SANDPIT: Integrated Assessment of Geoengineering Proposals (IAGP)

国际社会一致认为，必须避免达到危险程度的气候变化。然而，如果不从根本上改变能源的来源和使用方式，分析表明，地球将在本世纪晚些时候开始经历令人无法接受的破坏性和破坏性的环境变化，这是一个非常真实的风险。如果通过减缓和适应应对气候变化的传统方法被证明是不够的，未来可以采取什么行动来保障环境质量、生态系统、农业、经济和社会？我们能在紧急情况下直接控制地球的温度吗？刻意操纵地球气候并不是一个新奇的想法，然而，人们对气候变暖潜在严重性的日益认识和担忧，最近引发了关于直接干预地球气候和自然系统以对抗全球变暖和其他已知的温室气体浓度增加影响的伦理和可行性的辩论。随着这一被称为地球工程学的新研究领域在国际上声名鹊起，从大气中消除二氧化碳或直接改变地表吸收的太阳光的想法已经激增。建议的消除二氧化碳的方法跨越海洋和陆地生物圈，从通过向海洋表面施肥来提高海洋生产力，到添加石灰来中和二氧化碳的酸度。表面的直接冷却可能通过向大气中注入硫酸盐气雾剂或种植更多反光品种的作物来实现。然而，尽管在构思不同的地球工程方案方面做出了努力并发挥了科学创造力，但所有方案的有效性仍然无法量化，特别是在区域范围内。其中一些不太可能像设想的那样发挥作用，许多可能会对环境和社会产生不良的气候副作用和风险。目前，我们没有足够的信息来为我们需要进行的关于地球工程的辩论提供信息。地球工程建议的综合评估(IAGP)是一个跨学科的项目，它将开始填补我们知识中的这一差距，特别关注地球工程方案的潜在副作用和不可预见的后果。该项目将制定一个全面的评估框架(涉及利益攸关方和公众)，以便对所有主要的地球工程提案进行深入比较。该项目的研究工具将包括最先进的地球系统的计算机表示，考虑到海洋循环、海冰、温室气体变暖、大气过程和动力学，以及海洋中碳和营养的循环。需要解决的重要问题包括：是否可以将不同的技术结合在一起，以最大限度地减少缓解效益和最大限度地减少不必要的风险；如何充分控制地球工程计划并在必要时迅速“关闭”；如何将公众意见纳入如何界定惠益和副作用，以便政策制定者做出明智的决定。该项目将地球系统建模和与利益攸关方和公众的协商参与结合在一起，以确保评估对各种价值和标准负责，并确保将各种问题和社会价值观集中纳入评估。我们对不同二氧化碳去除和直接冷却计划的有效性和影响的分析结果不仅将通过为我们的全球环境未来提供信息而具有直接的政策相关性，而且将经过精心定制，以足够清晰和有意义的方式向更广泛的受众提供信息，使围绕地球工程的辩论能够在社会中进一步发展。

There is international consensus that dangerous levels of climate change must be avoided. Yet without radical changes in the ways energy is sourced and used, analyses suggest that there is a very real risk that the Earth will start to experience unacceptably damaging and disruptive environmental change later this century. What future actions can be taken to safeguard environmental quality, ecosystems, agriculture, economy, and societies if the conventional approaches to tackling climate change, through mitigation and adaptation, prove insufficient? Could we take direct control of our planet's temperature in an emergency? Deliberately manipulating the Earth's climate is not a novel idea, however increasing awareness and concern about the potentially serious nature of a much warmer climate has led to recent debates regarding the ethics and feasibility of making a direct intervention in the Earth's climate and natural systems to counteract global warming and the other known impacts of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations.As this new research field, known as 'geoengineering', has gained in international profile, ideas for either removing CO2 from the atmosphere or directly altering the amount of sunlight absorbed at the surface have proliferated. Suggested means of removing CO2 span marine and terrestrial biospheres, from enhancing marine productivity by fertilizing the surface of the ocean with nutrients, to adding lime to neutralize the CO2 acidity. Direct cooling of the surface could potentially be done by injecting sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere or planting more reflective varieties of crops. However, despite the effort and scientific ingenuity being brought to bear in thinking up different geoengineering schemes, all remain un-quantified in their effectiveness, particularly at the regional scale. Some are unlikely ever to work as envisaged, and many contain the potential for undesirable climatic side-effects and risks to the environment and to society. Currently we have insufficient information to inform the debate we need to have on geoengineering. The Integrated Assessment of Geoengineering Proposals ('IAGP') is an interdisciplinary project which will begin to address this gap in our knowledge, paying particular attention to the potential for side-effects and unanticipated consequences of geoengineering schemes. The project will develop a comprehensive evaluation framework (involving stakeholders and publics), which will allow an in-depth comparison of all major geoengineering proposals. The project research tools will include state-of-the-art computer representations of the Earth system, accounting for ocean circulation, sea-ice, and greenhouse warming and atmospheric processes and dynamics, as well as the cycling of carbon and nutrients within the ocean. Important questions to be addressed include: whether different technologies can be combined to maximize mitigation benefits and minimize unwanted risks, how might geoengineering schemes be adequately controlled and 'turned off' quickly if needed, how to include the public's views in how benefits and side-effects are defined in order for policy-makers to take informed decisions. The project combines Earth system modelling and deliberative engagement with stakeholders and publics to ensure the evaluation is accountable to a variety of values and criteria and ensures that issues and society's values are centrally incorporated within the evaluation.The results of our analysis of the effectiveness and implications of different CO2 removal and direct cooling schemes will not only have direct policy relevance through informing decisions about our global environmental future, but will be carefully tailored to give wider audiences information in a sufficiently clear and meaningful way that the debates surrounding geoengineering can be progressed further within society.