Andrew Lockley
University College London, Bartlett UCL, Graduate Student
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Solar geoengineering, also known as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), has been proposed to alter Earth’s radiative balance to reduce the effects of anthropogenic climate change. SRM has been identified as a research priority, as it has... more
Solar geoengineering, also known as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), has been proposed to alter Earth’s radiative balance to reduce the effects of anthropogenic climate change. SRM has been identified as a research priority, as it has been shown to effectively reduce surface temperatures, while substantial uncertainties remain around side effects and impacts. Global modeling studies of SRM have often relied on idealized scenarios to understand the physical processes of interventions and their widespread impacts. These extreme or idealized scenarios are not directly policy-relevant and are often physically implausible (such as imposing global solar reduction to counter the warming of an instantaneous quadrupling of CO2). The climatic and ecological impacts of politically relevant and potentially plausible SRM approaches have rarely been modeled and assessed. Nevertheless, commentators and policymakers often falsely assume that idealized or extreme scenarios are proposed solutions ...
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM... more
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM can be drawn from situations where citizens are empowered to act unilaterally in crises such as stopping trains, deploying fire hoses, and using lethal force for self-defence. The question arises: could citizens ethically and responsibly conduct SRM? To explore philanthropic geoengineering, issues of justifiability and legitimacy are examined in various scenarios: Greenfinger, Billionaires' Club, Crowdfunding, Social Movement, and Technocrats. The governance, support, rules & laws, and informed & effective decision-making in these scenarios are evaluated through discussions of legitimacy types: normative, descriptive, rational-legal, and output-input lrespectively. In conclusion, legitimacy is neither guaranteed nor impossiblebut particular accountability and stability problems arise in the lone-actor Greenfinger model and loosely-structured crowdfunded movements. However, there is some merit to Technocrats, particularly when overseen by external funders. Blending various approaches appears to offer significant benefits. Finally, a set of criteria for legitimacy is proposed.
Research Interests:
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM... more
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) geoengineering could moderate anthropogenic global warming. SRM could be privatised, e.g. using voluntary carbon offsets; alternatively, philanthropic geoengineering is possible. Analogues to private SRM can be drawn from situations where citizens are empowered to act unilaterally in crises such as stopping trains, deploying fire hoses, and using lethal force for self-defence. The question arises: could citizens ethically and responsibly conduct SRM? To explore philanthropic geoengineering, issues of justifiability and legitimacy are examined in various scenarios: Greenfinger, Billionaires' Club, Crowdfunding, Social Movement, and Technocrats. The governance, support, rules & laws, and informed & effective decision-making in these scenarios are evaluated through discussions of legitimacy types: normative, descriptive, rational-legal, and output-input lrespectively. In conclusion, legitimacy is neither guaranteed nor impossiblebut particular accountability and stability problems arise in the lone-actor Greenfinger model and loosely-structured crowdfunded movements. However, there is some merit to Technocrats, particularly when overseen by external funders. Blending various approaches appears to offer significant benefits. Finally, a set of criteria for legitimacy is proposed.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance... more
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance... more
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth's climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term... more
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth's climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated "Greenfinger" individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited subset of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare-each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Research Interests:
Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) is at pilot scale. Air cooling and liquefaction stores energy; reheating revaporises the air at pressure, powering a turbine or engine (Ameel et al., 2013). Liquefaction requires water & CO2 removal,... more
Liquid Air Energy Storage (LAES) is at pilot scale. Air cooling and liquefaction stores energy; reheating revaporises the air at pressure, powering a turbine or engine (Ameel et al., 2013). Liquefaction requires water & CO2 removal, preventing ice fouling. This paper proposes subsequent geological storage of this CO2 - offering a novel Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) by-product, for the energy storage industry. It additionally assesses the scale constraint and economic opportunity offered by implementing this CDR approach. Similarly, established Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) uses air compression and subsequent expansion. CAES could also add CO2scrubbing and subsequent storage, at extra cost. CAES stores fewer joules per kilogram of air than LAES - potentially scrubbing more CO2 per joule stored. Operational LAES/CAES technologies cannot offer full-scale CDR this century (Stocker et al., 2014), yet they could offer around 4% of projected CO2 disposals for LAES and < 25% for cu...
