Earth's future in the Anthropocene: Technological interventions between piecemeal and utopian social engineering

Abstract

An extensive discussion in the academic and policy communities is developing around the possibility of climate engineering through stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI). In this contribution, we develop a perspective on this issue in the context of the wider setting of societal development in the Anthropocene. We draw on Karl Popper's concepts of piecemeal and utopian social engineering to examine how different visions of societal development relate to SAI. Based on this reflection, we argue that the debate on SAI is fueled not only by the inequitable distribution of its effects and potential atmospheric and climatic side effects, as disconcerting as some of these effects and side effects may be, but also, and perhaps primarily, by its apparent privileging of the status quo and incremental change over a more immediate and radical change in societal organization. Although differing ideological orientations might thus help explain the intensity of parts of the debate, the understanding from which they follow, in which societal development is deduced from postulated technological characteristics and assumptions about a technology's use, hides from view a more subtle understanding of the relationship between technology and politics. Global Change in the AnthropoceneAs a consequence of the concerns about extensive documented and predicted impacts of climate change [Stocker et al., 2013], a new topic has recently prominently entered the debate on climate policy: the possibility of reflecting some of the incoming sunlight back into space in order to gain control over global mean temperatures [Keith, 2000;Crutzen, 2006]. Whether societies and their leaders will choose to implement a technology capable of this is uncertain as of now, also because the science on such solar radiation management (SRM) and its side effects is not yet settled. But the debate alone can shed some light on how societies attempt to grapple with their increasingly large leverage over fundamental processes that govern life on Earth in the Anthropocene, the age in which humanity has become a global forcing agent. In this contribution, we present a critical examination of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), an SRM technology that would block out sunlight by introducing reflective particles into the stratosphere, by applying Karl Popper's concepts of piecemeal and utopian social engineering. To this end, we first briefly discuss the concept of the Anthropocene and the role of technology in this new epoch. We then introduce Popper's concepts of piecemeal and utopian social engineering and examine how SAI relates to these categories. We apply the resulting insights to the debate on SAI more generally, and reflect on our findings. The Earth's climate is a permanently changing system. Although there are phases of relative stability that may last millions of years, it also occasionally undergoes rapid transitions into new states. A very recent addition to the list of factors that contribute to change in the Earth's climate system is humanity, w...

Air Pollution and Climate Change Effects on Allergies in the Anthropocene: Abundance, Interaction, and Modification of Allergens and Adjuvants

“…The term Anthropocene describes the present era of globally pervasive and steeply increasing anthropogenic/human influence on planet Earth, including the land surface, biosphere and atmosphere. − Human activities have become a driving force that changes many characteristics of our environment such as biodiversity and air quality on local, regional, and global scales, for example, through land use change, agriculture, fossil fuel burning, traffic emissions, and the release of industrial products. ,,,,− While the basic concept of the Anthropocene, as introduced by Nobel laureate Paul J. Crutzen and colleagues, ,, is widely accepted and increasingly used across the sciences and humanities, the actual beginning of the Anthropocene as a new geological epoch is still under investigation and discussion. ,− ,− The proposed dates range from early human history via the 19th century (industrialization) to the 1960s (nuclear weapon testing and “Great Acceleration”). − ,− Since the industrialization of the 19th century and especially during the “Great Acceleration” of the 20th century, the primary emission, secondary formation, and concentration of air pollutants like ozone, nitrogen, and sulfur oxides, soot, and a wide range of other reactive trace gases and aerosols have greatly increased relative to preindustrial times, especially in densely populated and industrialized areas but also in agricultural environments and around the globe. ,,− For example, the average mixing ratios of ozone in continental background air have increased by factors of 2–4 from around 10–20 ppb from the beginning of the 19th century to 30–40 ppb in the 21st century, and the number and mass concentrations of aerosol particles in polluted urban air are typically by 1–2 orders of magnitude higher than in pristine air of remote continental regions (∼10 2 –10 3 cm –3 and ∼1–10 μg m –3 vs ∼10 3 –10 5 cm –3 and ∼10–100 μg m –3 ). , …”

The Buying Time Argument within the Solar Radiation Management Discourse

“…The 'while' indicates that abatement must be done in parallel. SAI technologies, then, might "be used as a stop-gap measure to buy time for a societal transformation to a carbon-free economy, shaving off the worst effects of climate change along the way" (Schäfer 2014) [18] (p. 5).…”

A Critical Examination of Geoengineering: Economic and Technological Rationality in Social Context

“…In agreement with the argument presented in Section 4.1, Muraca and Neuber [45] begin with the case that growth-dependent economies are unsustainable in the long-run. They develop a unique rendition of the "moral hazard" case against geoengineering [51] from a degrowth perspective: in a growth-dependent society, geoengineering deployment will create trade-offs with mitigation efforts, thereby delaying the transition to an ecological society (see also [52]). …”