ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2014-07-23
    Description: Due to the failure of international efforts to limit atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, consideration is now being given to solar geoengineering—a deliberate intervention to limit global warming without altering the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases. In contrast to emission cuts, geoengineering is expected to be cheap, quick to lower temperature, and feasible through the use of a single intervention. However, geoengineering is an imperfect substitute for emission reductions and will likely have undesirable side effects, only some of which can be anticipated before geoengineering is deployed. Most importantly, because geoengineering can be undertaken unilaterally, it creates issues of governance: Who gets to decide if, when, and how geoengineering should be attempted? This article provides an introduction to the key issues surrounding the governance of this unprecedented technology. ( JEL : Q54, F53, K33)
    Keywords: Q54 - Climate ; Natural Disasters ; Global Warming, F53 - International Agreements and Observance ; International Organizations, K33 - International Law
    Print ISSN: 1750-6816
    Electronic ISSN: 1750-6824
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Political Science , Economics
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2014-07-23
    Description: Climate engineering measures are designed to either reduce atmospheric carbon concentration (by growing trees or spreading iron in the ocean, for example) or directly influence the radiation reaching or leaving the earth (by injecting sulfur into the stratosphere or modifying cloud formations, for example) to compensate for greenhouse gas–induced warming. The former measures are termed carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which we characterize as a low-leverage causative approach, and the latter are termed radiation management (RM), which we characterize as a high-leverage symptomatic approach. There are similarities between CDR and emission control. Accordingly, benefit-cost analysis can be used to assess certain CDR measures. By contrast, high-leverage RM represents a genuinely new option in the climate change response portfolio, at first glance promising insurance against fat-tail climate change risks. However, the persistent intrinsic uncertainties of RM suggest that any cautious climate risk management approach should consider RM as a complement to (rather than a substitute for) emission control at best. Moreover, the complexity of the earth system imposes major limitations on the ability of research to reduce these uncertainties. Thus we argue that a research strategy is needed that focuses on increasing our basic understanding of the earth system and conducting comprehensive assessments of the risk(s) associated with both climate change and the deployment of climate engineering. ( JEL : Q52, Q54, Q55)
    Keywords: Q52 - Pollution Control Costs ; Distributional Effects ; Employment Effects, Q54 - Climate ; Natural Disasters ; Global Warming, Q55 - Technological Innovation
    Print ISSN: 1750-6816
    Electronic ISSN: 1750-6824
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Political Science , Economics
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Publication Date: 2014-07-23
    Description: Climate scientists, and natural scientists more generally, believe that climate change is a major, perhaps the most important, problem facing humankind this century, and that it is increasingly linked to extreme weather events. However, the impression one gets from much of the economic literature, particularly simulations from integrated assessment models used in policy analysis, is that the potential impacts of climate change are not large enough to warrant aggressive mitigation efforts in the near term. Although these models represent an important step in the needed interdisciplinary analysis of climate change by elucidating the links between climate and economy, we argue that they grossly underestimate potential impacts and associated damages because they (and the related policy analyses) fail to adequately capture extreme conditions, catastrophic events, and tipping points that trigger irreversible changes in the climate system, as well as impacts on the natural environment that cannot be monetized. Because the most severe impacts are expected in the later years of this century and beyond, discounting is crucial, and we argue that the appropriate rate is well below market rates. Moreover, we show that in the uniquely long period relevant to climate policy, the irreversibility of climate changes and impacts is more serious than the irreversibility of proposed mitigation measures. We conclude that an aggressive mitigation policy is warranted, one that holds further increases in global mean temperature to the scientific consensus on what is required to avoid the worst impacts, and that such a policy can be achieved at a cost that is well below potential damages. ( JEL : Q54)
    Keywords: Q54 - Climate ; Natural Disasters ; Global Warming
    Print ISSN: 1750-6816
    Electronic ISSN: 1750-6824
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Political Science , Economics
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Publication Date: 2014-01-28
    Description: Uncertainty is intrinsic to climate change: we know that the climate is changing but not precisely how fast or in what ways. Nor do we understand fully the social and economic consequences of these changes or the options that will be available for reducing climate change. Furthermore, the uncertainty about these issues is not readily quantified in probabilistic terms: we are facing deep uncertainty rather than known risks. We argue that this may render the classical expected utility framework for decision making under uncertainty of limited value for informing climate policy. We review the sources of uncertainty about all aspects of climate change, separate these into scientific and socioeconomic components, and examine their relative importance. Then we review decision-making frameworks that may be more appropriate in the absence of unique probabilities including nonprobabilistic approaches and those based on multiple priors, and we discuss their application in the context of climate change economics. ( JEL : D81, Q54)
    Keywords: D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty, Q54 - Climate ; Natural Disasters ; Global Warming
    Print ISSN: 1750-6816
    Electronic ISSN: 1750-6824
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering , Political Science , Economics
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...