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

German comic on CE.

LINK

"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

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