Research Interests:
Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) is a proposed Negative Emissions Technology (NET) to remove atmospheric CO2 through the dispersion of alkaline materials (e.g.: calcium hydroxide, slaked lime, SL) into seawater, simultaneously... more
Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement (OAE) is a proposed Negative Emissions Technology (NET) to remove atmospheric CO2 through the dispersion of alkaline materials (e.g.: calcium hydroxide, slaked lime, SL) into seawater, simultaneously counteracting ocean acidification. This study considers aircraft discharge of SL and its consequent dry deposition, extending to the marine environment a technique used in freshwater. A feasibility analysis assesses potential, costs, benefits, and disadvantages, considering scenarios with different assumptions on aircraft size, discharge height and duration, and wind conditions. Due to the small size of SL particles (median diameter 9 μm), the dispersion from aircraft is highly enhanced by wind drift; the smallest SL particles may drift thousands of kilometres, especially if discharged from elevated altitudes. This could pose problems related to powders particles settling on remote lands. Although calcium hydroxide maximum concentration into water (from 0.01 to 82 mg L-1) is for almost all the scenarios lower than the most stringent threshold for the ecosystem impacts on a 96-h exposure, the ecologically sensitive sea surface microlayer (SML) should be considered in detail. The high CO2 emissions of the Landing to Take-Off Cycle (LTO) of the aircraft and their limited payload lead to a significant CO2 penalty, ranging in analysed scenarios between 28% and 77% of the CO2 removal potential; very fast discharge could reduce the penalty to 11% - 32%. Preliminary cost analysis shows that the cost of the SL discharge through aircraft is high, between € 30 and € 1846 per ton of CO2 removed (neglecting the lime cost), substantially higher than the cost for discharge by surface vessels resulting from previous studies, which restricts the practical use of this strategy.
Research Interests:
Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely discussed as a strategy to reduce harm from Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) . One postulated geoengineering scenario involves a ‘Rogue State’... more
Abstract Geoengineering (i.e. deliberate modification of the climate system) has been widely discussed as a strategy to reduce harm from Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) . One postulated geoengineering scenario involves a ‘Rogue State’ , acting unilaterally to commence geoengineering in defiance of wider opinion. Cost estimates for geoengineering by Solar Radiation Management (SRM) place geoengineering at a comparable level in the public finances to the provision of major national infrastructure projects (and similar investments) when the costs of construction, ownership and operation are considered using as close an approximation as possible of Whole Life Costing (WLC). Accordingly, we consider whether (at the scale of an individual nation state) individual adaptation programmes can favourably be compared to SRM geoengineering. We consider in detail three examples: a major dam, a city-scale flood defence scheme, and a healthcare scheme to counter an insect-vectored disease. In all cases, we find that a global SRM programme may compare favourably on cost-benefit grounds. We accordingly suggest that an individual state may have a rational reason to geoengineer the entire planet, as the result of a single-project cost-benefit analysis. Accordingly, we find strong support on economic grounds for the validity of the ‘rogue state’ framing, and extend this to consider a ‘rogue mayor’, official, or politician alternative.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering has been proposed to deal partially with the consequences of anthropogenic global warming. This is composed of two strands - fast acting, incomplete but inexpensive solar radiation management; and carbon dioxide removal,... more
Geoengineering has been proposed to deal partially with the consequences of anthropogenic global warming. This is composed of two strands - fast acting, incomplete but inexpensive solar radiation management; and carbon dioxide removal, which (if enacted quickly) has the potential to be a complete solution. We propose a system of smart contracts, executed and made transparent by the blockchain, to provide an economically and environmentally complete solution to carbon emissions at the point of combustion. This will integrate CDR futures contracts and matched SRM contracts to ensure that all emissions are fully and transactionally disposed of at the moment of release. Specifically, we suggest use of an SRM ‘bridge’ contract, to counter the warming caused between CDR economic activity being undertaken, and the resultant drawdown of carbon occurring.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is one proposed method, reliant on lofting material into the stratosphere. Engineering... more
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is one proposed method, reliant on lofting material into the stratosphere. Engineering reviews related to this technology approach have been sparse, with most major primary analyses now at least five years old. We attempt to bridge this gap—with a short, qualitative review of recent developments in various fields of engineering that have potential applicability to SAI. Our analysis shows that a new conventional aircraft design is still likely to be the most dependable and affordable technology solution (cost estimates start around $1000–1500 per ton lofted), with hybrid or vacuum airships a potential challenger. Rockets, gas guns and MAGLEV/coilguns show some potential—although they lack the inherent level-flight capability that would be needed for direct aerosol distribution (versus distribution of gaseous precursors), without substanti...
