Sulfur in the Sky with Diamonds: An Inquiry into the Feasibility of Solar Geoengineering

Abstract

Solar geoengineering (SG) is considered a promising, albeit controversial, climate engineering technology to help reduce predicted global warming. However, the complexity of SG raises serious doubts about its political practicability. The objective of this article is to investigate this technology's feasibility, a fundamental dimension of said practicability. Feasibility is here understood as a political property: the higher the feasibility of a state of affairs ranks, the greater its eventual political practicability. According to this perspective, the less SG clashes with economic, institutional, and moral soft constraints, the more feasible it becomes, and hence the greater its political practicability. An analysis of economic and institutional soft constraints points to a high degree of SG feasibility. This feasibility is, however, limited by the perceived non‐bearable moral costs which SG involves. Given the greater weight of moral soft constraints, SG's overall feasibility is therefore low. Based on these indications, the article offers suggestions for lessening SG's friction with soft constraints, especially with the highly sensitive moral ones, with the aim of increasing this technology's feasibility. On the basis of this heightened feasibility, the paper concludes with policy recommendations which improves the practicability of SG.

Building Capabilities for Earth System Governance

“…In light of all the potential risks and associated controversy, more recent work has focused on how to make SRM feasible, morally acceptable, or just. For example, Grasso (2019) draws attention to the imperative of including the ideals of legitimacy and procedural justice as well as considerations of international and intergenerational distributive justice into governance as a means to increase public participation and thus minimize the risk of technocratic or elite domination, and ensuring an equitable allocation of burdens and benefits associated with deployment. Svoboda et al (2019) discuss the human rights challenges related to climate engineering, arguing that research and potential implementation must be guided by insights and frameworks of the human rights realm.…”

Legitimacy and procedural justice: how might stratospheric aerosol injection function in the public interest?

“…Svoboda, 2017), and political feasibility (e.g. Grasso, 2019). Others have explored its legitimacy -as clari ed in the following sections -but with different perspectives, notions, and scopes from the ones employed in this article.…”

“…One major challenge is to avoid SAI being outsourced or captured by elites led by technocrats, bureaucrats, and investors (Szerszynski et al, 2013;Winsberg, 2021), who could manipulate decisionmaking processes in their own interests (Hamilton, 2013). The way to minimise this danger is to ensure that legitimacy and procedural justice are part of SAI, as implied by the conclusions of prior studies (SRMGI, 2011;Morrow et al, 2013;Rayner et al, 2013;Zürn and Schäfer, 2013;Bodle et al, 2014;Schäfer et al, 2015;Frumhoff and Stephens, 2018;Smith, 2018;Callies, 2018Callies, , 2019aGrasso, 2019;Morrow, 2020). They are the most appropriate political properties for ensuring that this institution works in the public interest, as they necessitate, per se, openness, inclusiveness and independence.…”