Modeling the measurement of carbon dioxide removal: perspectives from the philosophy of measurement

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Joseph Wilson
{"title":"Modeling the measurement of carbon dioxide removal: perspectives from the philosophy of measurement","authors":"Joseph Wilson","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2023.1283333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores how recent developments in the philosophy of measurement can frame and guide the way we measure successful carbon sequestration in carbon dioxide removal (CDR) projects. Recent efforts to mitigate carbon emissions, e.g., the forest offset program implemented in California, have been revealed to systematically over-credit projects relative to the benefits they produce for the climate. In this paper I utilize concepts from the philosophy of measurement, primarily those surrounding models of the measurement process, to diagnose this problem of over-crediting in the broader context of concerns about uncertainty and impermanence in CDR. In light of these measurement models, I argue for absolute measurement targets in favor of the standard comparative targets, the latter of which are significantly dependent on tenuous baseline projections. I go on to consider which contemporary approaches to CDR are successful in light of lingering uncertainty about the future, which puts particular emphasis on the permanence of carbon sequestration. Independent of the specific argument developed here, the paper also serves to introduce concepts from the philosophy of science and measurement to a broader audience, in the hopes they will benefit other areas of research.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":"45 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1283333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper explores how recent developments in the philosophy of measurement can frame and guide the way we measure successful carbon sequestration in carbon dioxide removal (CDR) projects. Recent efforts to mitigate carbon emissions, e.g., the forest offset program implemented in California, have been revealed to systematically over-credit projects relative to the benefits they produce for the climate. In this paper I utilize concepts from the philosophy of measurement, primarily those surrounding models of the measurement process, to diagnose this problem of over-crediting in the broader context of concerns about uncertainty and impermanence in CDR. In light of these measurement models, I argue for absolute measurement targets in favor of the standard comparative targets, the latter of which are significantly dependent on tenuous baseline projections. I go on to consider which contemporary approaches to CDR are successful in light of lingering uncertainty about the future, which puts particular emphasis on the permanence of carbon sequestration. Independent of the specific argument developed here, the paper also serves to introduce concepts from the philosophy of science and measurement to a broader audience, in the hopes they will benefit other areas of research.
二氧化碳去除测量建模:测量哲学的视角
本文探讨了衡量哲学的最新发展如何为我们衡量二氧化碳清除(CDR)项目中成功固碳的方法提供框架和指导。最近为减少碳排放所做的努力,例如在加利福尼亚州实施的森林补偿计划,被揭示为系统性地对项目进行了过高的补偿,而不考虑其对气候所产生的效益。在本文中,我利用测量哲学中的概念,主要是围绕测量过程模型的概念,从 CDR 的不确定性和无常性这一更广阔的背景下诊断了这一过度抵消问题。根据这些测量模型,我主张采用绝对测量目标,而不是标准比较目标,后者在很大程度上依赖于脆弱的基线预测。鉴于未来的不确定性挥之不去,我将继续考虑哪些当代 CDR 方法是成功的,其中特别强调了碳封存的持久性。与本文提出的具体论点无关,本文还旨在向更广泛的读者介绍科学哲学和测量学的概念,希望这些概念能惠及其他研究领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信