Research Interests:
Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (Shepherd, 2009; National Research Council, 2015). Solar Radiation Management geoengineering (SRM) offers relatively... more
Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (Shepherd, 2009; National Research Council, 2015). Solar Radiation Management geoengineering (SRM) offers relatively inexpensive, rapid temperature control. However, this low cost leads to a risk of controversial unilateral intervention—the “free-driver” problem (Weitzman, 2015). Consequently, this creates a risk of counter-geoengineering (deliberate warming) (Parker et al., 2018), resulting in governance challenges (Svoboda, 2017) akin to an arms race. Free-driver deployment scenarios previously considered include the rogue state, Greenfinger (Bodansky, 2013), or power blocs (Ricke et al., 2013), implying disagreement and conflict. We propose a novel distributed governance model of consensually-constrained unilateralism: Countries’ authority is limited to each state’s fraction of the maximum realistic intervention (e.g., pre-industrial temperature). We suggest a division o...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Geoengineering is the deliberate modification of the climate system. It has been discussed as a technique to counteract changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).1 Speculation has occurred that the possibility of... more
Geoengineering is the deliberate modification of the climate system. It has been discussed as a technique to counteract changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).1 Speculation has occurred that the possibility of geoengineering will reduce or delay efforts to mitigate AGW. This possible delay or reduction in mitigation has been described as ‘moral hazard’ by various authors. We investigate the definitions and use of the term ‘moral hazard’, and the related (but significantly different) concept of ‘morale hazard’, in relevant law, economic and insurance literatures. We find that ‘moral hazard’ has been generally misapplied in discussions of geoengineering, which perhaps explains unexpected difficulties in detecting expected effects experimentally.2 We clarify relevant usage of the terms, identifying scenarios that can properly be described as moral hazard (malfeasance), and morale hazard (lack of caution or recklessness). We note generally the importance of c...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Aircraft can distribute slaked lime for ocean alkalinity enhancement. • A feasibility analysis is conducted, considering different discharging scenarios. • Scenarios assume various aircraft payload, discharge altitude and duration. •... more
Aircraft can distribute slaked lime for ocean alkalinity enhancement. • A feasibility analysis is conducted, considering different discharging scenarios. • Scenarios assume various aircraft payload, discharge altitude and duration. • Energy penalty and costs are much higher than distribution in the ships' wake. • Very high dispersion is reached, but effects on surface microlayer are still unclear.
Research Interests:
Science fiction offers scenarios in which a planet is destroyed in combat. However, these are often impractical. Instead of supplying all the energy required, more plausible attacks may use leverage in order to damage or destroy the... more
Science fiction offers scenarios in which a planet is destroyed in combat. However, these are often impractical. Instead of supplying all the energy required, more plausible attacks may use leverage in order to damage or destroy the planet or its biosphere. In order to study the conduct, observation, or defence associated with such attacks, a range of potentially practical weapon and defence technologies are discussed. These are: altering the radiation budget of a planet so as to substantially change its temperature; introducing invasive species to transform the biogeochemistry; and using orbital perturbations of comets and asteroids to cause collisions, or to move the planet to an unstable or uninhabitable orbit. Weapon transit and effect times associated with these technologies render them suitable only for extreme slow-motion warfare, assuming near-term technologies.
Research Interests:
Solar radiation management (SRM) geoengineering can be used to deliberately alter the Earth’s radiation budget, by reflecting sunlight to space. SRM has been suggested as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), to partly or... more
Solar radiation management (SRM) geoengineering can be used to deliberately alter the Earth’s radiation budget, by reflecting sunlight to space. SRM has been suggested as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), to partly or fully balance radiative forcing from AGW [1]. Approximately 22% of sun-like stars have Earth-like exoplanets[2]. Advanced civilisations may exist on these, and may use geoengineering for positive or negative radiative forcing. Additionally, terraforming projects [e.g. 3], may be used to expand alien habitable territory, or for resource management or military operations on non-home planets. Potential observations of alien geoengineering and terraforming may enable detection of technologically advanced alien civilisations, and may help identify widely-used and stable geoengineering technologies. This knowledge may assist the development of safe and stable geoengineering methods for Earth. The potential risks and benefits of possible alien detection of Ear...
It is remarkable that the high-end sea level rise threat over the next few hundred years comes almost entirely from only a handful of ice streams and large glaciers. These occupy a few percent of ice sheets’ coastline. Accordingly,... more
It is remarkable that the high-end sea level rise threat over the next few hundred years comes almost entirely from only a handful of ice streams and large glaciers. These occupy a few percent of ice sheets’ coastline. Accordingly, spatially limited interventions at source may provide globally-equitable mitigation from rising seas. Ice streams control draining of ice sheets; glacier retreat or acceleration serves to greatly increase potential sea level rise. While various climatic geoengineering approaches have been considered, serious consideration of geotechnical approaches has been limited – particularly regarding glaciers. This study summarises novel and extant geotechnical techniques for glacier restraint, identifying candidates for further research. These include draining or freezing the bed; altering surface albedo; creating obstacles: retaining snow; stiffening shear margins with ice; blocking warm sea water entry; thickening ice shelves (increasing buttressing, and strength...
