FCEA asked members of our Board of Advisors, made up of physical and social scientists, to comment on the question “Could climate engineering technologies be used to slow or weaken hurricanes? Is this a research question worth proposing or a distraction?”
FCEA is seeking new writing! We are currently accepting submissions for a new Working Paper Series, a Commentary series, and our blog.
David Morrow, in a tightly constructed talk at American University on October 8, examined the arguments for and against a modest solar radiation management (SRM) research agenda. He came down strongly in favor of research, marking the first time that Dr. Morrow has staked such a clear preference.
My comment is meant to express a concern about how “climate engineering” is typically presented, initially at least, as set apart from other kinds of responses to climate change and even as raising “new” or “distinctive” ethical problems. I realise that this situation is changing somewhat, so to try to help it on its way, here is why I personally endorse a move away from talking about “climate engineering” in favour of talking about the many separate technologies that are currently herded together under that label. I realise this makes things rather messy, but I also think that messiness is a perennial feature of climate change politics.
Discussion of Climate Engineering in Social Science Literature: Technofix, Plan B or Ultima Ratio – Judith Kreuter
The wide, in some cases global scope of effects of climate engineering technologies as well as their deep implications for human society make CE technologies prone to analysis and evaluation by social sciences as well as humanities.
It is past time to challenge the assertion that geoengineering, in particular solar geoengineering, would disproportionately harm the world’s poorest and most vulnerable populations.
Perhaps the most welcome (and to my mind, perhaps the most surprising) aspect of the reports is their sustained focus on the governance challenges associated with climate engineering proposals.
We sought responses from individuals engaged with climate policy and advocacy at all levels, via a range of approaches including human rights, security, environmental justice, ethics and economics.
A quantitative evaluation of the public response to climate engineering: Reply to Gardner – Guest Post – Malcolm J. Wright, Damon A.H. Teagle and Pamela M. Feetham
Professor Meryl P. Gardner recently published a comment in this forum discussing our article on the likely public reaction to…
Can Geoengineering save small holder farmers from adjuncts of climate change in Uganda? – Guest Post- Morrison Rwakakamba, Agency for Transformation
If geoengineering can work for Uganda, farmers have to be at the center of it. Farmers interact with the environment…