Instead of considering negative carbon emissions as potentially undermining to the proliferation of carbon free energy, the climate change mitigation community at large should consider the portfolio of options that can permanently sequester carbon as an enabler and accelerant.
This week, the Larsen C ice shelf broke away from Antarctica, setting a one trillion ton iceberg afloat in the Wedell Sea. While this event was natural and expected, scientists predict further calving events as temperatures rise, potentially unleashing several feet of sea level rise. We asked members of our Board of Advisors and other experts: Could proposed solar climate engineering technologies prevent or slow Arctic and Antarctic ice melt?
David Wallace-Wells’ new article, “The Uninhabitable Earth,” suggests that it’s game over for the planet. While climate scientists debate the accuracy of Wallace-Wells’ description of potential climate futures, there has been little discussion of the article’s unique framing of potential climate responses.
Geoengineering Research Governance Project (GRGP) Oxford Workshop on a Code of Conduct for Responsible Geoengineering Research – Anna-Maria Hubert
The Geoengineering Research Governance Project (GRGP) recently convened a Code of Conduct Workshop at the Oxford Martin School at the University of Oxford. Read about the objectives and format of the workshop, some of the insights gained from this meeting and next steps for the project.
FCEA is seeking new writing! We are currently accepting submissions for a new Working Paper Series, a Commentary series, and our blog.
U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has referred to climate change as an “engineering problem.” As a conversation on NPR’s “To the Point”, featuring FCEA Co-Executive Director Simon Nicholson, revealed, proposed climate engineering solutions to climate change may bear their own host of problems.
The Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment is excited to be joining thousands around the world in participating in the People’s Climate March, on Saturday, April 29, 2017.
The discussions on Geoengineering Watch illustrate how this new anti-geoengineering platform, grounded on the premise of existing and ongoing climate manipulation, relates to broader hostilities towards experts and concerns about class inequality. We can expect these underlying tensions around inequality to grow under the current administration, thus potentially attracting new people to an anti-geoengineering movement. It’s possible that forming an opinion on geoengineering becomes not an impersonal assessment of a technology, but an identity position.
What has social science research on the public perception of climate engineering done? And what can it do? – Holly Jean Buck
The potentially useful role of social studies in evaluating climate engineering deserves further consideration. The stakes of not understanding and communicating with all the parts of society are higher than ever, and the time is ripe for more collaborative work on environmental futures writ large. I have a few ideas and questions about how to move forward.
We welcomed the response of Wil Burns to our recent article, “Five solar geoengineering tropes that have outstayed their welcome.” Ultimately, in his comments we have not found anything that refutes what we wrote. We remain convinced that the claims that we cited are unsupported by existing evidence, unlikely to occur, or greatly exaggerated.