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Geology and Astrobiology
Methane is a significant GHG, and substantial reservoirs are vulnerable to instability due to AGW. Excursions, from permafrost and clathrates especially, act a positive feedback to AGW. Existing concentrations of well-mixed atmospheric... more
Methane is a significant GHG, and substantial reservoirs are vulnerable to instability due to AGW. Excursions, from permafrost and clathrates especially, act a positive feedback to AGW. Existing concentrations of well-mixed atmospheric methane substantially exceed pre-industrial levels. Various geoengineering methods are herein proposed for containment of methane, and/or accelerated oxidation to CO2 (a gas with a lower GWP over all timescales). A basic qualitative analysis of each technique is undertaken, to direct further study. Consideration is also given to the potential capacity of each technique to treat the total likely excursions of methane expected as a result of AGW.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Law and Environmental Law
Methane is a significant GHG, and substantial reservoirs are vulnerable to instability due to AGW. Excursions, from permafrost and clathrates especially, act a positive feedback to AGW. Existing concentrations of well-mixed atmospheric... more
Methane is a significant GHG, and substantial reservoirs are vulnerable to instability due to AGW. Excursions, from permafrost and clathrates especially, act a positive feedback to AGW. Existing concentrations of well-mixed atmospheric methane substantially exceed pre-industrial levels. Various geoengineering methods are herein proposed for containment of methane, and/or accelerated oxidation to CO2 (a gas with a lower GWP over all timescales). A basic qualitative analysis of each technique is undertaken, to direct further study. Consideration is also given to the potential capacity of each technique to treat the total likely excursions of methane expected as a result of AGW. Proposed techniques: Section 0 SRM (comparison option) Section 1 Pre-emptive treatment of methane reservoirs Soil heating (polytunnels, heat pumps); Soil aeration; Mining of clathrates; Burning of clathrates Section 2 Remediation of aquatic methane excursions Lake sealing; Mixing of aquatic strata; Bubble capture; Lake aeration; Biological oxidation in aquatic environments Section 3 Remediation of concentrated atmospheric methane Regenerative thermal oxidation; Electrical ignition; Thermal ignition; Using incendiary munitions Section 4 Remediation of diffuse atmospheric methane Thermal oxidation by concentrated solar power; Compression ignition; Chemical degradation Assessment criteria: Infrastructure/implementation cost; Energy cost; Expected efficacy; Complexity/development path; Environmental impacts; Potential for CCS
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Currently reading: Abstract Get access Share Cite Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window] Abstract Approximately 22% of sun-like stars have Earth-like exoplanets. Advanced civilizations may exist on these, and significant effort... more
Currently reading:
Abstract
Get access
Share
Cite
Rights & Permissions
[Opens in a new window]
Abstract
Approximately 22% of sun-like stars have Earth-like exoplanets. Advanced civilizations may exist on these, and significant effort has been expended on the theoretical analysis of planetary systems, and accompanying practical detection instruments.
The longevity of technological civilizations is unknown, as is the probability of less advanced societies becoming technological. Accordingly, searching for pre-industrial extra-terrestrial societies may be more productive.
Using the earth as a model, a consideration of possible detectible proxies suggests that observation of seasonal agriculture may be possible in the near future – particularly in ideal circumstances, for which quantitative analysis is provided. More speculatively, other detectible processes may include: species introduction; climate change; large urban fires and land-use or aquatic changes.
Primitive societies may be both aware that their activities may be observed from other planets, and may deliberately adjust these activities to aid or conceal detection.
Abstract
Get access
Share
Cite
Rights & Permissions
[Opens in a new window]
Abstract
Approximately 22% of sun-like stars have Earth-like exoplanets. Advanced civilizations may exist on these, and significant effort has been expended on the theoretical analysis of planetary systems, and accompanying practical detection instruments.
The longevity of technological civilizations is unknown, as is the probability of less advanced societies becoming technological. Accordingly, searching for pre-industrial extra-terrestrial societies may be more productive.
Using the earth as a model, a consideration of possible detectible proxies suggests that observation of seasonal agriculture may be possible in the near future – particularly in ideal circumstances, for which quantitative analysis is provided. More speculatively, other detectible processes may include: species introduction; climate change; large urban fires and land-use or aquatic changes.
Primitive societies may be both aware that their activities may be observed from other planets, and may deliberately adjust these activities to aid or conceal detection.
