04.01.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Suarez, Pablo; van Aalst, Maarten K. (2016): Geoengineering. A humanitarian concern

Suarez, Pablo; van Aalst, Maarten K. (2016): Geoengineering. A humanitarian concern. In: Earth's Future. DOI: 10.1002/2016EF000464.

"This paper explores the humanitarian dimensions of geoengineering, specifically relating to solar radiation management (SRM). Drawing from the engagement of the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre in SRM discussions, we discuss how to improve linkages between science, policy and humanitarian practice. We further propose the creation of a geoengineering risk management framework to ensure that the interests of the most vulnerable are considered and addressed - including the voices of all stakeholders."

Link


Read more »

20.08.2016

# Media

0 Comments

Geoengineering Monitor: Resistance to Geoengineering: A Timeline

"Civil society has been questioning and opposing geoengineering for almost 20 years. What began as a reaction to technocratic hubris rapidly evolved into worldwide protests against attempts to initiate ocean fertilization and a consensus of civil society and Global South opposition at the 2010 People’s Summit in Cochabamba."

Link


Read more »

23.04.2016

# Media

0 Comments

Geoengineering Monitor: If mankind is forced to take drastic action to stop global violence or warming, things are gonna get ugly

"It’s hard to see how to feel good about a future in which we’re forced to fundamentally alter the planet to save it from burning and drowning – but warning about that nightmare scenario might be what it takes to kick the world’s leaders into high gear."

Link


Read more »

20.04.2016

# Media

0 Comments

Nonprofit Chronicals:

Article on the report Center for Carbon Removal (2016): Philanthropy Beyond Carbon Neutrality. "Between 2008 and 2014, foundations donated an average of less than $1 million a year to projects or programs dedicated to carbon removal, according to Philanthropy Beyond Carbon Neutrality, an excellent new report from the Center for Carbon Removal. That’s less than 0.5 percent of their annual climate-change giving. To put that in context, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the largest climate-change grant-maker, spent more than $663 million on climate programs between 2008 and 2014."

Link


Read more »

01.02.2016

# Media

0 Comments

Fern: What does the Paris climate agreement mean for forests and forest peoples’ rights?

"However, the long-term goal, and indeed much of the Paris Agreement, could also open the door to a form of geoengineering, known as carbon dioxide removal (CDR), if large-scale monoculture plantations or bioenergy crops with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) were used to remove significant volumes of carbon from the atmosphere."

Link


Read more »

29.11.2015

# Media

0 Comments

The Center for Carbon Removal: NGO Spotlight: Bellona

"Bellona has been a leader in the Bio-CCS field for many years -- what follows is a recap of an email exchange with Bellona Bio-CCS expert Marika Andersen to share more about their work and their views of the importance of Bio-CCS in meeting climate goals."

Link


Read more »

28.05.2015

# Media

0 Comments

Friends of the Earth: US National Academy of Sciences backs untested geoengineering technologies

"Despite these shortcomings and financial and technical problems, the NAS nonetheless ultimately supports investment, research and experimentation into these technologies. It's a dangerous road that we are beginning to travel."

Link


Read more »

20.05.2015

# Media

0 Comments

Everything and the Carbon Sink Blog: Throwing the Carbon Capture Baby out with the Coal Bath Water

Mostly on CCS. "The environmental advocacy group Greenpeace recently released a report lambasting carbon capture and storage (or “CCS”) as “a false climate solution” that “[i]n no uncertain terms…hurts the climate.” The Greenpeace analysis, however, made a number of assumptions that fit the conventional wisdom surrounding CCS, but when analyzed with greater scrutiny turn out to be deceptively misleading."

Link


Read more »

06.05.2015

# Media

0 Comments

FCEA Blog: One Good Reason Why the Left Should Give Geoengineering a Second Look

"While a more realistic implementation of geoengineering would still inevitably entail costs, there is a reasonable chance that these would be more than offset by benefits in terms of reduced climate impacts of the sort described above. How the ledger is likely to balance out globally, and particularly for the global South, is unknown, yet that is precisely the reason why more research on solar geoengineering is so urgently needed."

Link


Read more »

23.04.2015

# Media

0 Comments

Earth Island Journal: The Technofix Is In

"An Ecomodernist Manifesto fails to acknowledge the political forces at work in the battle over climate change, and so fails to chart a way forward"

Link


Read more »