual property policy. Compensation for possible harm from outdoor activities could be through liability or a compensation fund. The review closes with suggested lines of future inquiry.


Humanities ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeroen Oomen

The development of climate engineering research has historically depended on mostly western, holistic perceptions of climate and climate change. Determinations of climate and climate change as a global system have played a defining role in the development of climate engineering. As a result, climate engineering research in general, and solar radiation management (SRM) in particular, is primarily engaged in research of quantified, whole-Earth solutions. I argue that in the potential act of solar radiation management, a view of climate change that relies on the holistic western science of the climatic system is enshrined. This view, dependent on a deliberative intentionality that seems connected to anthropocenic notions of responsibility and control, profoundly influences the assumptions and research methods connected to climate engineering. While this may not necessarily be to the detriment of climate engineering proposals—in fact, it may be the only workable conception of SRM—it is a conceptual limit to the enterprise that has to be acknowledged. Additionally, in terms of governance, reliability, and cultural acceptance, this limit could be a fundamental objection to future experimentation (or implementation).


Author(s):  
David W. Keith ◽  
Riley Duren ◽  
Douglas G. MacMartin

We summarize a portfolio of possible field experiments on solar radiation management (SRM) and related technologies. The portfolio is intended to support analysis of potential field research related to SRM including discussions about the overall merit and risk of such research as well as mechanisms for governing such research and assessments of observational needs. The proposals were generated with contributions from leading researchers at a workshop held in March 2014 at which the proposals were critically reviewed. The proposed research dealt with three major classes of SRM proposals: marine cloud brightening, stratospheric aerosols and cirrus cloud manipulation. The proposals are summarized here along with an analysis exploring variables such as space and time scale, risk and radiative forcing. Possible gaps, biases and cross-cutting considerations are discussed. Finally, suggestions for plausible next steps in the development of a systematic research programme are presented.


2021 ◽  
pp. 196-227
Author(s):  
Eelco J. Rohling

This chapter considers solar radiation management, also known as solar geoengineering, which seeks to manipulate Earth’s climate energy balance by reducing the absorption of incoming solar energy. As the chapter explains, this approach spans a class of proposed measures that has been polarizing the community, with some advocating it as an essential means of keeping global warming within acceptable limits, while others see only grave drawbacks and dangers. The chapter describes the two approaches to limiting the absorption of solar energy: measures taken in space, between Earth and the Sun, to reflect or disperse solar radiation before it even hits Earth’s atmosphere; and measures taken in Earth’s atmosphere or at the Earth’s surface to reflect incoming solar radiation. It goes on to discuss the various proposed methods, their potential, and their drawbacks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document