Research Interests:
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is one proposed method, reliant on lofting material into the stratosphere. Engineering... more
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is one proposed method, reliant on lofting material into the stratosphere. Engineering reviews related to this technology approach have been sparse, with most major primary analyses now at least five years old. We attempt to bridge this gap-with a short, qualitative review of recent developments in various fields of engineering that have potential applicability to SAI. Our analysis shows that a new conventional aircraft design is still likely to be the most dependable and affordable technology solution (cost estimates start around $1000-1500 per ton lofted), with hybrid or vacuum airships a potential challenger. Rockets, gas guns and MAGLEV/coilguns show some potential-although they lack the inherent level-flight capability that would be needed for direct aerosol distribution (versus distribution of gaseous precursors), without substantial additional engineering. Should very high-altitude access be required, rockets, jet-hybrid rockets, and various guns (especially light-gas guns) potentially offer the required capability. Costs and performance for tethered balloons remain highly uncertain. Towers are not found to be promising. The extreme accessibility of free balloons suggests that this method may be used primarily for reasons of political leverage, as opposed to being an optimal engineering solution.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering (the deliberate modification of the climate system), has been discussed as a technique to control Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Public Trust Doctrine (PTD) is used to hold assets that are not in private ownership in a... more
Geoengineering (the deliberate modification of the climate system), has been discussed as a technique to control Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Public Trust Doctrine (PTD) is used to hold assets that are not in private ownership in a form of collective ownership for public benefit; it is familiarly applied to the shoreline between tides. Several variants of PTD exist, yet all variants serve to limit private ownership. The version arising from Anglo-American common law creates duties and responsibilities on the sovereign to maintain and preserve assets in public trust. 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. We note that, whilst PTD obligations are atomised in nature, the inherent commonality of the threat potentially serves to reduce this fragmentation, and to encourage common action amongst states. However, we note the failure of recent legal proceedings, which exposes practical limitations on the ability of PTD to compel climate action generally – and thus its applicability to geoengineering.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (Shepherd, 2009; National Research Council, 2015). Solar Radiation Management geoengineering (SRM) offers relatively... more
Geoengineering (deliberate climate modification) is a possible way to limit Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (Shepherd, 2009; National Research Council, 2015). Solar Radiation Management geoengineering (SRM) offers relatively inexpensive, rapid temperature control. However, this low cost leads to a risk of controversial unilateral intervention—the “free-driver” problem (Weitzman, 2015). Consequently, this creates a risk of counter-geoengineering (deliberate warming) (Parker et al., 2018), resulting in governance challenges (Svoboda, 2017) akin to an arms race. Free-driver deployment scenarios previously considered include the rogue state, Greenfinger (Bodansky, 2013), or power blocs (Ricke et al., 2013), implying disagreement and conflict. We propose a novel distributed governance model of consensually-constrained unilateralism: Countries’ authority is limited to each state’s fraction of the maximum realistic intervention (e.g., pre-industrial temperature). We suggest a division of authority based on historical emissions (Rocha et al., 2015)—noting alternatives (e.g., population). To aid understanding, we offer an analogue: An over-heated train carriage, with passenger-controlled windows. We subsequently discuss the likely complexities, notably Coasian side-payments. Finally, we suggest further research: Algebraic, bot and human modeling; and observational studies.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Conventionally it consists of two strands: Solar Radiation Management (SRM), which is fast-acting, incomplete but inexpensive, and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR),... more
Geoengineering is a proposed response to
anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Conventionally it
consists of two strands: Solar Radiation Management
(SRM), which is fast-acting, incomplete but inexpensive,
and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), which is slower
acting, more expensive, and comprehensive. Pairing SRM
and CDR offers a contractually complete solution for
future emissions if effectively-scaled and coordinated.
SRM offsets warming, while CDR takes effect. We suggest
coordination using a blockchain, i.e. smart contracts and a
distributed ledger. Specifically, we integrate CDR futures
with time and volume-matched SRM orders, to address
emissions contractually before release. This provides an
economically and environmentally proportionate solution
to CO2 emissions at the wellhead, with robust contractual
transparency, and minimal overhead cost.
Our proposal offers a ‘polluter pays’ implementation of
Long & Shepherds SRM ‘bridge’ concept. This ‘polluter
geoengineers’ approach mandates and verifies emissionslinked payments with minimal friction, delay, or cost.
Finally, we compare alternative market designs against this
proposal, finding that this proposal offers several advantages. We conclude that blockchain implementation of the
‘polluter geoengineers’ approach is attractive and feasible
for larger wellhead contracts. We also identify a handful of
advantages and disadvantages that merit further study.
anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Conventionally it
consists of two strands: Solar Radiation Management
(SRM), which is fast-acting, incomplete but inexpensive,
and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), which is slower
acting, more expensive, and comprehensive. Pairing SRM
and CDR offers a contractually complete solution for
future emissions if effectively-scaled and coordinated.
SRM offsets warming, while CDR takes effect. We suggest
coordination using a blockchain, i.e. smart contracts and a
distributed ledger. Specifically, we integrate CDR futures
with time and volume-matched SRM orders, to address
emissions contractually before release. This provides an
economically and environmentally proportionate solution
to CO2 emissions at the wellhead, with robust contractual
transparency, and minimal overhead cost.
Our proposal offers a ‘polluter pays’ implementation of
Long & Shepherds SRM ‘bridge’ concept. This ‘polluter
geoengineers’ approach mandates and verifies emissionslinked payments with minimal friction, delay, or cost.
