calling for a Solar Geoengineering Non-use Agreement

77 views
Skip to first unread message

Stacy VanDeveer

unread,
Jan 18, 2022, 1:09:49 PM1/18/22
to Gep-Ed

Dear GEP colleagues,

 

With more than 60 senior climate scientists and governance scholars from around the world, we have launched a global initiative today calling for an International Non-use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering.

We argue that planetary-scale solar geoengineering deployment cannot be governed fairly and poses unacceptable risks if included as a future climate policy option. We are also deeply concerned about the risks that solar geoengineering development may pose to climate policy and decarbonization commitments.

 

We are now calling on fellow academics, civil society organizations and concerned individuals to sign an open letter to governments, the United Nations and other actors to stop development and the potential use of planetary scale geoengineering technologies.

 

This initiative draws on an article published in WIREs Climate Change, which is co-authored by the 16 initiators of this initiative. Co-authors include, besides myself, prof. Frank Biermann (Utrecht University, Dr. Jeroen Oomen, (Utrecht University), prof. Aarti Gupta (Wageningen  University), prof. Saleem H. Ali (University of Delaware), prof. Ken Conca (American University), prof. Maarten A. Hajer (Utrecht University), prof. Prakash Kashwan (University of Connecticut), prof. Louis J. Kotzé (North-West University), prof. Melissa Leach (Institute  of  Development  Studies), prof. Dirk Messner (German Environment Agency), prof. Chukwumerije Okereke (Alex-Ekwueme  Federal University Ndufu-Alike), prof. Åsa Persson (Stockholm Environment Institute), prof. Janez Potocnik (International  Resource  Panel,  United  Nations  Environment  Programme), prof. David Schlosberg (Sydney Environment Institute), prof. Michelle Scobie (The University of the West Indies), prof. Stacy D. VanDeveer (University of Massachusetts Boston).

 

First signatories include prof. Mike Hulme, prof. Sheila Jasanoff,  prof. Stefan Rahmstorf, prof. Jennie C. Stephens, prof. Arturo Escobar, prof. Hiroshi Ohta, prof. Patricia Kameri-Mbote, prof. Wolfgang Kramer, prof. Raymond Pierrehumbert, prof. Karen O’Brien, as well as the novelist Dr. Amitav Ghosh.

 

We would be very grateful if you would support us by circulating this initiative widely within your networks. Additionally, we hope you will consider signing up as a Signatory on our website www.solargeoeng.org, and to encourage your academic colleagues to do the same.

 

Finally, please also sign and share with your civil society networks, friends and family and all concerned citizens the change.org petition calling for an International Non-Use Agreement for Solar Geoengineering here: https://www.change.org/SolarGeoengNon-Use

 

If you wish to contribute your time, please contact Carol Bardi (c.costa...@uu.nl)

 

You can follow the progress on this on initiative on twitter: @solargeoeng

 

Thank you!

--Stacy

 

-- 

Stacy D. VanDeveer (he/him)

Chair, Department of Conflict Resolution, Human Security & Global Governance

Professor, Global Governance & Human Security

McCormack Graduate School of Policy & Global Studies

University of Massachusetts Boston

www.global.umb.edu

Gernot Wagner

unread,
Jan 18, 2022, 1:48:00 PM1/18/22
to stacy.v...@umb.edu, Gep-Ed
Thanks, Stacy.

Not trying to start an email BBQ on this list, but let me just say that the words used here are awfully close to those used by those most signatories would describe as solar geoengineering (research) "boosters." The subtle but all-important difference: e.g. Ted Parson and David Keith, in 2013, called for a "non-use" agreement (moratorium) on deployment, while specifically allowing for research.

And for research, of course, the all important distinction is whether it's e.g. permissible to study the implications of the Tonga volcano or whether even (small) outdoor experiments are permissible. Here e.g. from my just-published book, Geoengineering: the Gamble (Polity, 2021):

image.png

In contrast, this "Non-Use Agreement" here, of course, also includes (most) research.

All the best,
Gernot

Gernot Wagner, New York University (on leave at Columbia Business School, spring 2022)
gwagner.com
Keep in touch: gwagner.com/#newsletter 


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gep-ed+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/2E478E44-DF0C-474E-B7C7-D06756F5F75C%40umb.edu.

