scholarly journals How can solar geoengineering and mitigation be combined under climate targets?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 1529-1542
Author(s):  
Mohammad M. Khabbazan ◽  
Marius Stankoweit ◽  
Elnaz Roshan ◽  
Hauke Schmidt ◽  
Hermann Held
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Policy Option ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Negative Emissions ◽  
Solar Geoengineering ◽  
Radiation Management

Abstract. So far, scientific analyses have mainly focused on the pros and cons of solar geoengineering or solar radiation management (SRM) as a climate policy option in mere isolation. Here, we put SRM into the context of mitigation by a strictly temperature-target-based approach. As the main innovation, we present a scheme that extends the applicability regime of temperature targets from mitigation-only to SRM-mitigation analyses. We explicitly account for one major category of side effects of SRM while minimizing economic costs for complying with the 2 ∘C temperature target. To do so, we suggest regional precipitation guardrails that are compatible with the 2 ∘C target. Our analysis shows that the value system enshrined in the 2 ∘C target leads to an elimination of most of the SRM from the policy scenario if a transgression of environmental targets is confined to 1/10 of the standard deviation of natural variability. Correspondingly, about half to nearly two-thirds of mitigation costs could be saved, depending on the relaxation of the precipitation criterion. In addition, assuming a climate sensitivity of 3 ∘C or more, in case of a delayed enough policy, a modest admixture of SRM to the policy portfolio might provide debatable trade-offs compared to a mitigation-only future. Also, in our analysis which abstains from a utilization of negative emissions technologies, for climate sensitivities higher than 4 ∘C, SRM will be an unavoidable policy tool to comply with the temperature targets. The economic numbers we present must be interpreted as upper bounds in the sense that cost-lowering effects by including negative emissions technologies are absent. However, with an additional climate policy option such as carbon dioxide removal present, the role of SRM would be even more limited. Hence, our results, pointing to a limited role of SRM in a situation of immediate implementation of a climate policy, are robust in that regard. This limitation would be enhanced if further side effects of SRM are taken into account in a target-based integrated assessment of SRM.

scholarly journals Trade-offs of Solar Geoengineering and Mitigation under Climate Targets

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad M. Khabbazan ◽  
Marius Stankoweit ◽  
Elnaz Roshan ◽  
Hauke Schmidt ◽  
Hermann Held
Keyword(s):  
Policy Option ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Value System ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Climate Targets ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Solar Geoengineering ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Radiation Management ◽  
Do So

Abstract. So far scientific analyses have mainly focused on the pros and cons of solar geoengineering or solar radiation management (SRM) as a climate policy option in mere isolation. Here we put SRM into the context of mitigation by a strictly temperature-target based approach. As a main innovation, we present a scheme by which the applicability regime of temperature targets is extended from mitigation-only to SRM-mitigation analyses. Hereby we explicitly account for a risk-risk comparison of SRM and global warming, while minimizing economic costs for complying with the 2 °C temperature target. To do so, we suggest precipitation guardrails that are compatible with the 2 °C target. Our analysis shows that the value system enshrined in the 2 °C target would be almost prohibitive for SRM, while still about half to nearly two-third of mitigation costs could be saved, depending on the choice of extra room for precipitation. In addition, assuming a climate sensitivity of 3 °C or more, in case of a delayed enough policy, a modest admixture of SRM to the policy portfolio might provide debatable trade-offs compared to a mitigation-only future. In addition, in our analysis for climate sensitivities higher than 4 °C, SRM will be an unavoidable policy tool to comply with the temperature targets.

scholarly journals A Scheme for Jointly Trading off Costs and Risks of Solar Radiation Management and Mitigation Under Long-Tailed Climate Sensitivity Probability Density Distributions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elnaz Roshan ◽  
Mohammad M. Khabbazan ◽  
Hermann Held
Keyword(s):  
Solar Radiation ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Policy Option ◽  
Mirror Image ◽  
Welfare Loss ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Climate Risks ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Radiation Management

AbstractSide effects of “solar-radiation management” (SRM) might be perceived as an important metric when society decides on implementing SRM as a climate policy option to alleviate anthropogenic global warming. We generalize cost-risk analysis that originally trades off expected welfare loss from climate policy costs and risks from transgressing climate targets to also include risks from applying SRM. In a first step of acknowledging SRM risks, we represent global precipitation mismatch as a prominent side effect of SRM under long-tailed probabilistic knowledge about climate sensitivity. We maximize a social welfare function for the following three scenarios, considering alternative relative weights of risks: temperature-risk-only, precipitation-risk-only, and equally-weighted both-risks. Our analysis shows that in the temperature-risk-only scenario, perfect compliance with the 2 °C-temperature target is attained for all numerically represented climate sensitivities, a unique feature of SRM, but the 2 °C-compatible precipitation corridor is violated. The precipitation-risk-only scenario exhibits an approximate mirror-image of this result. In addition, under the both-risks scenario, almost 90% and perfect compliance can be achieved for the temperature and precipitation targets, respectively. Moreover, in a mitigation-only analysis, the welfare loss from mitigation cost plus residual climate risks, compared to the no-climate-policy option, is approximately 4.3% (in terms of balanced growth equivalent), while being reduced more than 90% under a joint-mitigation-SRM analysis.