Finally, we compare alternative market designs against this
proposal, finding that this proposal offers several advantages. We conclude that blockchain implementation of the
‘polluter geoengineers’ approach is attractive and feasible
for larger wellhead contracts. We also identify a handful of
advantages and disadvantages that merit further study.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Conventionally it consists of two strands: Solar Radiation Management (SRM), which is fast-acting, incomplete but inexpensive, and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR),... more
Geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Conventionally it consists of two strands: Solar Radiation Management (SRM), which is fast-acting, incomplete but inexpensive, and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), which is slower acting, more expensive, and comprehensive. Pairing SRM and CDR offers a contractually complete solution for future emissions if effectively-scaled and coordinated. SRM offsets warming, while CDR takes effect.We suggest coordination using a blockchain, i.e. smart contracts and a distributed ledger. Specifically, we integrate CDR futures with time and volume-matched SRM orders, to address emissions contractually before release. This provides an economically and environmentally proportionate solution to CO2 emissions at the wellhead, with robust contractual transparency, and minimal overhead cost.
Our proposal offers a ‘polluter pays’ implementation of Long & Shepherds SRM ‘bridge’ concept. This ‘polluter geoengineers’ approach mandates and verifies emissionslinked payments with minimal friction, delay, or cost. Finally, we compare alternative market designs against this proposal, finding that this proposal offers several advantages. We conclude that blockchain implementation of the ‘polluter geoengineers’ approach is attractive and feasible for larger wellhead contracts. We also identify a handful of advantages and disadvantages that merit further study.
Our proposal offers a ‘polluter pays’ implementation of Long & Shepherds SRM ‘bridge’ concept. This ‘polluter geoengineers’ approach mandates and verifies emissionslinked payments with minimal friction, delay, or cost. Finally, we compare alternative market designs against this proposal, finding that this proposal offers several advantages. We conclude that blockchain implementation of the ‘polluter geoengineers’ approach is attractive and feasible for larger wellhead contracts. We also identify a handful of advantages and disadvantages that merit further study.
Research Interests:
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW) (National Academy of Sciences, 2015). There may be profound – even violent – disagreement on preferred temperature. SRM... more
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) geoengineering is a proposed response to anthropogenic global warming (AGW) (National Academy of Sciences, 2015). There may be profound – even violent – disagreement on preferred temperature. SRM disruption risks dangerous temperature rise (termination shock). Concentrating on aircraft-delivered Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), we appraise threats to SRM and defense methodologies. Civil protest and minor cyberattacks are almost inevitable but are manageable (unless state-sponsored). Overt military attacks are more disruptive, but unlikely – although superpowers’ symbolic overt attacks may deter SRM. Unattributable attacks are likely, and mandate use of widely-available weapons. Risks from unsophisticated weapons are therefore higher. An extended supply chain is more vulnerable than a secure airbase – necessitating supply-chain hardening. Recommendations to improve SRM resilience include heterogeneous operations from diverse, secure, well-stocked bases (possibly ocean islands or aircraft carriers); and avoidance of single-point-of-failure risks (e.g. balloons). A distributed, civilian-operated system offers an alternative strategy. A multilateral, consensual SRM approach reduces likely attack triggers.
Research Interests:
Options are derivative contracts that give the purchaser the right to buy (call options) or sell (put options) a given underlying asset at a particular price at a future date. The purchaser of a put option may exercise the right to sell... more
Options are derivative contracts that give the purchaser the right to buy (call options) or sell
(put options) a given underlying asset at a particular price at a future date. The purchaser of a
put option may exercise the right to sell the asset to the issuer at any point in the future before
the expiration of the contract. These rights may be contracted directly between two parties
(i.e. over-the-counter), or may sold publicly on formal exchanges, such as the Chicago Board
Options Exchange (CBOE). If the latter, they are called Tradeable Put Options (TPOs)
because they can be bought and sold by third-parties via a secondary market. The World
Bank has a Pilot Auction Facility for methane and carbon mediation which uses TPOs in
carbon-relevant markets, giving producers (of e.g. forest restoration) a floor price for their
product.1 This enables long-term producer planning.
We discuss the potentially broader use of these options contracts in Carbon Dioxide Removal
(CDR) markets generally and at scale. We conclude that they can, if priced correctly,
encourage rapid investment both in CDR technology and in operational capacity. TPOs could
do this without creating same type of systemic risk associated with other instruments (e.g.
long-dated futures). Nevertheless, the widespread use of such instruments potentially creates
novel risks. These include the political risk of premature closure2 (conventionally rendered as
‘counting your chickens before they are hatched’); and the economic risk of overpaying for
carbon removal services. These instruments require careful structuring, and do not inoculate
the CDR market against regulatory disruption, or political pressure. Accordingly, we note the
potential for the development of TPO markets in CDR, but we urge caution in respect of
identified risks.
