Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Anthropogenic Climate Change (Stakeholders: These are four of the most…
Anthropogenic Climate Change
Arguments
: Ethics and economics are just two of the perspectives that must be considered when confronting climate change
Economic
#
Pareto efficiency:
Do any action that harms no one but makes at least one person better off --
very restrictive
Kaldor-Hicks efficiency
: Do any action where gains to winners are larger than losses to losers
Markets give social optimum when marginal private benefits = margin social benefits and marginal private costs = marginal social costs. "Internalizing the externality" --
Pigouvian tax
Present value
: Asset/cost may be worth a different amount in 100 years. i.e. Spending $100 now may be worth $1 million in future damages avoided.
Ethical
#
Deontology
View that rightness or wrongness of an action depends on whether it obeys various moral principles, regardless of consequences.
Deon
= duty
Virtue ethics
View that acquiring and developing traits of good character is more important for good moral standing than principles concerning conduct
Consequentialism
View that the "goodness" or "badness" of an action is dependent solely upon the "goodness" or "badness" of the action's consequences.
"Goodness" of a consequence is defined by
most
pleasure for
most
amount of people. Opposite for "badness."
Impacts
: Vulnerable populations will bear the brunt of the initial effects, but climate change will eventually impact everyone.
#
#
Long-term spatial and temporal effects
Resource limitation
Political instability
Climate refugees
Organized violent conflicts
Consequences of global warming
Expansion of tropics
Increase in insect-born diseases
Melting of mountain glaciers and
thermal expansion of ocean water
Sea-level rise and change in water supplies
Changes in precipitation patterns
Flooding and droughts
Increase in land surfaces and ocean temperatures
Damage to natural ecosystems and agriculture
Increase in extreme weather
More intense tropical storms
Causes
: These causes are only reflective of anthropogenic climate change
Accelerating Factors
#
85% of global energy consumption is from carbon fuels, which emit carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas – into the atmosphere.
Dismantlement of regulative bodies (like EPA) and withdrawal/non-participation in climate treaties
Mitigating Factors
Regulative bodies and international treaties
New
green
technologies like electric cars
Alternative sources of energy
Scientific
#
Greenhouse effect:
atmospheric gases (like CO2) radiate energy that heats the planet's surface.
Concentration of atmospheric CO2 has increased 40% increase in 200 years, leading to a small, but consequential rise in average global temperatures.
Solutions
: All of these solutions have significant tradeoffs and will require some level of large-scale consensus
Regulations
Cap-and-trade
: Creates a limited number of tradable CO2 allowances that equal a predetermined cap.
Pros
: Efficient market-based approach, quantity is capped, proved record of effectiveness (Acid Rain Program)
Cons
: Volatile prices, stifles innovation and investment, bad public perception, difficult to determine cap
Command and control
: Employs uniform mandates and sets standards for emissions reduction
Pros
: Logistically easy to approve mandates, more predictable, easier to measure
Cons
: Not cost effective, not a global approach, no incentives to go beyond standard
Carbon tax
: Ubiquitous tax on fossil fuels in terms of dollars per ton of CO2
Pros
: Administratively simple, generates revenue, encourages companies to innovate, seek new ways to reduce emissions
Cons
: Difficult to enforce, especially if companies self-report. May result in non-competitive companies exiting market
Grand Solar Plan
: Massive switch from fossil fuels to solar power plants through photovoltaic cells in American Southwest
#
Pros
On paper, could provide 69% of U.S. electricity and 35% of total energy.
Would reduce emissions from power plants by 1.7 billion tons per year
Domestic jobs increase
Trade deficit reduced
Global tensions eased (maybe)
Cons/Uncertainties/Issues
How to pay for $400 billion cost
Would displace 600 fossil fuel plants and eliminate oil trade -- impact of such a disruption is unclear
Underlying requirements
250,000 square miles of land in American Southwest
Consistent sunlight
Direct-current transmission backbone
Improvements in module efficiency
Economies of scale
Government policy to develop land
Timeline
Plan for 40 years - "by 2050"
Geoengineering
: The intentional manipulation of the environment on a global scale
#
Cons/Uncertainties/Issues
What should be considered geoengineering? There are a range of alternatives, and not all of them fall under the same category.
