The Buying Time Argument within the Solar Radiation Management Discourse

Neuber, Frederike; Ott, Konrad

doi:10.3390/app10134637

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this way, SAI may be more of a 'socially sustaining technology' rather than a 'socially disruptive technology' (Hopster, 2021), but one that does not bring about the necessary societal changes for a sustainable future. As SAI would be deployed temporarily, it can be seen as a means to 'buy time' (Neuber and Ott, 2020) and shave off peak warming scenarios, reducing some of the most severe impacts of climate change. A major concern, however, is that the availability of this technique (even in theory) might disincentivize decarbonization of the global energy system and prolong unjust and unsustainable market and geopolitical arrangements (Schneider and Fuhr, 2020).…”

Section: Impacts and Social Disruptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The potential for SAI to rapidly reduce some of the impacts of climate change also complicates the question of what countries owe one another or to future generations. As noted earlier, this possibility has been framed as a way of 'buying time' for mitigation (Neuber and Ott, 2020;Betz and Cacean, 2012). Some advocates of SRM research have long claimed that, facing insufficient mitigation, there is a moral responsibility to deploy SRM to protect human rights (Horton and Keith, 2016).…”

Section: Conceptual Disruptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technologies shape who we are, how we organize our societies and how we relate to nature. For example, social media challenges democracy; artificial intelligence raises the question of what is unique to humans; and the possibility to create artificial wombs may affect notions of motherhood and birth. Some have suggested that we address global warming by engineering the climate, but how does this impact our responsibility to future generations and our relation to nature? This book shows how technologies can be socially and conceptually disruptive and investigates how to come to terms with this disruptive potential. Four technologies are studied: social media, social robots, climate engineering and artificial wombs. The authors highlight the disruptive potential of these technologies, and the new questions this raises. The book also discusses responses to conceptual disruption, like conceptual engineering, the deliberate revision of concepts.

show abstract

Section: Impacts and Social Disruptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptual Disruptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Ricke et al., 2013 ), and an initial assessment focus on regulation of prospective deployment ( Victor, 2008 ; Virgoe, 2009 ) pivoted to a more polycentric governance of research itself ( Nicholson et al., 2018 ). The most prevalent defense of SRM potentials came to be (and still is) as a time-buying strategy ( Neuber and Ott, 2020 ), underpinned by scenarios that model SAI's capacity to reduce a broad spectrum of climate harms, especially if coupled with strong mitigation (e.g. MacMartin et al., 2014 ).…”

Section: Analysis: Sociotechnical Strategies Of the Copenhagen Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

Delaying decarbonization: Climate governmentalities and sociotechnical strategies from Copenhagen to Paris

Low

Boettcher

2020

Earth System Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An era (2005–2015) centered around the Copenhagen Accord saw the rise of several immature sociotechnical strategies currently at play: carbon capture and storage, REDD+, next-generation biofuels, shale gas, short-lived climate pollutants, carbon dioxide removal, and solar radiation management. Through a framework grounded in governmentality studies, we point out common trends in how this seemingly disparate range of strategies is emerging, evolving, and taking effect. We find that recent sociotechnical strategies reflect and reinforce governance rationalities emerging during the Copenhagen era: regime polycentrism, relative gains sought in negotiations, ‘co-benefits’ sought with other governance regimes, ‘time-buying’ or ‘bridging’ rationalities, and appeals to vulnerable demographics. However, these sociotechnical systems remain conditioned by the resilient market governmentality of the Kyoto Protocol era. Indeed, the carbon economy exercises a systemic structuring condition: While emerging climate strategies ostensibly present new tracks for signalling ambition and action, they functionally permit the delaying of comprehensive decarbonization.

show abstract

“…Ricke, Moreno-Cruz & Caldeira, 2013), and an initial assessment focus on regulation of prospective deployment (Victor, 2008;Virgoe, 2009) pivoted to a more polycentric governance of research itself (Nicholson et al, 2018). The most prevalent defense of SRM potentials came to be (and still is) as a time-buying strategy (Neuber & Ott, 2020), underpinned by scenarios that model SAI's capacity to reduce a broad spectrum of climate harms, especially if coupled with strong mitigation (e.g. MacMartin et al, 2014).…”

Section: Solar Radiation Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate Imagineering

Low¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof.dr. H.R.B.M. Kummeling, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 14 april 2021 des middags te 2.30 uur door Sean Jiaming Low geboren op 26 juli 1983 te Singapore, Singapore Bibliography Samenvatting List of common acronyms BECCS -Bioenergy carbon capture and storage CCS -Carbon capture and storage CDR -Carbon dioxide removal IAM -Integrated assessment modeling IPCC -Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change RRI -Responsible Research and Innovation SAI -Stratospheric Aerosol Injection SRM -Sunlight reflection methods, or solar radiation management STS -Science and technology studiesIn the introduction (Chapter 1) and conclusion (Chapter 7), no acronyms are used, in order to aid the general reader. In particular, CDR is referred to more plainly as 'carbon removal', and SRM as 'sunlight reflection'. In the intervening chapters -which all represent published journal articles -the use of acronyms is resumed.

show abstract

The Buying Time Argument within the Solar Radiation Management Discourse

Cited by 9 publications

References 44 publications

Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies

Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies

Delaying decarbonization: Climate governmentalities and sociotechnical strategies from Copenhagen to Paris

Climate Imagineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About