Keywords
(put options) a given underlying asset at a particular price at a future date. The purchaser of a
put option may exercise the right to sell the asset to the issuer at any point in the future before
the expiration of the contract. These rights may be contracted directly between two parties
(i.e. over-the-counter), or may sold publicly on formal exchanges, such as the Chicago Board
Options Exchange (CBOE). If the latter, they are called Tradeable Put Options (TPOs)
because they can be bought and sold by third-parties via a secondary market. The World
Bank has a Pilot Auction Facility for methane and carbon mediation which uses TPOs in
carbon-relevant markets, giving producers (of e.g. forest restoration) a floor price for their
product.1 This enables long-term producer planning.
We discuss the potentially broader use of these options contracts in Carbon Dioxide Removal
(CDR) markets generally and at scale. We conclude that they can, if priced correctly,
encourage rapid investment both in CDR technology and in operational capacity. TPOs could
do this without creating same type of systemic risk associated with other instruments (e.g.
long-dated futures). Nevertheless, the widespread use of such instruments potentially creates
novel risks. These include the political risk of premature closure2 (conventionally rendered as
‘counting your chickens before they are hatched’); and the economic risk of overpaying for
carbon removal services. These instruments require careful structuring, and do not inoculate
the CDR market against regulatory disruption, or political pressure. Accordingly, we note the
potential for the development of TPO markets in CDR, but we urge caution in respect of
identified risks.
Keywords
Research Interests:
Futures contracts are exchange-traded financial instruments that enable parties to fix a price in advance, for later performance on a contract. Forward contracts also entail future settlement, but they are traded directly between two... more
Futures contracts are exchange-traded financial instruments that enable parties to fix a price in advance, for later performance on a contract. Forward contracts also entail future settlement, but they are traded directly between two parties. Futures and forwards are used in commodities trading, as producers seek financial security when planning production. We discuss the potential use of futures contracts in Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) markets; concluding that they have one principal advantage (near-term price security to current polluters), and one principal disadvantage (a combination of high price volatility and high trade volume means contracts issued by the private sector may cause systemic economic risk). Accordingly, we note the potential for the development of futures markets in CDR, but urge caution about the prospects for market failure. In particular, we consider the use of regulated markets: to ensure contracts are more reliable, and that moral hazard is minimised. While regulation offers increased assurances, we identify major insufficiencies with this approach—finding it generally inadequate. In conclusion, we suggest that only governments can realistically support long-term CDR futures markets. We note existing long-term CDR plans by governments, and suggest the use of state-backed futures for supporting these assurances.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering is the deliberate modification of the climate system. It has been discussed as a technique to counteract changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).1 Speculation has occurred that the possibility of... more
Geoengineering is the deliberate modification of the climate system. It has been discussed as a technique to counteract changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).1 Speculation has occurred that the possibility of geoengineering will reduce or delay efforts to mitigate AGW. This possible delay or reduction in mitigation has been described as ‘moral hazard’ by various authors. We investigate the definitions and use of the term ‘moral hazard’, and the related (but significantly different) concept of ‘morale hazard’, in relevant law, economic and insurance literatures. We find that ‘moral hazard’ has been generally misapplied in discussions of geoengineering, which perhaps explains unexpected difficulties in detecting expected effects experimentally.2 We clarify relevant usage of the terms, identifying scenarios that can properly be described as moral hazard (malfeasance), and morale hazard (lack of caution or recklessness). We note generally the importance of correctly applying this distinction when discussing geoengineering. In conclusion, we note that a proper consideration of the risks of both moral and morale hazards allows us to easily segment framings for both geoengineering advocacy and the advocate groups who rely on these framings. We suggest mnemonics for groups vulnerable to moral hazard (Business as Usuals) and morale hazard (Chicken Littles) and suggest the development of an experimental methodology for validating the distinction thus drawn.
Research Interests:
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) has been suggested as a technique to counteract some of the changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).1 It has been suggested2 that SRM could be carried out by commercially... more
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) has been suggested as a technique to counteract some of the changes expected as a result of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).1 It has been suggested2 that SRM could be carried out by commercially motivated actors. This process has been envisaged as using the Voluntary Carbon Offset (VCO) market as a mechanism for monetising the SRM process, due to the secondary effects of SRM on the carbon cycle.3 Current VCO customers are typically businesses: those looking to be ‘carbon neutral’ or reselling offsets alongside high-carbon goods and services (for example, airlines). Other potential VCO customers include states, or philanthropists. In this short scoping paper we provide a broad overview the issues of regulation and legitimacy, as may be applicable to the activities of future commercial SRM actors. We discuss the need for a two-pronged regulatory approach, encompassing first legal and corporate regulation and second, scientific and technical regulation. In conclusion, we identify differing regulatory requirements, according to whether the intended effect on the climate system of the SRM industry, or of individual firms, can be regarded as de minimis. We additionally suggest the use of a two-tier marketplace structure in order to ensure regulatory demands can be efficiently and transparently enacted.
