Should we put the climate at the service of geoengineering?

What are Erde abzukühlen? An idea, when it comes to climate control, is different, but it doesn’t work.

Geoengineering is a technology made available to humans by the people who use it. There are two central ideas: How CO₂ is involved in the environment – ​​the efficient removal of carbon dioxide (CDR) – or a deeper reflection on the world in the world – with modification of solar radiation (SRM).

Geoengineering can have unintended consequences, but the climate on earth is a big influence on the planet. So you are passive, a mass attacks global responsibility, one state has a negative influence – and others do not benefit from it.

Beyond that, geoengineering is another thing within the framework of the ecosystem: whether, under Ozeanen’s decisions, the levels and development plans were leiden or sogar aussterben, when Was your Lebensräume as strong as possible?

This must be the case for the method, the CDR or the SRM. The American Geophysical Union (AGU) has launched a science, policy, and education program. This research is completely safe and research into the ethics and implementation of geoengineering is implemented.

Welche Chancen SRM et CDR bieten et wie der Handlungsrahmen zu bewerten ist, ordnen three Experten and Expertinnen un. Alle Folgen our series “3 to 1” find yourself here.

Riskanter Eingriff in a complex system

However, the CDR-Maßnahmen im Vergleich zu SRM in der Regel mit mehreren Jahrzehnten bis zu den geforderten Effekten deutlich langwieriger sind and viel more Cooperation and coordination between companies and companies carried out: at global, national, regional, politics and politics Regulatorischen Ebene, sowie mit der Privatwirtschaft.

The chance to use the best technology may cause the climate control to change or stop the operation. The risk is high – it lies directly in a complex system created, because the climate system is not complete: even if our (zukünftiges) Wissen über das Klimasystem is, we are in a dark place.

The AGU framework is well advanced, but it is also clear in the current context, that it is a document for everyone at its strictest and polarized on the best rationalization drives. This is only one aspect, the most visibility is available, as the option, research on ethical green is not possible.

It is the right of Germany to have moral rights

The greatest risk of geoengineering – especially that of SRM and, for all, that of CDR – is the moral principle: the tattoos themselves were designed in a simple way by geoengineering, but are not not used in solar installations, heat pumps, electric vehicles or green steel vehicles.

These are all physical risks associated with SRM. The plans relating to the interior, but at a given moment, therefore know zu können, bedarf es more Forschung. Moral economy does not apply itself, but it is not focused on geoengineering. As a geoengineering specialist has started work, geoengineering is a solution for CO₂ reduction.

In the sleeves, Aspekten is ohnegleichen geoengineering. In many other areas, geoengineering is ideally suited to other areas of climate and energy research. For everyone, the CDR is last in life Hinsicht einfach “nur” noch teure Mitigation.

Das ore etwa auch für die moralische Gefahr, die davon ausgeht. Additionally, the CDR and SRM were not used effectively because they created the AGU framework and standardized the SRM and it was very difficult.

Please note that the Forschung

Geoengineering, integrated with SRM methods, is excellent work. Research relies on luck, and the global corporation provides greater versatility of potential investment opportunities in a solution to a problem. Errors occur during research and risk: Positive errors occur in the spirit of training, when emissions are auszustoßen.

The implementation of geoengineering has its own chances and risks, which makes the research more thorough. The CDR-Maßnahmen takes risks with the Landnutzungskonflikte. You are always on top of greenhouse gas emissions that offset and emit prolonged negative emissions.

SRM-Methoden können Niederschlagsmuster beeinflussen, ermöglichen jedoch eine vorübergehende Abmilderung der Klimawandelfolgen et könnten das Überschreiten von Kipppunkten verhindern. Beide Ansätze müssen sorgfältig abgewägt werden, um ihre Potenziale, aber auch ihre Gefahren genauer einschätzen zu können. I am proud of the positively integrated AGU ethics framework.