The limited information now in circulation about negative emissions technologies (NETs) threatens to lead policy makers and other decision makers down the wrong path. IPCC models and state mitigation pledges under the Paris agreement assume widespread use of NETs. However, there is great uncertainty about these technologies’ feasibility and cost. Further, environmental NGOs and climate advocates are largely absent from the growing conversation on NETs, as they consider how to fit this new category of climate response into their communications strategies.
The Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment (FCEA) works to close these gaps, to give policymakers the knowledge of NETs that they need to make informed decisions about mitigation policy and to encourage climate advocates to participate in critical assessment of NETs.
No silver bullet: why geoengineering alone won’t save the planet – Guest Post – David Morrow, Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy at George Mason University
December 10, 2014Keuntungan & Kerugian main-main Judi Bola88 Online di Internet
December 1, 2014New study assesses potential challenges to BECCS deployment – Wil Burns
November 30, 2014Forum – Where does the climate geoengineering conversation go from here?
November 13, 2014‘Uncertainties’ is an understatement, when it comes to BECCS – Guest Post – Rachel Smolker, Biofuelwatch
November 10, 2014“Schrödinger’s SRM”- Guest Post- Duncan McLaren -University of Lancaster
July 29, 2014Is CDR ‘geoengineering’? Guest Post- Noah Deich, MBA candidate, UC Berkeley
July 16, 2014Ocean Iron Fertilization and the Southern Ocean- Hype or hope? Wil Burns
May 19, 2014Wil Burns – Bioenergy CCS and Potential Tradeoffs with Food Production
May 4, 2014Wil Burns – Biochar could exacerbate existing inequalities
April 21, 2014Guest post – Bob Olson, Senior Fellow, Institute for Alternative Futures – A Venture Into Geoengineering
April 8, 2014Wil Burns- Carbon Dioxide Removal Approaches: Long-Term Implications And Requisite Societal Commitments
March 24, 2014