Wil Burns

unread,
Jan 18, 2022, 2:07:01 PM1/18/22
to ger...@gwagner.com, stacy.v...@umb.edu, Gep-Ed

It’s a good point, Gernot. Perhaps the call could be re-tooled to clarify that this is a call for a moratorium on research also? I think Biermann, et. al. make a powerful case for doing so in Sec. 1 of the WIRES article. As someone who has worked in this field for over 13 years, I applaud this initiative. wil

 

 

 

 

 

 

WIL BURNS

Visiting Professor

Environmental Policy & Culture Program

Northwestern University

 

Email: william...@northwestern.edu  

Mobile: 312.550.3079

 

1808 Chicago Ave. #110

Evanston, IL 60208

https://epc.northwestern.edu/people/staff-new/wil-burns.html

 

Want to schedule a call? Click on one of the following scheduling links:

 

I acknowledge and honor the Ojibwe, Potawatomi, and Odawa, as well as the Menominee, Miami and Ho-Chunk nations, upon whose traditional homelands Northwestern University stands, and the Indigenous people who remain on this land today.

 

 

 

 

From: gep...@googlegroups.com <gep...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Gernot Wagner
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 12:48 PM
To: stacy.v...@umb.edu
Cc: Gep-Ed <gep...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [gep-ed] calling for a Solar Geoengineering Non-use Agreement

 

Thanks, Stacy.

 

Not trying to start an email BBQ on this list, but let me just say that the words used here are awfully close to those used by those most signatories would describe as solar geoengineering (research) "boosters." The subtle but all-important difference: e.g. Ted Parson and David Keith, in 2013, called for a "non-use" agreement (moratorium) on deployment, while specifically allowing for research.

 

And for research, of course, the all important distinction is whether it's e.g. permissible to study the implications of the Tonga volcano or whether even (small) outdoor experiments are permissible. Here e.g. from my just-published book, Geoengineering: the Gamble (Polity, 2021):

 

Gernot Wagner

unread,
Jan 18, 2022, 6:14:44 PM1/18/22
to Wil Burns, stacy.v...@umb.edu, Gep-Ed
I guess that's the question: Is it a "moratorium on research"?

The short statement clearly states none of this should restrict "legitimate" climate research. Meanwhile, neither the short statement nor the "extended argument" defines "legitimate." The longer statement clearly states that research leading to "development" is impermissible.

So yes, back to square one: I realize SCoPEx is out (per the "extended argument"), but is it OK to fly an ER2 into the Tonga volcano plume and study chemical processes?

Gernot Wagner, New York University (on leave at Columbia Business School, spring 2022)
gwagner.com
Keep in touch: gwagner.com/#newsletter 

Stacy VanDeveer

unread,
Jan 18, 2022, 7:04:30 PM1/18/22
to Gernot Wagner, Wil Burns, Gep-Ed

Gernot,

We did not propose exact text for an agreement, in part because that should be part of open decision-making processes and spirited debate.

If you accept – as we do – that growing and ongoing investments (and media coverage, and academic publishing, and academies of science reports, etc.) are all clearly and fairly quickly normalizing the idea that

(some) humans may or will eventually “manage” solar radiation for all of us, then curtailing this research (as well us development and deployment) seems wise.

Certainly, careful language and agreed rules could be expected to distinguish between large research projects designed and intended to advance solar geoengineering technologies, and research intended to understand the implications of the Tonga volcano. Enormous scientific and technical advances continued in chemical and biological research and commerce, long after most chemical and biological weapons research and development were banned, to draw from another example.

--SV

 

-- 

Stacy D. VanDeveer (he/him)

Chair, Department of Conflict Resolution, Human Security & Global Governance

Professor, Global Governance & Human Security

McCormack Graduate School of Policy & Global Studies

University of Massachusetts Boston

www.global.umb.edu

 

From: Gernot Wagner <ger...@gwagner.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 at 6:14 PM
To: Wil Burns <w...@feronia.org>
Cc: Stacy VanDeveer <Stacy.V...@umb.edu>, Gep-Ed <gep...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [gep-ed] calling for a Solar Geoengineering Non-use Agreement

 

EXTERNAL SENDER

prakash.kashwan

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 9:05:18 AM1/19/22
to gep-ed

To add to Stacy's response - the question of "legitimacy" should be put in the hands of legitimately democratic forms of global governance. Voluntary codes of conduct can be tools for self-enlightenment but not for responsible and accountable governance of such important matters as hacking the planet.