Geoengineering is less bad than climate catastrophe. Is that reason enough to choose it?
Arm the Future
argument: If we don't start doing serious research now, we won't be in a position to choose this option in the nightmare scenario.
Merely preventative, not mitigative. May cause dangerous side effects.
Underlying requirements
Global consensus: who has the right to make a decision that will affect the entire world?
Research, development of safe technology
Timeline
Carbon dioxide persists in the atmosphere for hundreds, sometimes thousands of years. Full cost of a generation's emissions will not be realized in their lifetime.
Time until impact depends on type of geoengineering executed
Should the "nightmare scenario" arise, research for best practices is needed now in order to "arm the future."
Pros
More cost-effective than mitigation
Will buy time while mitigation measures are being implemented
Some solutions have been proven to work -- volcanic eruptions cool the Earth with SO2
Uncertainties and Dynamics
: Starting points and implications
#
Scenarios
Increased speed of climate change impacts
Would force global leadership to reconsider extent of climate agreements. Would also put unexpected pressure on developed countries to take in climate refugees.
Regulatory changes
Trump administration is rolling back environmental regulations, which could accelerate effects of climate change. More stringent regulations would reduce emissions, but could have negative economic impact
Political changes
Domestic
Trump administration has significantly cut funding to EPA and threatened to withdraw from Paris Agreement. Any political change would likely have a net positive effect on climate policy.
Global
Trend toward anti-globalist politics may cause short-term reduction of emissions, but long-term problems for standards/treaties.
Emerging technologies
Could provide cost-effective and scalable alternatives to fossil fuels, reverse effects of climate change, etc. Question is how easy will they be to implement on a large scale, since the most effective technologies aren't always adopted (i.e. electric cars).
Wildcards
Much of the world is ill-prepared for the current predicted impacts of climate change. Unexpected disasters or events will increase pressure on resources/decision-making, possibly beyond salvation
Risks
Stakeholders
: These are four of the most directly relevant stakeholders
Industry
#
#
#
Agendas
Preventing regulation -> continued economic prosperity
Vulnerabilities
Overwhelming scientific evidence points to industry as a leading cause of climate change. Some regulation in place, possibility for more restrictive future legislation
Roles, how/when needed
Largest contributor to carbon emissions. Also most powerful deterrent against governmental regulation through lobbying
Arguments against climate change
"Regulations are unnecessary and will harm the economy."
Government
#
#
Agendas
Varying. Safety of constituents should theoretically be most important
Vulnerabilities
Climate refugees, disaster relief
Roles, how/when needed
Responsible for making large-scale decisions. Climate change can't be solved on an individual basis, so some level of government policy is absolutely necessary
Arguments against climate change
"The science is not settled. We have more pressing matters to worry about. Regulations hurt our economy"
Scientists
#
Roles, how/when needed
97% of publishing climate scientists agree that climate change poses a serious threat to humanity. They are the best resource to convince skeptics.
Agendas
Reporting the facts
Vulnerabilities
Credibility is questioned by skeptics. Minority of scientists dispute accuracy of climate science
Arguments against climate change
3% of scientists believe climate change is a natural process and not caused by humans
Vulnerable populations
#
Agendas
Survival
Vulnerabilities
No control over their own situation. Must rely on developed nations to make a change
Roles, how/when needed
Developed nations are responsible for bulk of emissions, but vulnerable populations (like the Maldives) have the most to lose
Arguments against climate change
None
Other Factors
Standards and Regulations
#
Verified Carbon Standard
Carbon footprint
EPA Programs
Clean Air Markets
Clean Energy programs
Stationary Sources
Transportation
Underground Injection Control Program
Trends
#
Populism, anti-globalization
Climate change education
"Fake News," misconceptions more widespread in digital age
Global governance
Current structure in place
Paris Agreement
: Goal to keep warming under 2 degrees. All countries must submit targets, but no penalty for missing them. Overall, does not go far enough in protecting the vulnerable.
Factors to consider
Equality
: "Common, but differentiated responsibilities." Developed nations contribute the most to global warming, but don't necessarily feel the brunt of impact.
Well being
: Landscape approach, rights-based approach, or justice-centered approach.
Vulnerability
: Communities must have the resources to adapt to climate change stimuli.