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 »

18.12.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Lo, Y. T. Eunice; et al. (2016): Detecting sulphate aerosol geoengineering with different methods

Lo, Y. T. Eunice; Charlton-Perez, Andrew J.; Lott, Fraser C.; Highwood, Eleanor J. (2016): Detecting sulphate aerosol geoengineering with different methods. In: Scientific reports 6, S. 39169. DOI: 10.1038/srep39169.

"Sulphate aerosol injection has been widely discussed as a possible way to engineer future climate. Monitoring it would require detecting its effects amidst internal variability and in the presence of other external forcings. We investigate how the use of different detection methods and filtering techniques affects the detectability of sulphate aerosol geoengineering in annual-mean global-mean near-surface air temperature. This is done by assuming a future scenario that injects 5 Tg yr−1 of sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere and cross-comparing simulations from 5 climate models."

Link


Read more »

10.05.2016

# New Publications

0 Comments

Arino, Yosuke; et al. (2016): Estimating option values of solar radiation management assuming that climate sensitivity is uncertain

Arino, Yosuke; Akimoto, Keigo; Sano, Fuminori; Homma, Takashi; Oda, Junichiro; Tomoda, Toshimasa (2016): Estimating option values of solar radiation management assuming that climate sensitivity is uncertain. In Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, p. 201520795–201520795. DOI 10.1073/pnas.1520795113.

"This paper presents one possible methodology for estimating option values of SRM assuming a fairly moderate scenario on SRM’s use compared with preceding literature, which would be helpful to examine realistic values of SRM for the society where social acceptability of SRM’s actual deployment is not high. Our results emphasize the near- to mid-term role of retaining SRM as a later risk-hedging option in the face of the uncertainty about climate sensitivity."

Link


Read more »

23.04.2015

# New Publications

0 Comments

Stilgoe, Jack (2015): Geoengineering as Collective Experimentation

Stilgoe, Jack (2015): Geoengineering as Collective Experimentation. In Science and Engineering Ethics. DOI 10.1007/s11948-015-9646-0.

"Geoengineering would seem to be an archetype of technology as social experiment, blurring lines that separate research from deployment and scientific knowledge from technological artefacts. Looking into the experimental systems of geoengineering, we can see the negotiation of what is known and unknown."

Link


Read more »

05.03.2015

# Media

0 Comments

news.ch: Is geoengineering research going outdoors?

"Serious research outside of these limits has been a taboo because of the serious risks this may pose for ecosystems and society. However, two recent publications are breaking the ice and bringing the discussion of field experiments into the limelight of the scientific community."

Link


Read more »

23.02.2015

# Media

0 Comments

[press review] AAAS conference in San Jose + CIA intrests in CE

Media responses to the meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Jose/California. Tobic are large scale tests and CIA contacting to Alan Robock.


Read more »

18.02.2015

# New Publications

0 Comments

Keith, David W.; MacMartin, Douglas G. (2015): A temporary, moderate and responsive scenario for solar geoengineering

Keith, David W.; MacMartin, Douglas G. (2015): A temporary, moderate and responsive scenario for solar geoengineering. In Nature Climate change. DOI 10.1038/nclimate2493.

"Most analyses assume, for example, that SRM would be used to stop the increase in global temperature or restore temperature to pre-industrial values. We argue that these are poor scenario choices on which to base policy-relevant judgements about SRM."

Link


Read more »

18.02.2015

# New Publications

0 Comments

Doughty, Jack (2015): Past Forays into SRM Field Research and Implications for Future Governance

Doughty, Jack (2015): Past Forays into SRM Field Research and Implications for Future Governance (Geoengineering Our Climate? Working Paper and Opinion Article Series). 

"Exploring these experiments illustrates the varying degrees to which scientists have wrestled with the ethical, social and environmental governance concerns that have been raised by many. Exploring how these past outdoor research projects were carried out (or not, as is the case with SPICE) highlights the need for existing governance to be adapted to ensure that these concerns are addressed."

Link


Read more »

16.02.2015

# Media

0 Comments

Stuff.c.nz: Scientists call for 'geoengineering' tests to find ways to cool the planet

Reponse to conference session in San Jose. "Scientists are calling for tests to find ways to cool the planet - the first step toward exploration of the controversial field of geoengineering, which aims to change the climate by blocking the sun's rays."

Link


Read more »

17.11.2014

# New Publications

0 Comments

Latham, John; et al. (2014): Introduction: Climate engineering: exploring nuances and consequences of deliberately altering the Earth's energy budget

Latham, John; Rasch, Philip J.; Launder, Brian Edward (2014): Introduction: Climate engineering: exploring nuances and consequences of deliberately altering the Earth's energy budget. In Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 372 (2031). DOI 10.1098/rsta.2014.0050.

"This Theme Issue explores details of (i) the fundamental physics and chemistry of what we (the editors) perceive to be the most feasible of the announced CE methods; (ii) possible field experiments that can be used to examine science's understanding of those processes and (iii) societal issues associated with the testing of CE and its impact on the planet. Indeed, the issue seeks to draw together research relevant to these disparate areas."

Link


Read more »