Solar geoengineering, also known as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), has been proposed to alte... more Solar geoengineering, also known as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), has been proposed to alter Earth’s radiative balance to reduce the effects of anthropogenic climate change. SRM has been identified as a research priority, as it has been shown to effectively reduce surface temperatures, while substantial uncertainties remain around side effects and impacts. Global modeling studies of SRM have often relied on idealized scenarios to understand the physical processes of interventions and their widespread impacts. These extreme or idealized scenarios are not directly policy-relevant and are often physically implausible (such as imposing global solar reduction to counter the warming of an instantaneous quadrupling of CO2). The climatic and ecological impacts of politically relevant and potentially plausible SRM approaches have rarely been modeled and assessed. Nevertheless, commentators and policymakers often falsely assume that idealized or extreme scenarios are proposed solutions ...
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SR... more Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM can be drawn from situations where citizens are empowered to act unilaterally in crises such as stopping trains, deploying fire hoses, and using lethal force for self-defence. The question arises: could citizens ethically and responsibly conduct SRM? To explore philanthropic geoengineering, issues of justifiability and legitimacy are examined in various scenarios: Greenfinger, Billionaires' Club, Crowdfunding, Social Movement, and Technocrats. The governance, support, rules & laws, and informed & effective decision-making in these scenarios are evaluated through discussions of legitimacy types: normative, descriptive, rational-legal, and output-input lrespectively. In conclusion, legitimacy is neither guaranteed nor impossiblebut particular accountability and stability problems arise in the lone-actor Greenfinger model and loosely-structured crowdfunded movements. However, there is some merit to Technocrats, particularly when overseen by external funders. Blending various approaches appears to offer significant benefits. Finally, a set of criteria for legitimacy is proposed.
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SR... more Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM can be drawn from situations where citizens are empowered to act unilaterally in crises such as stopping trains, deploying fire hoses, and using lethal force for self-defence. The question arises: could citizens ethically and responsibly conduct SRM? To explore philanthropic geoengineering, issues of justifiability and legitimacy are examined in various scenarios: Greenfinger, Billionaires' Club, Crowdfunding, Social Movement, and Technocrats. The governance, support, rules & laws, and informed & effective decision-making in these scenarios are evaluated through discussions of legitimacy types: normative, descriptive, rational-legal, and output-input lrespectively. In conclusion, legitimacy is neither guaranteed nor impossiblebut particular accountability and stability problems arise in the lone-actor Greenfinger model and loosely-structured crowdfunded movements. However, there is some merit to Technocrats, particularly when overseen by external funders. Blending various approaches appears to offer significant benefits. Finally, a set of criteria for legitimacy is proposed.
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid ... more Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid ... more Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid ... more Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth's climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated "Greenfinger" individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited subset of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare-each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) is at pilot scale. Air cooling and liquefaction stores energy; r... more Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) is at pilot scale. Air cooling and liquefaction stores energy; reheating revaporises the air at pressure, powering a turbine or engine (Ameel et al., 2013). Liquefaction requires water & CO2 removal, preventing ice fouling. This paper proposes subsequent geological storage of this CO2 - offering a novel Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) by-product, for the energy storage industry. It additionally assesses the scale constraint and economic opportunity offered by implementing this CDR approach. Similarly, established Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) uses air compression and subsequent expansion. CAES could also add CO2scrubbing and subsequent storage, at extra cost. CAES stores fewer joules per kilogram of air than LAES - potentially scrubbing more CO2 per joule stored. Operational LAES/CAES technologies cannot offer full-scale CDR this century (Stocker et al., 2014), yet they could offer around 4% of projected CO2 disposals for LAES and < 25% for cu...
Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) is a proposed Negative Emissions Technology (NET) to remove at... more Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) is a proposed Negative Emissions Technology (NET) to remove atmospheric CO2 through the dispersion of alkaline materials (e.g.: calcium hydroxide, slaked lime, SL) into seawater, simultaneously counteracting ocean acidification. This study considers aircraft discharge of SL and its consequent dry deposition, extending to the marine environment a technique used in freshwater. A feasibility analysis assesses potential, costs, benefits, and disadvantages, considering scenarios with different assumptions on aircraft size, discharge height and duration, and wind conditions. Due to the small size of SL particles (median diameter 9 μm), the dispersion from aircraft is highly enhanced by wind drift; the smallest SL particles may drift thousands of kilometres, especially if discharged from elevated altitudes. This could pose problems related to powders particles settling on remote lands. Although calcium hydroxide maximum concentration into water (from 0.01 to 82 mg L-1) is for almost all the scenarios lower than the most stringent threshold for the ecosystem impacts on a 96-h exposure, the ecologically sensitive sea surface microlayer (SML) should be considered in detail. The high CO2 emissions of the Landing to Take-Off Cycle (LTO) of the aircraft and their limited payload lead to a significant CO2 penalty, ranging in analysed scenarios between 28% and 77% of the CO2 removal potential; very fast discharge could reduce the penalty to 11% - 32%. Preliminary cost analysis shows that the cost of the SL discharge through aircraft is high, between € 30 and € 1846 per ton of CO2 removed (neglecting the lime cost), substantially higher than the cost for discharge by surface vessels resulting from previous studies, which restricts the practical use of this strategy.
Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely disc... more Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely discussed as a strategy to reduce harm from Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) . One postulated geoengineering scenario involves a ‘Rogue State’ , acting unilaterally to commence geoengineering in defiance of wider opinion. Cost estimates for geoengineering by Solar Radiation Management (SRM) place geoengineering at a comparable level in the public finances to the provision of major national infrastructure projects (and similar investments) when the costs of construction, ownership and operation are considered using as close an approximation as possible of Whole Life Costing (WLC). Accordingly, we consider whether (at the scale of an individual nation state) individual adaptation programmes can favourably be compared to SRM geoengineering. We consider in detail three examples: a major dam, a city-scale flood defence scheme, and a healthcare scheme to counter an insect-vectored disease. In all cases, we find that a global SRM programme may compare favourably on cost-benefit grounds. We accordingly suggest that an individual state may have a rational reason to geoengineer the entire planet, as the result of a single-project cost-benefit analysis. Accordingly, we find strong support on economic grounds for the validity of the ‘rogue state’ framing, and extend this to consider a ‘rogue mayor’, official, or politician alternative.
Geoengineering has been proposed to deal partially with the consequences of anthropogenic global ... more Geoengineering has been proposed to deal partially with the consequences of anthropogenic global warming. This is composed of two strands - fast acting, incomplete but inexpensive solar radiation management; and carbon dioxide removal, which (if enacted quickly) has the potential to be a complete solution. We propose a system of smart contracts, executed and made transparent by the blockchain, to provide an economically and environmentally complete solution to carbon emissions at the point of combustion. This will integrate CDR futures contracts and matched SRM contracts to ensure that all emissions are fully and transactionally disposed of at the moment of release. Specifically, we suggest use of an SRM ‘bridge’ contract, to counter the warming caused between CDR economic activity being undertaken, and the resultant drawdown of carbon occurring.
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global wa... more Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is one proposed method, reliant on lofting material into the stratosphere. Engineering reviews related to this technology approach have been sparse, with most major primary analyses now at least five years old. We attempt to bridge this gap—with a short, qualitative review of recent developments in various fields of engineering that have potential applicability to SAI. Our analysis shows that a new conventional aircraft design is still likely to be the most dependable and affordable technology solution (cost estimates start around $1000–1500 per ton lofted), with hybrid or vacuum airships a potential challenger. Rockets, gas guns and MAGLEV/coilguns show some potential—although they lack the inherent level-flight capability that would be needed for direct aerosol distribution (versus distribution of gaseous precursors), without substanti...
Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global ... more Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (Shepherd, 2009; National Research Council, 2015). Solar Radiation Management geoengineering (SRM) offers relatively inexpensive, rapid temperature control. However, this low cost leads to a risk of controversial unilateral intervention—the “free-driver” problem (Weitzman, 2015). Consequently, this creates a risk of counter-geoengineering (deliberate warming) (Parker et al., 2018), resulting in governance challenges (Svoboda, 2017) akin to an arms race. Free-driver deployment scenarios previously considered include the rogue state, Greenfinger (Bodansky, 2013), or power blocs (Ricke et al., 2013), implying disagreement and conflict. We propose a novel distributed governance model of consensually-constrained unilateralism: Countries’ authority is limited to each state’s fraction of the maximum realistic intervention (e.g., pre-industrial temperature). We suggest a division o...
