Unfortunately the cause and effect go the other way – for any of us trying to 
get research done on a shoestring, we simply don’t have the resources to pay 
for open-access on top of that.  I can’t speak for this team, but for much of 
what our research group does, that would have to come out of my personal pocket.

I think the reason for near-zero funding is more complicated…

From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> On 
Behalf Of Stephen Salter
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2020 7:44 AM
To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com; Holly J <holly.jean.b...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geo] Evaluating the efficacy and equity of environmental stopgap 
measures


Hi All

There would be a dramatic increase in the funding for solar geoengineering if 
this paper was not behind a pay-wall.

Stephen
Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering, University of 
Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland 
s.sal...@ed.ac.uk<mailto:s.sal...@ed.ac.uk>, Tel +44 (0)131 662 1180 
WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs<http://WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs>, YouTube Jamie 
Taylor Power for Change

On 28/03/2020 09:26, Renaud de RICHTER wrote:
Holly Jean Buck et al. Evaluating the efficacy and equity of environmental 
stopgap measures<https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-0497-6>, Nature 
Sustainability (2020). DOI: 
10.1038/s41893-020-0497-6<http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0497-6>

Researchers create framework for evaluating environmental stopgap measures
phys.org/news/2020-03-framework-environmental-stopgap.html<https://phys.org/news/2020-03-framework-environmental-stopgap.html>

March 27, 2020
The paper considers the possible effects of measures like solar geoengineering, 
which involves spraying small amounts of reflective aerosols into the 
stratosphere to reflect away sunlight and slow global warming. Credit: NASA/JSC 
Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth

Ending global environmental crises such as climate change and slowing the 
growing number of extinctions of plant and animal species will require radical 
solutions that could take centuries to implement. Meanwhile, the crises are 
damaging the planet and human well-being in ways that cannot wait for perfect 
solutions.

So academics and other environmental leaders are turning their focus to stopgap 
measures, which may not fully solve the bigger problems but could mitigate the 
damage from climate change while more complex, longer-term solutions are 
implemented.

A new paper in Nature Sustainability—written by 13 academics and nonprofit 
organization leaders, including UCLA experts in science, law and public 
policy<https://phys.org/tags/public+policy/>—evaluates the effectiveness of 
such measures and recommends a framework for evaluating them.

Environmental stopgap measures could include using hatcheries to support wild 
salmon populations, for example, instead of fully restoring salmon habitats. Or 
solar geoengineering<https://phys.org/tags/solar+geoengineering/>—spraying 
small amounts of reflective aerosols into the stratosphere to reflect away 
sunlight and slow global warming—instead of the larger, more complex processes 
of transitioning our society to be carbon-neutral and removing carbon dioxide 
from the atmosphere.

Recent history offers specific examples, said Holly Buck, a UCLA postdoctoral 
scholar and lead author of the paper. Puerto Rico turned to quick fixes after 
its power grid was ravaged by Hurricane Maria, using gas-powered generators 
while more permanent infrastructure was rebuilt.

And in 2019, Pacific Gas & Electric cut off electricity to more than 2 million 
people during periods of extreme wildfire risk in California, recognizing that 
equipment failures had been linked to five of the 10 most destructive fires in 
the state since 2015.

The paper sheds light on the social implications of climate 
change<https://phys.org/tags/climate+change/> solutions, where previous 
research tended to focus mostly on the measures' technical and engineering 
perspectives.

"We're asking questions about who wins, who loses and who makes the decisions," 
Buck said. "That will make the discussion more robust."

The framework for evaluating stopgap measures comprises eight criteria:

  *   Short-term effectiveness
  *   Risks and harms
  *   So-called distributional effects—that is, who wins and who loses
  *   Whether there is a cost-effective path toward an economically viable 
permanent solution
  *   Whether it will act as a barrier to future solutions
  *   How it will enable long-term goals to be realized
  *   Whether there is a mechanism to move from short-term to long-term goals
  *   If it includes a process to evaluate long-term solutions and paths to get 
there

The paper applied that framework to stratospheric aerosol injections, a type of 
solar geoengineering that could be used as stopgap until the ultimate goal of 
halting emissions and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere can be 
achieved.

The authors examined the approach because it is promising but has raised 
controversy. Early tests show it would be highly effective and come with few 
economic tradeoffs, and it performed well when judged by some of the criteria 
listed in the paper. But it is less clear whether solar geoengineering might 
put at risk communities, groups or nations that are short on resources. In 
addition, stopgap measures often raise concerns about whether they will create 
disincentives for more urgent actions to reduce emissions and remove carbon 
from the atmosphere.

"The real question is, when do these environmental stopgaps become an excuse 
for not moving forward?" Buck said. "That's a clear danger, but we need to 
bring it up and talk about it."

The analysis uncovered another problem common to newer stopgap measures: a lack 
of research. The authors believe that if researchers can assess the benefits 
and costs of stopgaps as a practice overall, environmental scientists and 
policy analysts in the years to come will be better able to judge new stopgap 
measures as they're proposed.

For many environmental researchers and advocates, the new approach may be a 
tough pill to swallow.

"We want a purity of solutions and a best-case future," Buck said. "It can be 
hard for people to think about solutions that may only bear fruit two or three 
generations down the road."

Peter Kareiva, co-author of the paper and director of the UCLA Institute of the 
Environment and Sustainability, said temporary fixes are common in everyday 
life.

"Stopgaps are all around us: short-term loans until the paycheck arrives, the 
car door that is wired shut until you can afford to pay the body shop to 
replace it and, of course, physical distancing to flatten the COVID-19 curve 
until hospitals can prepare and until a vaccine can be discovered and 
distributed," Kareiva said. "In some cases, they are obviously reasonable. In 
some cases, they are clearly unwise. In all cases, the question of equity and 
fairness should be raised."
More information: Holly Jean Buck et al. Evaluating the efficacy and equity of 
environmental stopgap measures, Nature Sustainability (2020). DOI: 
10.1038/s41893-020-0497-6<http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0497-6>



--
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<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn9_Q7Ntc6AN8BBnMoQPj3KnKp2fkcFDRJGCG0pKPS77_zg%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn9_Q7Ntc6AN8BBnMoQPj3KnKp2fkcFDRJGCG0pKPS77_zg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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<mailto:geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/3b0a0d28-7412-e323-521e-2728c416780a%40ed.ac.uk<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/3b0a0d28-7412-e323-521e-2728c416780a%40ed.ac.uk?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/BL0PR04MB4707F938A128ABD48FC9FE578FCD0%40BL0PR04MB4707.namprd04.prod.outlook.com.

Reply via email to