Hugh Sansom — hes2133 page 1 of 4

Tuesday, 22 March 2011 word count = 787

FACT SHEET
Alternative Options for Reducing Climate Change Risk
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, especially from consumption of fossil fuels, Between 1970 and 2004, global
is causing climate change (IPCC 2007a). The release rate for CO2 alone is emissions of GHGs increased by 70%
currently about 8.5 gigatons/yr (Royal Society, 2009:9). Climate change will (24% between 1990 and 2004), from
continue for decades and centuries to come and will have effects varied in 28.7 to 49 Gigatonnes of carbon dioxide
intensity over time and geography (IPCC 2007b). There is widespread equivalents. CO2 emissions grew
concern over probable negative impacts like rising sea levels or harm to between 1970 and 2004 by about 80%
biological systems. While concerns about negative outcomes have dominated and represented 77% of total
public discourse, some nations, like Russia, perceive possible benefits. Both anthropogenic GHG emissions in 2004.
climate science and economics are marked by uncertainty. Policy is marked by — IPCC, 2007
the uncertainty attached to the science and economics on which decisions are
based and by differing circumstances and preferences of participants. These A car that gets 28 miles per gallon,
uncertainties and differences complicate collective action, particularly action driven 10,000 miles in a year, wil emit
aimed at mitigating negative outcomes that have not yet been realized. As a about 1 ton of carbon
result, alternative, more certain options have some appeal. — Nordhaus, 2008, p. 3

Reduction in GHG Emissions Has Dominated Discussion “The ultimate objective of this
Most attention in recent years has focused on reducing the primary causal Convention . . . is to achieve . . .
agent in climate change — GHG emissions, especially CO2. Goals are typically stabilization of greenhouse gas
specified in terms of a target and a reference point or baseline: concentrations in the atmosphere at a
• Global mean temperature rise of “3.5°C over 2007 levels by 2100” level that would prevent dangerous
(Yohe 2008) anthropogenic interference with the
• Atmospheric CO2 concentration of 450 ppm, compared to pre- climate system.
industrial levels of perhaps 300 ppm. (Morello 2009, Nordhaus, — UN, 1992
2008:69-70)

However, reducing or limiting GHG emissions and concentrations is unlikely

to be adequate for three reasons:
1. Nations have
a. Repeatedly failed to reach agreement, and
b. Failed to meet commitments already agreed. (Morello 2009,
Nordhaus 2005)
2. Agreement on targets for caps or reductions depend on
a. Scientific predictions that are uncertain, and
b. Nations resolving differences over the desirability of process and
outcomes.
3. Agreed reductions or caps may be inadequate to mitigate harmful
outcomes (Victor, 2009:65).

Approaches to Climate Change Correlate with the Causal Chain

Policies to reduce GHG emissions address the issue at the start of the sequence
charted below. Alternatives to GHG reductions can be categorized according
to where they approach the causal sequence:

Emission Impact
TIME

Prevent or 1. Capture emissions 2. Interrupt effects Adapt to

reduce emissions after release of emissions impact
Examples • Oceanic uptake of CO2 • Geoengineering: Examples
• emissions caps • Technological increase albedo • alter living
• alternate fuels /industrial solutions patterns
• conservation • technologies
 Hugh Sansom — hes2133 page 2 of 4
Tuesday, 22 March 2011 word count = 787

1. Capture and Storage

GHGs can be removed from the atmosphere post-emission by artificial and Trade-offs
natural means. Ocean water naturally absorbs carbon dioxide. Other natural
carbon sinks include growing plants and some naturally occurring minerals. Ocean water acts as a carbon sink,
capturing atmospheric CO2. But that
Artificial techniques already exist to collect and store CO2 (Lackner 2009): increases acidity of the oceans, .
— UN, 1992
• Synthetic trees could mimic the natural photosynthetic processes of plants
• In addition to ocean storage, CO2 could be injected underground, in the
deep sea, below the ocean floor, for example.

Carbon Dioxide Removal Methods

Land
Biological Afforestation and land use
Biomass/fuels with carbon sequestration
Physical Atmospheric CO2 scrubbers (‘air
capture’)
Chemical (‘enhanced weathering’ In-situ carbonation of silicates
techniques) Basic minerals (incl. olivine) on soil
Ocean
Iron fertilization
Phosphorus/nitrogen
Fertilization
Enhanced upwelling
Changing overturning circulation
Alkalinity enhancement (grinding,
dispersing and dissolving limestone,
silicates, or calcium hydroxide)
— Royal Society, 2009, p. 9

2. Geoengineering
Geoengineering
When Lyndon Johnson received the first “presidential briefing on the dangers
of climate change, the only remedy prescribed to counter the effects of global “[T]he deliberate modification of the
warming was geoengineering. That advice reflected the scientific culture of climate by means other than by
the time, which imagined that engineering could fix almost any problem” changing the atmospheric concentration
(Victor 2009). of greenhouse gases.”
— Barrett, 2007
Examples:
• Space-based “shade” that would block sunlight from reaching Earth.
• Albedo modification — increasing the tendency of the Earth’s “[T]he intentional large-scale
atmosphere to reflect sunlight back into space. Light-colored surfaces on manipulation of the environment,
the Earth already tend to reflect light (e.g., the polar ice caps, which are particularly manipulation that is intended
will decrease in size as mean global temperature increases). Airborne to reduce undesired anthropogenic
particles, like those thrown into the high atmosphere in a volcanic climate change.”
eruption, also block light from reaching the Earth’s surface (Victor
2009:69) — Keith, 2000

Advantages
• Can be tailored in response to observed fact and can be rapidly adjusted
• The science supporting the feasibility of some geoengineering approaches
is well-developed.
• Does not require broad consensus of international community.
• Compatible with continued fossil fuel usage, particularly by heavily-
industrialized states like the U.S.

