“Planting new forests is the carbon removal practice with the highest level of public support at 86%; speeding up natural reactions between carbon and rock formations to store carbon is lowest at 43%.”
“Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) systems put more greenhouse gases into the air than they take out.”
Sapinski, J. P.; Buck, Holly Jean; Malm, Andreas (Eds.) (2020): Has it come to this? The promises and perils of geoengineering on the brink. New Brunswick, Camden: Rutgers University Press (Nature, society, and culture).
“The editors set out this diverse collection of voices not as a monolithic, unified take on geoengineering, but as a place where creative thinkers, students, and interested environmental and social justice advocates can explore nuanced ideas in more than 240 characters.”
“Matt Watson talks about his experiences on the SPICE Project, the need for careful research into SRM given temperature rises and the slow pace of decarbonisation. He also explains how he dealt with a death threat that came during the SPICE project, an unexpected hazard for someone who is a volcanologist and also known from his blog as the reluctant geoengineer.”
Corbett, Charles R. (2020): “Extraordinary” and “Highly Controversial”: Federal Research of Solar Geoengineering Under NEPA. (September 21, 2020). Northwestern University Law Review Online (forthcoming), Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3696942.
“This Essay argues that NOAA should use its discretion to conduct a programmatic environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) as an initial step in complying with Congress’s mandate. Federal research into solar geoengineering is an extraordinary and highly controversial policy. The agency should carefully consider the environmental, social, and political impacts that may come with this undertaking. Further, the public deserves an opportunity to weigh in on the matter and to be appraised of its risks.”
Shrum, Trisha R.; Markowitz, Ezra; Buck, Holly; Gregory, Robin; van der Linden, Sander; Attari, Shahzeen Z.; van Boven, Leaf (2020): Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal. In Interface Focus. 10 (5), p. 20200002. DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2020.0002.
“In this paper, we review behavioural decision theory and discuss how public reactions to CDR will be different from and more complex than that implied by rational choice theory.”
“The Carbon Capture and Storage Association (CCSA), a trade body for the Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) industry in the UK, has welcomed the Government’s publication of its response to the CCUS Business Models consultation.”
Lockley, A.; Futerman, G.; Coffman, D. (2020): Geoengineering and Public Trust Doctrine. In Carbon [&] Climate Law Review 14 (2), pp. 85–97. DOI: 10.21552/cclr/2020/2/4.
“We consider various types of geoengineering to protect example assets currently under PTD, finding a compelling case for action in a variety of contexts. This introduces a paradoxical situation, where it may theoretically be easier to compel states to undertake geoengineering to protect a beach, than to protect the whole planet.”
“A new public conversation about the urgency of climate change is important for people’s perceptions of CO2 removal technologies.”
Cox, Emily; Spence, Elspeth; Pidgeon, Nick (2020): Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom. In Nat. Clim. Chang. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-020-0823-z.
“Here we report a mixed-methods study on public perceptions of CDR in the United States and the United Kingdom, focusing on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, direct air capture and terrestrial enhanced rock weathering.”
