The International Politics of Climate Engineering: A Review and Prospectus for International Relations

Horton, Joshua; Reynolds, Jesse L.

doi:10.1093/isr/viv013

Cited by 113 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Any technological advancements that significantly lower the financial burden or technological challenges of solar geoengineering also lower barriers impeding private or sovereign actors from implementing such measures unilaterally (Barrett, 2008;Schelling, 1996;Weitzman, 2015). Low barriers to climate engineering pose not only an alarming geopolitical prospect but also concerns from an ethical, economic, and ecological perspective (Buck, 2012;Horton & Reynolds, 2016;Parson & Ernst, 2013). Low barriers to climate engineering pose not only an alarming geopolitical prospect but also concerns from an ethical, economic, and ecological perspective (Buck, 2012;Horton & Reynolds, 2016;Parson & Ernst, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Production of Sulfates Onboard an Aircraft: Implications for the Cost and Feasibility of Stratospheric Solar Geoengineering

Smith

Dykema

Keith

2018

Earth and Space Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Injection of sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere, a form of solar geoengineering, has been proposed as a means to reduce some climatic changes by decreasing net anthropogenic radiative forcing. The cost and technical feasibility of forming aerosols with the appropriate size distribution are uncertain. We examine the possibility of producing the relevant sulfur species, SO2 or SO3, by in situ conversion from elemental sulfur onboard an aircraft. We provide a first‐order engineering analysis of an open cycle chemical plant for in situ sulfur to sulfate conversion using a Brayton cycle combustor and a catalytic converter. We find that such a plant could have sufficiently low mass that the overall requirement for mass transport to the lower stratosphere may be reduced by roughly a factor of 2. All else equal, this suggests that—for a given radiative forcing—the cost of delivering sulfate aerosols may be nearly halved. Beyond reducing cost, the use of elemental sulfur reduces operational health and safety risks and should therefore reduce environmental side effects associated with delivery. Reduction in cost is not necessarily beneficial as it reduces practical barriers to deployment, increasing the urgency of questions concerning the efficacy, risks, and governance of solar geoengineering.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Production of Sulfates Onboard an Aircraft: Implications for the Cost and Feasibility of Stratospheric Solar Geoengineering

Smith

Dykema

Keith

2018

Earth and Space Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The potential of SG is, however, counterbalanced by its many physical, political and existential burdens (Halstead, ; Pasztor et al., ) that raise a fair number of uncertainties and problems (Horton and Reynolds, ; Robock, ). Cusack et al.…”

Section: Solar Geoengineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… See for instance, Corry, , Frumhoff and Stephens, , Horton and Reynolds, , Horton et al., , Morrow et al., , Nicholson et al., , Rayner et al., and Zürn and Schäfer, . …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Grasso

2019

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…States may well act or campaign according to their own particular interests. The idea of counteracting or forming balancing coalitions against other states engaged in climate engineering is a possibility from this perspective, since it could be deployed as an instrument of state power (see Horton and Reynolds, 2016: 449). For Joshua Horton (2011: 56–57), the rogue climate engineer scenario is a myth ‘grounded more in unexamined policy assumptions than in reasoned analysis’, since the incentives to cooperate would outweigh the individual benefits to climate engineering alone.…”

Section: Security Hazards Of Climate Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

The international politics of geoengineering: The feasibility of Plan B for tackling climate change

Corry

2017

Security Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geoengineering technologies aim to make large-scale and deliberate interventions in the climate system possible. A typical framing is that researchers are exploring a ‘Plan B’ in case mitigation fails to avert dangerous climate change. Some options are thought to have the potential to alter the politics of climate change dramatically, yet in evaluating whether they might ultimately reduce climate risks, their political and security implications have so far not been given adequate prominence. This article puts forward what it calls the ‘security hazard’ and argues that this could be a crucial factor in determining whether a technology is able, ultimately, to reduce climate risks. Ideas about global governance of geoengineering rely on heroic assumptions about state rationality and a generally pacific international system. Moreover, if in a climate engineered world weather events become something certain states can be made directly responsible for, this may also negatively affect prospects for ‘Plan A’, i.e. an effective global agreement on mitigation.

show abstract

The International Politics of Climate Engineering: A Review and Prospectus for International Relations

Cited by 113 publications

References 46 publications

Production of Sulfates Onboard an Aircraft: Implications for the Cost and Feasibility of Stratospheric Solar Geoengineering

Production of Sulfates Onboard an Aircraft: Implications for the Cost and Feasibility of Stratospheric Solar Geoengineering

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

The international politics of geoengineering: The feasibility of Plan B for tackling climate change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About