Solar geoengineering, also known as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), has been proposed to alte... more Solar geoengineering, also known as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), has been proposed to alter Earth’s radiative balance to reduce the effects of anthropogenic climate change. SRM has been identified as a research priority, as it has been shown to effectively reduce surface temperatures, while substantial uncertainties remain around side effects and impacts. Global modeling studies of SRM have often relied on idealized scenarios to understand the physical processes of interventions and their widespread impacts. These extreme or idealized scenarios are not directly policy-relevant and are often physically implausible (such as imposing global solar reduction to counter the warming of an instantaneous quadrupling of CO2). The climatic and ecological impacts of politically relevant and potentially plausible SRM approaches have rarely been modeled and assessed. Nevertheless, commentators and policymakers often falsely assume that idealized or extreme scenarios are proposed solutions ...
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SR... more Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM can be drawn from situations where citizens are empowered to act unilaterally in crises such as stopping trains, deploying fire hoses, and using lethal force for self-defence. The question arises: could citizens ethically and responsibly conduct SRM? To explore philanthropic geoengineering, issues of justifiability and legitimacy are examined in various scenarios: Greenfinger, Billionaires&#39; Club, Crowdfunding, Social Movement, and Technocrats. The governance, support, rules &amp; laws, and informed &amp; effective decision-making in these scenarios are evaluated through discussions of legitimacy types: normative, descriptive, rational-legal, and output-input lrespectively. In conclusion, legitimacy is neither guaranteed nor impossiblebut particular accountability and stability problems arise in the lone-actor Greenfinger model and loosely-structured crowdfunded movements. However, there is some merit to Technocrats, particularly when overseen by external funders. Blending various approaches appears to offer significant benefits. Finally, a set of criteria for legitimacy is proposed.
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SR... more Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM can be drawn from situations where citizens are empowered to act unilaterally in crises such as stopping trains, deploying fire hoses, and using lethal force for self-defence. The question arises: could citizens ethically and responsibly conduct SRM? To explore philanthropic geoengineering, issues of justifiability and legitimacy are examined in various scenarios: Greenfinger, Billionaires' Club, Crowdfunding, Social Movement, and Technocrats. The governance, support, rules & laws, and informed & effective decision-making in these scenarios are evaluated through discussions of legitimacy types: normative, descriptive, rational-legal, and output-input lrespectively. In conclusion, legitimacy is neither guaranteed nor impossiblebut particular accountability and stability problems arise in the lone-actor Greenfinger model and loosely-structured crowdfunded movements. However, there is some merit to Technocrats, particularly when overseen by external funders. Blending various approaches appears to offer significant benefits. Finally, a set of criteria for legitimacy is proposed.
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid ... more Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid ... more Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid ... more Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth's climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated "Greenfinger" individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited subset of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare-each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) is at pilot scale. Air cooling and liquefaction stores energy; r... more Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) is at pilot scale. Air cooling and liquefaction stores energy; reheating revaporises the air at pressure, powering a turbine or engine (Ameel et al., 2013). Liquefaction requires water & CO2 removal, preventing ice fouling. This paper proposes subsequent geological storage of this CO2 - offering a novel Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) by-product, for the energy storage industry. It additionally assesses the scale constraint and economic opportunity offered by implementing this CDR approach. Similarly, established Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) uses air compression and subsequent expansion. CAES could also add CO2scrubbing and subsequent storage, at extra cost. CAES stores fewer joules per kilogram of air than LAES - potentially scrubbing more CO2 per joule stored. Operational LAES/CAES technologies cannot offer full-scale CDR this century (Stocker et al., 2014), yet they could offer around 4% of projected CO2 disposals for LAES and < 25% for cu...
Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) is a proposed Negative Emissions Technology (NET) to remove at... more Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) is a proposed Negative Emissions Technology (NET) to remove atmospheric CO2 through the dispersion of alkaline materials (e.g.: calcium hydroxide, slaked lime, SL) into seawater, simultaneously counteracting ocean acidification. This study considers aircraft discharge of SL and its consequent dry deposition, extending to the marine environment a technique used in freshwater. A feasibility analysis assesses potential, costs, benefits, and disadvantages, considering scenarios with different assumptions on aircraft size, discharge height and duration, and wind conditions. Due to the small size of SL particles (median diameter 9 μm), the dispersion from aircraft is highly enhanced by wind drift; the smallest SL particles may drift thousands of kilometres, especially if discharged from elevated altitudes. This could pose problems related to powders particles settling on remote lands. Although calcium hydroxide maximum concentration into water (from 0.01 to 82 mg L-1) is for almost all the scenarios lower than the most stringent threshold for the ecosystem impacts on a 96-h exposure, the ecologically sensitive sea surface microlayer (SML) should be considered in detail. The high CO2 emissions of the Landing to Take-Off Cycle (LTO) of the aircraft and their limited payload lead to a significant CO2 penalty, ranging in analysed scenarios between 28% and 77% of the CO2 removal potential; very fast discharge could reduce the penalty to 11% - 32%. Preliminary cost analysis shows that the cost of the SL discharge through aircraft is high, between € 30 and € 1846 per ton of CO2 removed (neglecting the lime cost), substantially higher than the cost for discharge by surface vessels resulting from previous studies, which restricts the practical use of this strategy.
Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely disc... more Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely discussed as a strategy to reduce harm from Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) . One postulated geoengineering scenario involves a ‘Rogue State’ , acting unilaterally to commence geoengineering in defiance of wider opinion. Cost estimates for geoengineering by Solar Radiation Management (SRM) place geoengineering at a comparable level in the public finances to the provision of major national infrastructure projects (and similar investments) when the costs of construction, ownership and operation are considered using as close an approximation as possible of Whole Life Costing (WLC). Accordingly, we consider whether (at the scale of an individual nation state) individual adaptation programmes can favourably be compared to SRM geoengineering. We consider in detail three examples: a major dam, a city-scale flood defence scheme, and a healthcare scheme to counter an insect-vectored disease. In all cases, we find that a global SRM programme may compare favourably on cost-benefit grounds. We accordingly suggest that an individual state may have a rational reason to geoengineer the entire planet, as the result of a single-project cost-benefit analysis. Accordingly, we find strong support on economic grounds for the validity of the ‘rogue state’ framing, and extend this to consider a ‘rogue mayor’, official, or politician alternative.
Geoengineering has been proposed to deal partially with the consequences of anthropogenic global ... more Geoengineering has been proposed to deal partially with the consequences of anthropogenic global warming. This is composed of two strands - fast acting, incomplete but inexpensive solar radiation management; and carbon dioxide removal, which (if enacted quickly) has the potential to be a complete solution. We propose a system of smart contracts, executed and made transparent by the blockchain, to provide an economically and environmentally complete solution to carbon emissions at the point of combustion. This will integrate CDR futures contracts and matched SRM contracts to ensure that all emissions are fully and transactionally disposed of at the moment of release. Specifically, we suggest use of an SRM ‘bridge’ contract, to counter the warming caused between CDR economic activity being undertaken, and the resultant drawdown of carbon occurring.
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global wa... more Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is one proposed method, reliant on lofting material into the stratosphere. Engineering reviews related to this technology approach have been sparse, with most major primary analyses now at least five years old. We attempt to bridge this gap—with a short, qualitative review of recent developments in various fields of engineering that have potential applicability to SAI. Our analysis shows that a new conventional aircraft design is still likely to be the most dependable and affordable technology solution (cost estimates start around $1000–1500 per ton lofted), with hybrid or vacuum airships a potential challenger. Rockets, gas guns and MAGLEV/coilguns show some potential—although they lack the inherent level-flight capability that would be needed for direct aerosol distribution (versus distribution of gaseous precursors), without substanti...
Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global ... more Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (Shepherd, 2009; National Research Council, 2015). Solar Radiation Management geoengineering (SRM) offers relatively inexpensive, rapid temperature control. However, this low cost leads to a risk of controversial unilateral intervention—the “free-driver” problem (Weitzman, 2015). Consequently, this creates a risk of counter-geoengineering (deliberate warming) (Parker et al., 2018), resulting in governance challenges (Svoboda, 2017) akin to an arms race. Free-driver deployment scenarios previously considered include the rogue state, Greenfinger (Bodansky, 2013), or power blocs (Ricke et al., 2013), implying disagreement and conflict. We propose a novel distributed governance model of consensually-constrained unilateralism: Countries’ authority is limited to each state’s fraction of the maximum realistic intervention (e.g., pre-industrial temperature). We suggest a division o...
Geoengineering, the deliberate modification of the climate system, has been discussed as a respon... more Geoengineering, the deliberate modification of the climate system, has been discussed as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).
Many religions oblige followers to make formal or informal contributions of wealth or income. In some cases these religious laws are incorporated into statute. Resulting financial flows are globally significant (USA=$114.90bn), and comfortably exceed minimum funding requirements for geoengineering.
Despite application of the law to climate change generally 4 , a literature review reveals no in-depth consideration of religiously-obligated funding of geoengineering – although there is limited discussion of disciplinary overlap.
We therefore appraise both voluntary and legally-mandated religious funding for compatibility with geoengineering - finding a viable case across several religions. Accordingly, we alert the geoengineering research community to the governance challenges posed by this previously-overlooked funding stream.
Abstract
Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely disc... more Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely discussed as a strategy to reduce harm from Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) . One postulated geoengineering scenario involves a ‘Rogue State’ , acting unilaterally to commence geoengineering in defiance of wider opinion. Cost estimates for geoengineering by Solar Radiation Management (SRM) place geoengineering at a comparable level in the public finances to the provision of major national infrastructure projects (and similar investments) when the costs of construction, ownership and operation are considered using as close an approximation as possible of Whole Life Costing (WLC). Accordingly, we consider whether (at the scale of an individual nation state) individual adaptation programmes can favourably be compared to SRM geoengineering. We consider in detail three examples: a major dam, a city-scale flood defence scheme, and a healthcare scheme to counter an insect-vectored disease. In all cases, we find that a global SRM programme may compare favourably on cost-benefit grounds. We accordingly suggest that an individual state may have a rational reason to geoengineer the entire planet, as the result of a single-project cost-benefit analysis. Accordingly, we find strong support on economic grounds for the validity of the ‘rogue state’ framing, and extend this to consider a ‘rogue mayor’, official, or politician alternative.
Uploads
Papers
Many religions oblige followers to make formal or informal contributions of wealth or income. In some cases these religious laws are incorporated into statute. Resulting financial flows are globally significant (USA=$114.90bn), and comfortably exceed minimum funding requirements for geoengineering.
Despite application of the law to climate change generally 4 , a literature review reveals no in-depth consideration of religiously-obligated funding of geoengineering – although there is limited discussion of disciplinary overlap.
We therefore appraise both voluntary and legally-mandated religious funding for compatibility with geoengineering - finding a viable case across several religions. Accordingly, we alert the geoengineering research community to the governance challenges posed by this previously-overlooked funding stream.
Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely discussed as a strategy to reduce harm from Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) . One postulated geoengineering scenario involves a ‘Rogue State’ , acting unilaterally to commence geoengineering in defiance of wider opinion.
Cost estimates for geoengineering by Solar Radiation Management (SRM) place geoengineering at a comparable level in the public finances to the provision of major national infrastructure projects (and similar investments) when the costs of construction, ownership and operation are considered using as close an approximation as possible of Whole Life Costing (WLC).
Accordingly, we consider whether (at the scale of an individual nation state) individual adaptation programmes can favourably be compared to SRM geoengineering. We consider in detail three examples: a major dam, a city-scale flood defence scheme, and a healthcare scheme to counter an insect-vectored disease.
In all cases, we find that a global SRM programme may compare favourably on cost-benefit grounds. We accordingly suggest that an individual state may have a rational reason to geoengineer the entire planet, as the result of a single-project cost-benefit analysis.
Accordingly, we find strong support on economic grounds for the validity of the ‘rogue state’ framing, and extend this to consider a ‘rogue mayor’, official, or politician alternative.