22.04.2020

# Media

0 Comments

Phys.org: Why relying on new technology won't save the planet

"Overreliance on promises of new technology to solve climate change is enabling delay, say researchers from Lancaster University."

LINK


Read more »

12.01.2020

# Political Papers

0 Comments

C2G Guest Post by Gernot Wagner and Daniel Zizzamia: Green Moral Hazards

"For one, SRM is no “solution.” While CDR directly addresses the root cause of the problem – excess atmospheric carbon dioxide – SRM only does so indirectly. Meanwhile, either form of geoengineering conjures legitimate images of technofixes."

LINK


Read more »

11.12.2019

# Media

0 Comments

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist: Geoengineering is no climate fix. But calling it a moral hazard could be counterproductive

"Many experts are already worried that public discussion of geoengineering might dissuade policy makers from making harder but more substantial choices to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is commonly called the “moral hazard” problem, and it has become a major argument against even pursuing further research into geoengineering technologies."

LINK


Read more »

01.04.2019

# New Publications

0 Comments

Raimi, K.; et al. (2019): Framing of Geoengineering Affects Support for Climate Change Mitigation

Raimi, K.; Maki, A.; Dana, D.; Vandenbergh, M. (2019): Framing of Geoengineering Affects Support for Climate Change Mitigation. In: Environmental Communication 13 (3), S. 300–319. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2019.1575258.

"The growing recognition that climate change mitigation alone will be inadequate has led scientists and policymakers to discuss climate geoengineering. An experiment with a US sample found, contrary to previous research, that reading about geoengineering did not reduce conservatives’ skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Moreover, depending on how it is framed, geoengineering can reduce support for mitigation among both conservatives and non-conservatives."

LINK


Read more »

18.02.2019

# Media

0 Comments

Chatham House: Cool idea or hi-tech madness?

"As the threat from climate change looms ever larger, growing attention is being paid to proposals that sound as if they come straight from a sci-fi novel. One idea is to spray the stratosphere with particulates to reflect sunlight, thus reducing the temperature of planet Earth."

LINK


Read more »

17.12.2018

# Media

0 Comments

Helmholtz Blogs: Got it? #59 Dr. Greenhouse (German)

German comic on CE.

LINK


Read more »

17.12.2018

# Media

0 Comments

The Wire: Geoengineering: Should India Tread Carefully or Go Full Steam Ahead?

"Solar geoengineering doesn’t help reduce carbon emissions, and is founded on reckoning with the distressing possibility that reduction strategies won’t be enough."

LINK


Read more »

03.12.2018

# Media

0 Comments

UrbDeZine: Climate Change Geoengineering: Moral Hazard of the Moral Hazard argument

"CBS News recently published an article about seeding the atmosphere with aerosols to reflect a portion of the sun’s rays away from earth as a viable method to cool the climate.  This method is sometimes referred to as the albedo method.  As noted in the article, it is controversial but has long been viewed as one of the most feasible and relatively inexpensive ways to turn down the Earth’s emissions-induced heat."

LINK


Read more »

29.10.2018

# Media

0 Comments

Wired: Carbon Capture Is Messy and Fraught—But Might Be Essential

"On paper, carbon capture is a simple proposition: Take carbon that we’ve pulled out of the Earth in the form of coal and oil and put into the atmosphere, and pull it out of the atmosphere and put it back in the Earth. It’s like hitting undo on the Industrial Revolution. And scientists can indeed yank CO2 out of thin air, except that the process is expensive, not very efficient, and morally complicated."

LINK


Read more »

18.07.2018

# New Publications

0 Comments

Merk, Christine; et al. (2018): Do climate engineering experts display moral-hazard behaviour?

Merk, Christine; Pönitzsch, Gert; Rehdanz, Katrin (2018): Do climate engineering experts display moral-hazard behaviour? In: Climate Policy 37 (6), S. 1–13. DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1494534.

"Discourse analyses and expert interviews about climate engineering (CE) report high levels of reflectivity about the technologies’ risks and challenges, implying that CE experts are unlikely to display moral hazard behaviour, i.e. a reduced focus on mitigation. This has, however, not been empirically tested. Within CE experts we distinguish between experts for radiation management (RM) and for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and analyse whether RM and CDR experts display moral hazard behaviour."

LINK


Read more »