1. Ethical Aspects of Climate Engineering robock@envsci.rutgers.edu http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey

2. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Reviews of Geophysics distills and places in perspective previous scientific work in currently active subject areas of geophysics. Contributions evaluate overall progress in the field and cover all disciplines embraced by AGU. Authorship is by invitation, but suggestions from readers and potential authors are welcome. If you are interested in writing an article please talk with me, or write to reviewsgeophysics@agu.org, with an abstract, outline, and analysis of recent similar review articles, to demonstrate the need for your proposed article. reviewsgeophysics@agu.org Reviews of Geophysics has an impact factor of 14.8 in the 2014 Journal Citation Reports, highest in the geosciences. http://www.agu.org/journals/rg/

3. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Desire for improved well-being Consumption of goods and services Impacts on humans and ecosystems Climate change CO 2 in the atmosphere Consumption of energy CO 2 emissions CONSERVATION EFFICIENCY LOW-CARBON ENERGY S O L A R R A D I A T I O N M A N A G E M E N T CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL ADAPTATION After Ken Caldeira SUFFERING

4. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.pdf Recovery from volcanic eruptions dominates Tropospheric aerosols mask warming (global dimming) Greenhouse gases dominate

5. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Released February 14, 2015 Sponsors: U.S. National Academy of Sciences, U.S. intelligence community, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Department of Energy Solar Radiation Management (SRM) Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR)

6. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences

7. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Why are we here? Was industrialization, and its resulting impacts on climate ethical?

8. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences We have to discuss separately the ethics of climate engineering research and implementation. Research must be separated into indoor and outdoor. Robock, Alan, 2012: Is geoengineering research ethical? Peace and Security, 4, 226-229.

9. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Ethics is different from science. It is based on values rather than testable hypotheses. According to Tuana (2013), there are at least five relevant dimensions of justice: Distributive justice Intergenerational justice Corrective justice Ecological justice Procedural justice Tuana, Nancy, 2013: The ethical dimensions of geoengineering: Solar radiation management through sulphate particle injection. Geoengineering Our Climate?, https://geoengineeringourclimate.com/2013/06/11/the-ethical-dimensions-of- geoengineering-solar-radiation-management-through-sulphate-particle-injection- working-paper/ https://geoengineeringourclimate.com/2013/06/11/the-ethical-dimensions-of- geoengineering-solar-radiation-management-through-sulphate-particle-injection- working-paper/

10. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Distributive justice: Harms and benefits of an action should be fairly or equitably distributed. 1. Should harms and benefits be shared equally, or are differential impacts justified if the least well off are better off than they were previously? 2. How do you measure harms and benefits? Temperature only? Precipitation? How do you weight them? Impacts on agriculture and water? Or should there be some economic measure? Does length of period matter? To society or to individuals? 3. If things get bad, is there a responsibility to use climate engineering, even if there are harms? Tuana (2013)

11. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Intergenerational justice: Similar to distributive justice, but compares harms and benefits to current populations to those of future generations. Corrective justice: Considers the extent to which individuals or groups are morally deserving of impacts. Based on responsibilities for emissions, that is historical contributions to climate change, but by country or per capita? Should benefits to the worst off should be given more weight than benefits to the better off? Can compensation be equitably ensured? Ecological justice: Includes consideration of the impacts on nonhuman life and on ecosystem sustainability. Tuana (2013)

12. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences I agree with all these aspects of justice, but do not know how to address all of them simultaneously. For society to do this, Procedural Justice is necessary.

13. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Procedural justice: How to ensure that decision procedures are ethical. 1. Rationales for policy decisions should be transparent and public. 2. The decision process should be based on relevant ethical principles. 3. The process should allow for a mechanism for appeal and regulation to ensure fairness. 4. Must any just decision process be an international process? Is the nation-state the ethically relevant representative group for making a just decision? Tuana (2013)

14. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Procedural justice, continued: 5. If there are individuals, groups, or nations who do not consent to deployment, are they thereby more deserving of compensation for resulting harms? 6. Is there ever a condition in which it would be ethically acceptable for one group (e.g., a nation) or a small federation to make the decision to geoengineer without consultation with other groups/nations? 7. Who makes the decision about whether to test or implement geoengineering, when to stop testing or deploying, as well as what should be the target? Tuana (2013)

15. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Indoor climate engineering research is ethical and is needed to provide information to policymakers and society so that we can make informed decisions in the future to deal with climate change. Outdoor climate engineering research, however, is not ethical unless subject to governance that protects society from potential environmental dangers. Robock, Alan, 2012: Is geoengineering research ethical? Peace and Security, 4, 226-229. My opinion

16. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Benefits Risks 1. Reduce surface air temperatures, which could reduce or reverse negative impacts of global warming, including floods, droughts, stronger storms, sea ice melting, land-based ice sheet melting, and sea level rise 1. Drought in Africa and Asia 2. Perturb ecology with more diffuse radiation 3. Ozone depletion 4. Continued ocean acidification 5. Will not stop ice sheets from melting 6. Impacts on tropospheric chemistry 2. Increase plant productivity 7. Whiter skies 3. Increase terrestrial CO 2 sink 8. Less solar electricity generation 4. Beautiful red and yellow sunsets 9. Degrade passive solar heating 5. Unexpected benefits10. Rapid warming if stopped 11. Cannot stop effects quickly 12. Human error 13. Unexpected consequences 14. Commercial control 15. Military use of technology 16. Societal disruption, conflict between countries 17. Conflicts with current treaties 18. Whose hand on the thermostat? 19. Effects on airplanes flying in stratosphere 20. Effects on electrical properties of atmosphere 21. Environmental impact of implementation 22. Degrade terrestrial optical astronomy 23. Affect stargazing 24. Affect satellite remote sensing 25. More sunburn 26. Moral hazard – the prospect of it working would reduce drive for mitigation 27. Moral authority – do we have the right to do this? Each of these needs to be quantified so that society can make informed decisions. Stratospheric Geoengineering Robock, Alan, 2008: 20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea. Bull. Atomic Scientists, 64, No. 2, 14-18, 59, doi:10.2968/064002006. Robock, Alan, Allison B. Marquardt, Ben Kravitz, and Georgiy Stenchikov, 2009: The benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L19703, doi:10.1029/2009GL039209. Robock, Alan, 2014: Stratospheric aerosol geoengineering. Issues Env. Sci. Tech. (Special issue “Geoengineering of the Climate System”), 38, 162-185.

17. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Benefits Risks 1. Reduce surface air temperatures, which could reduce or reverse negative impacts of global warming, including floods, droughts, stronger storms, sea ice melting, land-based ice sheet melting, and sea level rise 1. Drought in Africa and Asia 2. Perturb ecology with more diffuse radiation 3. Ozone depletion 4. Continued ocean acidification 5. Will not stop ice sheets from melting 6. Impacts on tropospheric chemistry 2. Increase plant productivity 7. Whiter skies 3. Increase terrestrial CO 2 sink 8. Less solar electricity generation 4. Beautiful red and yellow sunsets 9. Degrade passive solar heating 5. Unexpected benefits10. Rapid warming if stopped 11. Cannot stop effects quickly 12. Human error 13. Unexpected consequences 14. Commercial control 15. Military use of technology 16. Societal disruption, conflict between countries 17. Conflicts with current treaties 18. Whose hand on the thermostat? 19. Effects on airplanes flying in stratosphere 20. Effects on electrical properties of atmosphere 21. Environmental impact of implementation 22. Degrade terrestrial optical astronomy 23. Affect stargazing 24. Affect satellite remote sensing 25. More sunburn 26. Moral hazard – the prospect of it working would reduce drive for mitigation 27. Moral authority – do we have the right to do this? Stratospheric Geoengineering Robock, Alan, Allison B. Marquardt, Ben Kravitz, and Georgiy Stenchikov, 2009: The benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L19703, doi:10.1029/2009GL039209. Robock, Alan, 2014: Stratospheric aerosol geoengineering. Issues Env. Sci. Tech. (Special issue “Geoengineering of the Climate System”), 38, 162-185. Not testable with modeling or the volcanic analog Robock, Alan, Douglas G. MacMartin, Riley Duren, and Matthew W. Christensen, 2013: Studying geoengineering with natural and anthropogenic analogs. Climatic Change, 121, 445-458, doi:10.1007/s10584-013-0777-5.

18. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences I don’t think geoengineering will ever be implemented. How would the planetary governance decision be made as to whether to implement geoengineering, and if so how much? Whose hand would be on the planetary thermostat? The principle of informed consent governs medical interventions. How could we get the informed consent of the entire planet? If geoengineering were ever implemented, every climate extreme would be blamed on the geoengineers. There would be no more “Acts of God.” Certainly the developed world is most capable of doing any geoengineering implementation. The history of colonialism will make the rest of the world wary of climate manipulations that are presumably for their benefit. Robock, Alan, 2012: Will geoengineering with solar radiation management ever be used? Ethics, Policy & Environment, 15, 202-205.

19. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences

20. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences American Meteorological Society* and American Geophysical Union # Policy Statement on Geoengineering The AMS and AGU recommend:  Enhanced research on the scientific and technological potential for geoengineering the climate system, including research on intended and unintended environmental responses. * 2009, readopted in 2013 # 2009, reaffirmed in 2012

21. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences The AMS and AGU recommend:  Enhanced research on the scientific and technological potential for geoengineering the climate system, including research on intended and unintended environmental responses.  Coordinated study of historical, ethical, legal, and social implications of geoengineering that integrates international, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational issues and perspectives and includes lessons from past efforts to modify weather and climate. * 2009, readopted in 2013 # 2009, reaffirmed in 2012 American Meteorological Society* and American Geophysical Union # Policy Statement on Geoengineering

22. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences The AMS and AGU recommend:  Enhanced research on the scientific and technological potential for geoengineering the climate system, including research on intended and unintended environmental responses.  Coordinated study of historical, ethical, legal, and social implications of geoengineering that integrates international, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational issues and perspectives and includes lessons from past efforts to modify weather and climate.  Development and analysis of policy options to promote transparency and international cooperation in exploring geoengineering options along with restrictions on reckless efforts to manipulate the climate system. * 2009, readopted in 2013 # 2009, reaffirmed in 2012 American Meteorological Society* and American Geophysical Union # Policy Statement on Geoengineering

23. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences The United Nations Framework Convention On Climate Change 1992 Signed by 194 countries and ratified by 188 (as of February 26, 2004) Signed and ratified in 1992 by the United States The ultimate objective of this Convention... is to achieve... stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

24. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change thought of “dangerous anthropogenic interference” as due to the inadvertent effects on climate from anthropogenic greenhouse gases. We now must include geoengineering in our pledge to “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” © New York Times, Henning Wagenbreth, Oct. 24, 2007

25. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Time (yr)  2000 2100 Business as usual CDR Mitigation SRM Impacts, adaptation, and suffering Climate change  Dangerous? But does SRM make it more dangerous? After John Shepherd’s “napkin diagram”

26. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences At the Paris climate conference (COP21) in December 2015, 195 countries adopted the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate deal. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/paris/index_en.htm

27. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences

28. London Sunset After Krakatau 4:40 p.m., Nov. 26, 1883 Watercolor by William Ascroft Figure from Symons (1888)

29. Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences “The Scream” Edvard Munch Painted in 1893 based on Munch’s memory of the brilliant sunsets following the 1883 Krakatau eruption.