Disadvantages
• Possible international political instability: Some states, particularly those
that see some advantage to climate change, could object, seeing
geoengineering states as “lone rangers” (Victor 2009:71).
• International law may bar some approaches (Bodansky 1996).
• The science supporting the feasibility of some geoengineering approaches
is well-developed.
 Hugh Sansom — hes2133 page 3 of 4
Tuesday, 22 March 2011 word count = 787

3. Adaptation
Adaptation to climate change is the default course of action. If nations
continue on a “business as usual” approach, then people will adapt (Newell
2008:8). The question is whether some changes will defy adaptation or
whether some costs will be prohibitively high. Humans have adapted to natural
climate change continuously over history. The issue now is one of adapting to
change that is (1) caused by human activity and therefore (2) could be
prevented by altering that activity or by mitigating the activities’ effects.

Examples:
• Relocation of at-risk populations.
• Alteration of architectural norms to allow for climate change (e.g., higher
temperatures, greater or less rainfall, etc.)

Advantages
• Requires comparatively little, if anything, of current heavy fossil fuel users,
like the U.S.
• Harnesses existing incentive and market systems already proven effective.

Disadvantages
• Longer-term climate change impacts may defy adaptation.
• Fails to take into account other environmental issues that are associated
with greenhouse gas emissions, like degradation of air quality.
• Fails to address possible fundamental issues in the sustainability of human
development.

Summation
Early discussion of what is now called geoengineering is found in American
and Soviet atmospheric science of the 1950s and 1960s (Keith 2000:250). That
discussion ebbed with changes in the perception of science’s capacities. Policy-
making can only benefit from considering a range of potential solutions. If
reductions in GHGs “achieve too little, too late, there will surely be pressure
to consider a ‘plan B’ ” (Martin Rees in Royal Society 2009:v).
Hugh Sansom — hes2133 page 4 of 4
Tuesday, 22 March 2011 word count = 787

Resources

Barrett, Scott (2007). “The Incredible Economics of Geoengineering”

Bodansky, Daniel (1996). “May We Engineer the Climate?” Climatic Change 33:309–321.

Carlin, Alan (2007). “Global Climate Change Control: Is There a Better Strategy than Reducing
Greenhouse Gas Emissions?” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 155, No. 6. Symposium:
Responses to Global Warming: The Law, Economics, and Science of Climate Change (Jun. 2007), pp.
1401–1497.

Clarke, Leon et al. (2009) “International Climate Policy Architectures: Overview of EMF 22
International Scenarios.” Energy Economics, Volume 31, Supplement 2, December 2009, Pages S64-S81

IPCC, 2007a: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working
Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R.
Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

IPCC, 2007b: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson,
Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 7-22.

Keith, David W. (2000). “Geoengineering the Climate: History and Prospect.” Annu. Rev. Energy
Environ. 25:245–84.

Lackner, Klaus and Sarah Brennan (2008). “Envisioning Carbon Capture and Storage: Expanded
Possibilities due to Air Capture, Leakage Insurance, and C-14 Monitoring.” Climatic Change 96:357–
378

Morello, Lauren (2009). “Is 350 the New 450 When It Comes to Capping Carbon Emissions?” New
York Times, September 28, 2009. http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/09/28/28climatewire-is-
350-the-new-450-when-it-comes-to-capping-c-6627.html

Newell, Richard G. (2008). “A U.S. Innovation Strategy for Climate Change Mitigation.” The
Brookings Institution: The Hamilton Project Discussion Paper 2008-15, December 2008.

Nordhaus, William D. (2005). “The Impact of Treaty Non-Participation on the Costs of Slowing
Global Warming.”

——— (2008). A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.

The Royal Society (2009). Geoengineering the Climate. Royal Society Policy Document, September
2009.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992).

Victor, David et al. (2009). “The Geoengineering Option: A Last Resort Against Global Warming?”
Foreign Affairs 88(2) March/April, 2009. p 64–76.

Yohe, Gary, et al. (2008). “Climate Change.” Copenhagen Consensus 2008: Global Warming Executive
Summary. Copenhagen Consensus Center.
Hugh Sansom — hes2133 page 5 of 4
Tuesday, 22 March 2011 word count = 787

Broder, John M (2010). “Degrees of Separation from Climate Goal,” The New York Times, 23 Nov.
2010. http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/degrees-of-separation-from-climate-goals/

Arrow, Kenneth J. (2007). "Global Climate Change: A Challenge to Policy." The Economists' Voice,
4(3) http://www.bepress.com/ev/vol4/iss3/art2

Nordhaus, William D. (2009). “An Analysis of the Dismal Theorem” mimeo Yale University.

——— (2008). A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options of Global Warming Policies. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press. Chapter 5.

——— (2007). "A Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change." Journal of
Economic Literature 45

Schelling, Thomas C. (2002). “What Makes Greenhouse Sense?” Foreign Affairs, May/June.

Heal, Geoffrey. “Climate Economics: A Meta-Review and Some Suggestions for Future Research.”
Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. 3: 4-21. –

Stern, Nicholas (2007). “The Stern Review on the Economic Effects of Climate Change.” Population
and Development Review, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Dec., 2006), pp. 793-798 (esp. Executive Summary, Ch. 2
and Ch. 2a).

Weitzman, Martin (2009). “On Modeling and Interpreting the Economics of Catastrophic Climate
Change” Review of Economics and Statistics 91(1): 1–19

——— (2007). “A Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change” 45: 703–724.