The Role of Trade and Competitiveness Measures in US Climate Policy

2011 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Fischer ◽  
Alan K Fox
Keyword(s):  
Climate Policy ◽  
Economic Efficiency ◽  
Carbon Leakage ◽  
Carbon Reduction ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Trade Measures ◽  
Border Adjustments

We review the proposed measures for addressing competitiveness and carbon leakage concerns in recent US climate policy legislation. For eligible energy-intensive, trade-exposed sectors, output-based rebates would initially dampen cost increases; later, border adjustments would ensure that imports face comparable cost burdens. Both measures can in theory enhance the economic efficiency of carbon reduction efforts, but both pose some interesting economic and practical trade-offs. This paper discusses our recent research into the welfare and carbon leakage effects of using output-based allocation and trade measures in conjunction with climate policies.

scholarly journals Complementing CO<sub>2</sub> emission reduction by solar radiation management might strongly enhance future welfare

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-472 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koen G. Helwegen ◽  
Claudia E. Wieners ◽  
Jason E. Frank ◽  
Henk A. Dijkstra
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
Solar Radiation ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Policy Option ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Stochastic Dynamic ◽  
Radiation Management

Abstract. Solar radiation management (SRM) has been proposed as a means to reduce global warming in spite of high greenhouse-gas concentrations and to lower the chance of warming-induced tipping points. However, SRM may cause economic damages and its feasibility is still uncertain. To investigate the trade-off between these (economic) gains and damages, we incorporate SRM into a stochastic dynamic integrated assessment model and perform the first rigorous cost–benefit analysis of sulfate-based SRM under uncertainty, treating warming-induced climate tipping and SRM failure as stochastic elements. We find that within our model, SRM has the potential to greatly enhance future welfare and merits being taken seriously as a policy option. However, if only SRM and no CO2 abatement is used, global warming is not stabilised and will exceed 2 K. Therefore, even if successful, SRM can not replace but only complement CO2 abatement. The optimal policy combines CO2 abatement and modest SRM and succeeds in keeping global warming below 2 K.

scholarly journals Field experiments on solar geoengineering: report of a workshop exploring a representative research portfolio

2014 ◽  
Vol 372 (2031) ◽  
pp. 20140175 ◽  
Author(s):  
David W. Keith ◽  
Riley Duren ◽  
Douglas G. MacMartin
Keyword(s):  
Solar Radiation ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Cirrus Cloud ◽  
Solar Geoengineering ◽  
Radiation Management

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.

Beyond solar radiation management – the strategic role of low-cost photovoltaics in solar energy production

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 211-220
Author(s):  
Felix Hermerschmidt ◽  
Panayiotis D. Pouloupatis ◽  
George Partasides ◽  
Andreas Lizides ◽  
Stella Hadjiyiannakou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Solar Radiation ◽  
Solar Energy ◽  
Energy Production ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Strategic Role ◽  
Radiation Management

scholarly journals Solar geoengineering to reduce climate change: a review of governance proposals

2019 ◽  
Vol 475 (2229) ◽  
pp. 20190255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse L. Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Solar Radiation ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Outdoor Activities ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Radiation Modification ◽  
Solar Geoengineering ◽  
Governance Roles ◽  
Radiation Management

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.

scholarly journals Assessing climate policies: Catastrophe avoidance and the right to sustainable development

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-150
Author(s):  
Daniel Edward Callies ◽  
Darrel Moellendorf
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Solar Radiation Management ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
International Climate Policy ◽  
Negative Emissions ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Radiation Management ◽  
The Right ◽  
Do So

With the significant disconnect between the collective aim of limiting warming to well below 2°C and the current means proposed to achieve such an aim, the goal of this paper is to offer a moral assessment of prominent alternatives to current international climate policy. To do so, we’ll outline five different policy routes that could potentially bring the means and goal in line. Those five policy routes are: (1) exceed 2°C; (2) limit warming to less than 2°C by economic de-growth; (3) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation only; (4) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation and widespread deployment of Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs); and (5) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation, NETs, and Solar Radiation Management as a fallback. In assessing these five policy routes, we rely primarily upon two moral considerations: the avoidance of catastrophic climate change and the right to sustainable development. We’ll conclude that we should continue to aim at the two-degree target, and that to get there we should use aggressive mitigation, pursue the deployment of NETs, and continue to research SRM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document