09.02.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Asayama, Shinichiro; et al. (2017): Ambivalent climate of opinions. Tensions and dilemmas in understanding geoengineering experimentation

Asayama, Shinichiro; Sugiyama, Masahiro; Ishii, Atsushi (2017): Ambivalent climate of opinions. Tensions and dilemmas in understanding geoengineering experimentation. In Geoforum 80, pp. 82–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.01.012.

"This paper examines how the meanings of geoengineering experimentation, specifically SAI field trials, are reconfigured in the deliberation of the lay public. To this end, we conducted focus groups with Japanese citizens in June 2015 on the geoengineering concept and SAI field trials."

LINK


Read more »

17.01.2017

# New Publications

0 Comments

Curvelo, Paula; Guimarães Pereira, Ângela (2016): Geoengineering: Reflections on Current Debates

Curvelo, Paula; Guimarães Pereira, Ângela (2016): Geoengineering: Reflections on Current Debates. In: Ana Delgado (Hg.): Technoscience and Citizenship. Ethics and Governance in the Digital Society, Bd. 17. Cham: Springer Verlag (The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology), S. 163–184.

"In this paper we propose to investigate the current debates on geoengineering, here considered as an illustrative metaphor of particular technoscientific promises and ‘techno-fix’ narratives that are emerging in our society."

Link


Read more »

29.11.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

van Hemer, Mieke (2016): Speculative promise as a driver in climate engineering research. The case of Paul Crutzen’s back-of-the-envelope calculation on solar dimming with sulfate aerosols

van Hemer, Mieke (2016): Speculative promise as a driver in climate engineering research. The case of Paul Crutzen’s back-of-the-envelope calculation on solar dimming with sulfate aerosols. In Futures. DOI 10.1016/j.futures.2016.11.006.

"In this paper, I study the generative role of speculative promise in climate engineering research. My analysis operationalizes Alfred Nordmann’s call for a ‘forensics of wishing’, a variety of technology assessment which scrutinizes the politics of anticipation in technoscience. Using scientific articles and reports as primary sources I trace the uptake and contestation of bold claims made by atmospheric scientist Paul Crutzen a decade ago."

Link


Read more »

04.11.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Caldeira, Ken; Bala, Govindasamy (2016): Reflecting on 50 years of geoengineering research

Caldeira, Ken; Bala, Govindasamy (2016): Reflecting on 50 years of geoengineering research. In Earth’s Future, n/a‐n/a. DOI 10.1002/2016EF000454

"The primary focus of many of our comments is solar geoengineering and not carbon dioxide removal. Thus, this text is not intended to comprise a comprehensive review or set of carefully documented analyses. Our primary conclusion is that sustained progress in ‘geoengineering’ research will depend on social and material support for experimental work that can provide the observational basis for improved modeling and analysis, and, potentially, development and deployment of systems that may help protect the environment and improve human well-being."

Link


Read more »

31.10.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Reynolds, Jesse L.; et al. (2016): Five solar geoengineering tropes that have outstayed their welcome

Reynolds, Jesse L.; Parker, Andy; Irvine, Peter (2016): Five solar geoengineering tropes that have outstayed their welcome. In Earth’s Future, n/a‐n/a. DOI 10.1002/2016EF000416.

"However, a number of claims are frequently made in the academic and popular SRM discourses and, despite evidence to the contrary, pose the risk of hardening into accepted facts. Here, in order to foster a more productive and honest debate, we identify, describe, and refute five of the most problematic claims that are unsupported by existing evidence, unlikely to occur, or greatly exaggerated. These are (1) once started, SRM cannot be stopped; (2) SRM is a right-wing project; (3) SRM would cost only a few billion dollars per year; (4) Modelling studies indicate that SRM would disrupt monsoon precipitation; and (5) there is an international prohibition on outdoors research."

Link


Read more »

09.10.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Fairbrother, Malcolm (2016): Geoengineering, moral hazard, and trust in climate science. Evidence from a survey experiment in Britain

Fairbrother, Malcolm (2016): Geoengineering, moral hazard, and trust in climate science. Evidence from a survey experiment in Britain. In Climatic Change. DOI 10.1007/s10584-016-1818-7.

"This paper presents the results of survey experiments testing whether hearing about solar radiation management (SRM) affects people’s support for taxing polluting energy and/or their trust in climate science. For a nationally representative sample of respondents in Britain, I found that receiving a brief introduction to SRM had no impact on most people’s willingness to pay taxes, nor on their trust in climate science."

Link


Read more »

06.10.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Burns, Elizabeth T.; et al. (2016): What do people think when they think about solar geoengineering? A review of empirical social science literature, and prospects for future reseach

Burns, Elizabeth T.; Flegal, Jane A.; Keith, David W.; Mahajan, Aseem; Tingley, Dustin; Wagner, Gernot (2016): What do people think when they think about solar geoengineering? A review of empirical social science literature, and prospects for future research. In Earth’s Future, n/a‐n/a. DOI 10.1002/2016EF000461.

"In reflecting on the past decade of research, we review around thirty studies investigating public familiarity with, and views about, solar geoengineering. A number of recurring patterns emerge: (1) general unfamiliarity with geoengineering among publics; (2) the importance of artifice versus naturalness; (3) some conditional support for certain kinds of research; and (4) nuanced findings on the ‘moral hazard’ and ‘reverse moral hazard’ hypotheses, with empirical support for each appearing under different circumstances and populations."

Link


Read more »

27.09.2016

# Media

0 Comments

Strange Horizons Blog: Terraforming and Geoengineering in Science Fiction

"What makes these narratives important is that they contextualise the implications of terraforming and geoengineering by situating these endeavours in the context of environmental, evolutionary, and cultural history, and they afford reflection and discussion about a host of issues relating to climate change."

Link


Read more »

12.09.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Vaughan, Naomi E.; Gough, Clair (2016): Expert assessment concludes negative emissions scenarios may not deliver

Vaughan, Naomi E.; Gough, Clair (2016): Expert assessment concludes negative emissions scenarios may not deliver. In Environ. Res. Lett. 11 (9), pp. 1–7. DOI 10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/095003.

"Here we present the results of an expert elicitation process that explores the explicit and implicit assumptions underpinning the feasibility of BECCS in IAM scenarios. Our results show that the assumptions are considered realistic regarding technical aspects of CCS but unrealistic regarding the extent of bioenergy deployment, and development of adequate societal support and governance structures for BECCS."

Link


Read more »

09.09.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Markusson, Nils; et al. (2016): Contrasting medium and genre on Wikipedia to open up the dominating definition and classification of geoengineering

Markusson, Nils; Venturini, Tommaso; Laniado, David; Kaltenbrunner, Andreas (2016): Contrasting medium and genre on Wikipedia to open up the dominating definition and classification of geoengineering. In Big Data & Society 3 (2). DOI 10.1177/2053951716666102.

"We analyse the representation of geoengineering on Wikipedia as a way of opening up this dominating, if contested, model for further debate. We achieve this by contrasting the dominating model as presented in the encyclopaedic article texts with the patterns of hyper-link associations between the articles. Two datasets were created tracing the geoengineering construct on Wikipedia, shedding light on its boundary with its context, as well as on its internal structure. The analysis shows that the geoengineering category tends to be associated on Wikipedia primarily with atmospheric solar radiation management rather than land-based carbon dioxide removal type technologies."

Link


Read more »