Ron and others, The final paragraph of the paper and the sentence which you cite below lead to numerous further details and caveats. Briefly, national and subnational (e.g. US states) laws are binding on individuals and backed by the implicit threat of force. Some of these could be immediately adapted with varying degrees of ease to climate engineering (CE), broadly defined. For example, the paper cites (via Tracy Hester) the application of US Clean Air Act and stratospheric aerosol injection, and Texas case law with respect to weather modification. Further, nations and subnational units can implement new legislation (and case law) on a moderate time frame, depending on the urgency and the effectiveness of the institutions.
But national and subnational laws generally do not regulate transboundary impacts, which some CE methods would have at sufficient scale. We turn to international law, which is binding on states, not individuals (with few exceptions), is more general, and changes much more slowly. Some components of international law can also be adapted with varying degrees of ease to climate engineering (CE). The paper cites some of these. However, the national governments generally must implement these international commitments in some way. And due to the absence of centralized enforcer, states have much 'wiggle room' in how they implement their commitments. This is a long way to get to your question. In the short term, national and subnational law is probably more important for regulating CE. This is both because this law is binding on individuals and because in the short term CE will likely not have transboundary impacts (e.g. most CDR, and small scale SRM field tests). In the long term, existing and possibly new international law will provide guidance and perhaps even some sort of regulatory system. In the even longer term, looking toward a scenario of global SRM implementation, I am of the mind that international politics ultimately trumps international law, although the latter can provide guidance and can influence state behaviour at the margin. Cheers, -Jesse ----------------------------------------- Jesse L. Reynolds, PhD Postdoctoral researcher Research funding coordinator, sustainability and climate European and International Public Law Tilburg Sustainability Center Tilburg University, The Netherlands Book review editor, Law, Innovation, and Technology email: j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl<mailto:j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl> http://works.bepress.com/jessreyn/ From: Ronal W. Larson [mailto:rongretlar...@comcast.net] Sent: 15 June 2015 02:30 To: J.L. Reynolds Cc: Geoengineering; ed.lar...@pepperdine.edu Subject: Re: [geo] The Common Law of Geoengineering: Building an Effective Governance for Stratospheric Injections; Edward J. Larson Dr. Reynolds, cc List (adding Prof. Ed Larson as a courtesy cc) 1. Thanks for forwarding this Edward Larson paper (which cites you three times). Being a non-lawyer, I thought it well referenced on SRM (but wished there were more on CDR legalities). 2. Do you agree with the final two sentences of this paper, which say (perhaps new, emphases added), referring (I believe only) to SRM: " In the absence of a rational international governance regime, which appears unattainable at present, existing national environmental statutes and state common law may offer our only starting point for regulation. We must work with what we have even as we hope for more. " 3. I have been assuming that only international bodies would be involved - so this conclusion is new. Any opinion (from anyone) on how those two (non-international) courts might rule on SRM? 4. I presume these two sentences would apply also to CDR; that an international court would only rarely (as for OIF) act on a CDR approach. But any thoughts on how any non-international court might rule on CDR issues - where negative impacts should be generally seen by only one party? Ron On Jun 6, 2015, at 7:36 AM, J.L. Reynolds <j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl<mailto:j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl>> wrote: A paper is attached. Disclaimer: I've not yet read it. Cheers -Jesse The COMMON LAW OF GEOENGINEERING BUILDING AN EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE FOR STRATOSPHERIC INJECTIONS EDWARD J. LARSON Pepperdine University School of Law A landmark report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued in 2015 is the latest in a series of scientific studies to assess the feasibility of geoengineering with stratospheric aerosols to offset anthropogenic global warming and to conclude that they offers a possibly viable supplement or back-up alternative to 329 reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Evidence for this once taboo form of climate intervention relies heavily on the known past effect of major explosive volcanic eruptions to moderate average worldwide temperatures temporarily. In the most extensive study to date, an elite NAS committee now suggests that such processes for adjusting global temperature, while still uncertain, merit further research and field testing. With the benefits of such interventions certain to be unevenly distributed and the risks of them not fully known, every study stresses the need for transparent international governance of stratospheric injections. After examining the roadblocks to such governance, this paper explores the statutory and common law frameworks that could provide some form of stopgap approaches until the needed regulatory regime emerges. ----------------------------------------- Jesse L. Reynolds, PhD Postdoctoral researcher Research funding coordinator, sustainability and climate European and International Public Law Tilburg Sustainability Center Tilburg University, The Netherlands Book review editor, Law, Innovation, and Technology email: j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl<mailto:j.l.reyno...@uvt.nl> http://works.bepress.com/jessreyn/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email togeoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com<mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com>. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. <2IndonJIntlCompL329.pdf> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
