„IAGP has three core objectives:
1) To evaluate the effectiveness and side effects of a broad range of geoengineering proposals
2) To evaluate the controllability of global climate using these proposals
3) To elicit and include stakeholder and public values into the evaluation“
Reynolds, Jesse (2011): The Regulation of Climate Engineering. In: Law, Inn Tech 3 (1), S. 113–136.
Essay on (legal) regulation of CE and problems with specific CE methods.
Uther, S., and Matzner, N. (2011), ‘Initiativen in der Climate-Engineering-Forschung. Projekte, Konferenzen, Netzwerke: Ein Bericht über ausgewählte Forschungsaktivitäten in Deutschland’, TATuP, 20/2: 94–98, accessed 28 Jul 2011.
EN[nbsp] Report on selectet German research activities and the Summer School on Climate Engineering 2010.
DE[nbsp] Bericht über deutsche Forschungsaktivitäten, insbesondere die Summer School 2010 in Heidelberg.
Bowerman, Niel; Kruger, Tim (2011): The Student Conference debate on
geoengineering. In: Weather 66 (7), S. 184–185. DOI: 10.1002/wea.837
„This year’s Royal Meteorological Society Student Conference has just finished, and we look forward to contributions from it in due course. Here, two contributors to a debate held at last year’s Conference, Niel Bowerman and Tim Kruger, air their views on geoengineering as a possible means of tackling dangerous climate change.“
DE „Weltweit stehen Unternehmen und staatliche Energiebehörden in den Startlöchern, um eine neue Energiequelle zu erschließen: Erdgas, das als eisähnliches Hydrat in den Meeresböden der Tiefsee eingeschlossen ist. In Deutschland erforschen mehr als 20 Partner aus Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft unter Leitung des Kieler Leibniz-Instituts für Meereswissenschaften (IFM-GEOMAR), wie aus Gashydraten umweltfreundlich Erdgas gewonnen werden kann, indem gleichzeitig Kohlendioxid sicher in den Hydraten gebunden wird. Das SUGAR-Projekt wird vom Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) sowie vom Bundesforschungsministerium (BMBF) gefördert. Heute startet es offiziell in die zweite Phase.“
Crutzen, Paul J.; Davis, Mike; Mastrandrea, Michael D.; Schneider, Stephen H.; Sloterdijk, Peter (Hg.) (2011): Das Raumschiff Erde hat keinen Notausgang. Energie und Politik im Anthropozän. Berlin: Suhrkamp (Edition Unseld : Sonderdruck).
On climate catastrophe and Anthropocene arguments.
Allenby, Brad (2011): Geoengineering: A critique. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology: IEEE, S. 1–5. DOI: 10.1109/ISSST.2011.5936870[nbsp]
„Geoengineering is a technological response to the challenge of anthropogenic climate change and the failure of political mechanisms to achieve substantial progress in controlling atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Because it derives from the same policy framework as current global warming initiatives, it suffers from the same deficiencies. In particular, the geoengineering dialog to date fails to understand the full power of technology systems, and, because of its singleminded focus on global climate change, inadequately defines the class of technologies included in the geoengineering category.“
Burns, William C. G. (2011): Climate Geoengineering: Solar Radiation Management and its Implications for Intergenerational Equity. In: Stanford Journal of Law, Science [&] Policy 4 (May 10), pp. 39–55.
„This article examines the implications of Solar Radiation Management climate geoengineering for intergenerational equity. It argues that under all but the most stringent circumstances, solar radiation management approaches would violate the internationally legally recognized principle of intergenerational equity.„
Humphreys, D. (2011), ‘Smoke and Mirrors: Some Reflections on the Science and Politics of Geoengineering’, The Journal of Environment [&] Development, 20/2: 99–120.
„This article identifies and explores some of the political issues that will need to be addressed in the governance of geoengineering. It is argued that the diversity of different possible geoengineering techniques—encompassing solar radiation management (SRM) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR), and further divided into territorial techniques and commons-based techniques—rules out a single mode of geoengineering governance. Whereas some geoengineering techniques may be effective when implemented by a small number of countries, others would need to be implemented around the globe and involve most countries of the world, with different countries having different comparative advantages in the various geoengineering techniques. Such an enterprise would generate collective action problems related to implementation and disagreements over who should pay for the financial and nonfinancial costs of geoengineering. Nonetheless, a more coherent system of geoengineering governance is possible and is necessary if international conflict is to be avoided and the risks of unintended consequences are to be minimized. Any new international institutional design on geoengineering will need to address some pressing political and scientific questions, including the desired mean temperature of the world’s climate, the possible role of CDR technologies in carbon offsets and emissions-trading schemes, and whether there should be differentiated obligations between different groups of states.“