Research Interests:
Solar radiation management or geoengineering can be used to deliberately alter the Earth’s radiation budget, by reflecting sunlight to space. This has been suggested as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming, to partly or fully... more
Solar radiation management or geoengineering can be used to deliberately alter the Earth’s radiation budget, by reflecting
sunlight to space. This has been suggested as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming, to partly or fully balance radiative
forcing [1]. Approximately 22% of sun-like stars have Earth-like exoplanets [2]. Advanced civilisations may exist on these, and
may use geoengineering for positive or negative radiative forcing. Additionally, terraforming projects [e.g. 3], may be used to
expand alien habitable territory, or for resource management or military operations on non-home planets. Potential observations
of alien geoengineering and terraforming may enable detection of technologically advanced alien civilisations, and may help
identify widely-used and stable geoengineering technologies. This knowledge may assist the development of safe and stable
geoengineering methods for Earth. The potential risks and benefits of possible alien detection of Earth-bound geoengineering
schemes must be considered before deployment of terrestrial geoengineering schemes.
sunlight to space. This has been suggested as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming, to partly or fully balance radiative
forcing [1]. Approximately 22% of sun-like stars have Earth-like exoplanets [2]. Advanced civilisations may exist on these, and
may use geoengineering for positive or negative radiative forcing. Additionally, terraforming projects [e.g. 3], may be used to
expand alien habitable territory, or for resource management or military operations on non-home planets. Potential observations
of alien geoengineering and terraforming may enable detection of technologically advanced alien civilisations, and may help
identify widely-used and stable geoengineering technologies. This knowledge may assist the development of safe and stable
geoengineering methods for Earth. The potential risks and benefits of possible alien detection of Earth-bound geoengineering
schemes must be considered before deployment of terrestrial geoengineering schemes.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance... more
Geoengineering, specifically Solar Radiation Management (SRM), has been proposed to effect rapid influence over the Earth’s climate system in order to counteract Anthropogenic Global Warming. This poses near-term to long-term governance challenges, some of which are within the planning horizon of current political administrations. Previous discussions of governance of SRM (in both academic and general literature) have focused primarily on two scenarios: an isolated “Greenfinger” individual, or state, acting independently (perhaps in defiance of international opinion); versus more consensual, internationalist approaches. I argue that these models represent a very limited sub-set of plausible deployment scenarios. To generate a range of alternative models, I offer a short, relatively unstructured discussion of a range of different types of warfare – each with an analogous SRM deployment regime.
Research Interests:
Climate models suggest that Solar Radiation Management (SRM), such as by means of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, could counteract the warming effects of greenhouse gases, though not with total effectiveness. As far as the regulation of... more
Climate models suggest that Solar Radiation Management (SRM), such as by means of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, could counteract the warming effects of greenhouse gases, though not with total effectiveness. As far as the regulation of SRM is concerned, scholars have focused typically on public, state-based regimes such as those provided by international treaties. The evidence suggests that SRM may also cause a reduction in atmospheric CO2, thereby creating potential carbon credit accrual. The emergence of private interests, in the form of credits tradeable in the voluntary carbon markets, represents a new challenge for the effective public regulation of SRM. Without an appropriate response, major, novel and potentially unacceptable risks to the climate system, biosphere and society may occur.
Research Interests:
Geoengineering, the deliberate modification of the climate system, has been discussed as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Many religions oblige followers to make formal or informal contributions of wealth or income. In... more
Geoengineering, the deliberate modification of the climate system, has been discussed as a response to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).
Many religions oblige followers to make formal or informal contributions of wealth or income. In some cases these religious laws are incorporated into statute. Resulting financial flows are globally significant (USA=$114.90bn), and comfortably exceed minimum funding requirements for geoengineering.
Despite application of the law to climate change generally 4 , a literature review reveals no in-depth consideration of religiously-obligated funding of geoengineering – although there is limited discussion of disciplinary overlap.
We therefore appraise both voluntary and legally-mandated religious funding for compatibility with geoengineering - finding a viable case across several religions. Accordingly, we alert the geoengineering research community to the governance challenges posed by this previously-overlooked funding stream.
Many religions oblige followers to make formal or informal contributions of wealth or income. In some cases these religious laws are incorporated into statute. Resulting financial flows are globally significant (USA=$114.90bn), and comfortably exceed minimum funding requirements for geoengineering.
Despite application of the law to climate change generally 4 , a literature review reveals no in-depth consideration of religiously-obligated funding of geoengineering – although there is limited discussion of disciplinary overlap.
We therefore appraise both voluntary and legally-mandated religious funding for compatibility with geoengineering - finding a viable case across several religions. Accordingly, we alert the geoengineering research community to the governance challenges posed by this previously-overlooked funding stream.