Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join   
     Login      Register    

Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Via PayPal




Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view









Personhood Beyond the Human Conference whats new at ieet
What’s the Rational Choice? Risk, Values and the Politics of Geoengineering

Prison Industrial Complex in America

Engineering the Future

The American prison system

Fighting Facebook, a Campaign for a People’s Terms of Service

Imagination Experiment: Visualizing Transformative Tech

From Mars to the Multiverse

The singularity: merging human/machine to achieve immortality

Feel the Pulse - 2013 MIT Image Award Winner

CubeSats: Tiny satellites work at MIT, U. Mich.


ieet books

eGods: Faith versus Fantasy in Computer Gaming
Author
by William Sims Bainbridge


comments

dobermanmac on 'The singularity: merging human/machine to achieve immortality' (May 23, 2013)

Peter Wicks on 'Will the Catholic Bishops Decide How You Die?' (May 23, 2013)

SHaGGGz on 'Prison Industrial Complex in America' (May 23, 2013)

Intomorrow on 'The American prison system' (May 22, 2013)

Intomorrow on 'Will the Catholic Bishops Decide How You Die?' (May 22, 2013)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

Life in the 2040s: nanofactories, flying cars, household robots, more
by Dick Pelletier
Apr 30, 2013
(6466) Hits
(1) Comments

Ten Responses to the Technological Unemployment Problem
by Jon Perry
May 1, 2013
(5482) Hits
(2) Comments

Organ, tissue replacement could end aging by mid-2020s
by Dick Pelletier
May 14, 2013
(3260) Hits
(1) Comments

Noam Chomsky on Libertarians
Andy80o
Apr 27, 2013
(3191) Hits
(15) Comments

Radical life extension: living a 1,000 year lifespan
by Dick Pelletier
May 7, 2013
(2766) Hits
(0) Comments

Imagine No Religion. On Facebook.
by Valerie Tarico
May 4, 2013
(2692) Hits
(150) Comments



IEET > Security > Eco-gov > Fellows > Jamais Cascio

Print Email permalink (0) Comments (3540) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


Geoengineering: New Problems, Old Politics


Jamais Cascio
Jamais Cascio
Open The Future

Posted: Mar 19, 2009

I’ve been writing about geoengineering since 2005, and have even published a short book on the subject (Hacking the Earth), looking primarily at the ethics and politics of the issue. The political aspects are, in my view, the most important, yet they’ve received little attention.

Up until recently, my 2007 essay, The Politics of Geoengineering (and its follow-ups, Terraforming War and Global Climate and Global Power) offered the only detailed argument about the complexities and consequences of geoengineering efforts in a world of global rivalries. That’s now changed, with the publication of Stanford Law professor David Victor‘s “The Geoengineering Option” (PDF) in the pages of Foreign Affairs. Victor’s article is a detailed run-down of the various political drivers, dilemmas, and implications of geoengineering. His piece covers much of the same ground that I’ve written about, and little of it will be surprising to readers of my book; he even includes the possibility of hostile use of geoengineering technologies and the potential for non-state actors to get in on the fun, although he misses the liability issues surrounding implementation of geoengineering.

Unsurprisingly, his conclusions are similar to my own:

The scientific academies in the leading industrialized and emerging countries—which often control the purse strings for major research grants—must orchestrate a serious and transparent international research effort funded by their governments. Although some work is already under way, a more comprehensive understanding of geoengineering options and of risk-assessment procedures would make countries less trigger-happy and more inclined to consider deploying geoengineering systems in concert rather than on their own. (The International Council for Science, which has a long and successful history of coordinating scientific assessments of technical topics, could also lend a helping hand.) Eventually, a dedicated international entity overseen by the leading academies, provided with a large budget, and suffused with the norms of transparency and peer review will be necessary.
Abundant research, deep transparency, and global cooperation are the only ways to deal with geoengineering safely.

It’s heartening to see that the kinds of ideas I’ve been hammering on for a few years now are starting to trickle out into the mainstream. I doubt that Victor has seen my work on geoengineering; what’s happening is that the debates about geoengineering in the green blogosphere (where my stuff gets read) and the high-level debates in the academic punditocracy have started to converge. And because this is in Foreign Affairs, it’s likely to become a topic of discussion in Washington, DC.

One sign that this is underway is the announcement that DARPA—the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency—is hosting a colloquium on geoengineering at Stanford this week. Ken Caldeira will be there, of course, and I would be shocked if David Victor wasn’t also invited. DARPA is a weird agency that is ostensibly under the Pentagon, but has historically supported a number of projects without clear military applications. Still, the very fact that a Department of Defense agency is looking at geoengineering is raising hackles, even among attendees.

“The last thing we need is to have DARPA developing climate-intervention technology,” says Caldeira. He says he agreed to go to the meeting “to try to get DARPA not to develop geoengineering techniques. Geoengineering is already so fraught with social, geopolitical, economic, and ethical issues; why would we want to add military dimensions?”

Unfortunately, we don’t need to “add” military dimensions—they’ve been there from the beginning. A technology with the potential to alter critical aspects of the global environment, with differential effects across regions, and not dependent upon a massive industrial base (so even available to non-state actors)? As I said in 2007, only partially tongue-in-cheek, no state wants to find itself facing a “terraforming gap.” Wise or not, smart or not, geoengineering is a geopolitical issue, with all that entails.


Jamais Cascio is a Senior Fellow of the IEET, and a professional futurist. He writes the popular blog Open the Future.
Print Email permalink (0) Comments (3541) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


COMMENTS


YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Battlestar Galactica poll, essays and finale

Previous entry: Risks posed by political extremism

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | AFRICAN FUTURES PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT 06106 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376