And, Gernot, I hope the conclusion of your book is, let's not gamble with the only planet we -- billions of human and non-human inhabitants -- call home.
-Prakash

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Prakash Kashwan, Ph.D. (Google Scholar) (Public Dropbox)
Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Connecticut
Co-Director, Research Program on Economic and Social Rights, Human Rights Institute

Editor, Environmental Politics
Vice Chair/Program Chair, Environmental Studies Section, International Studies Association (ISA)

University of Connecticut
365 Fairfield Way, Storrs, CT 06269
Phone: 860-486-7951
https://kashwan.net/

Wil Burns

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 9:22:14 AM1/19/22
to prakash...@uconn.edu, gep-ed

Here’s the result of the SCOPEX saga last year, an example of one country’s response to proposed SRM experimentation. Of course, as the piece points out, the response of the Harvard guys, is, essentially, “well, if one country rejects our experiment, let’s just stay a moving target.” It’s my hope that the new initiative will scupper efforts to do this in the United States also. wil

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-geoengineering-sweden/sweden-rejects-pioneering-test-of-solar-geoengineering-tech-idUSKBN2BN35X

Dan Bodansky

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 7:15:59 PM1/19/22
to prakash...@uconn.edu, GEPED
Prakash,

Aren’t we already in the midst of a huge gamble with the only planet we call home? 

Dan


Wil Burns

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 7:24:24 PM1/19/22
to danbo...@gmail.com, prakash...@uconn.edu, GEPED

I’ve always been fascinated with this frequent response to challenges of SRM. The natural corollary seems to be that we’ve ravaged the planet with uncontrolled technological interventions that affect the global commons, yet the solution for some is more uncontrolled technological interventions that affect the global commons. wil

Gernot Wagner

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 7:37:35 PM1/19/22
to Wil Burns, Daniel Bodansky, Prakash Kashwan, GEPED
There's a rather long history of just this, no? gwagner.com/greenMH

Wil Burns

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 7:40:05 PM1/19/22
to Gernot Wagner, Daniel Bodansky, Prakash Kashwan, GEPED

Yes, there certainly is. I am just not sure why it’s seemingly used as a “justification” for SRM. It would seem to counsel just the opposite. wil

 

 

 

 

 

WIL BURNS

Visiting Professor

Environmental Policy & Culture Program

Northwestern University

 

Email: william...@northwestern.edu  

Mobile: 312.550.3079

 

1808 Chicago Ave. #110

Evanston, IL 60208

https://epc.northwestern.edu/people/staff-new/wil-burns.html

 

Want to schedule a call? Click on one of the following scheduling links:

 

I acknowledge and honor the Ojibwe, Potawatomi, and Odawa, as well as the Menominee, Miami and Ho-Chunk nations, upon whose traditional homelands Northwestern University stands, and the Indigenous people who remain on this land today.

 

 

 

 

From: Gernot Wagner <ger...@gwagner.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 6:37 PM
To: Wil Burns <w...@feronia.org>

Gernot Wagner

unread,
Jan 19, 2022, 7:56:52 PM1/19/22
to Wil Burns, Daniel Bodansky, Prakash Kashwan, GEPED
It would suggest, to me, to use (the threat of) SRM to push as hard as possible on the decarbonization front -- and yes, to do the SRM research because, in the end, it's about trading off risks, uncertainties, and worse.

Then again, I would say that.

(And I realize now you'll tell me that the letter explicitly permits "legitimate" research. Sure. Of course, it also directly attempts to censor the IPCC.)

Cheers,
G

Gernot Wagner, New York University (on leave at Columbia Business School, spring 2022)
gwagner.com
Keep in touch: gwagner.com/#newsletter 

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages