重新评估清除二氧化碳的必要性:替代气候目标路径的道德影响

IF 4.6 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
L. Voget-Kleschin, Christian Baatz, Clare Heyward, D. V. van Vuuren, N. Mengis
{"title":"重新评估清除二氧化碳的必要性:替代气候目标路径的道德影响","authors":"L. Voget-Kleschin, Christian Baatz, Clare Heyward, D. V. van Vuuren, N. Mengis","doi":"10.1017/sus.2023.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Non-technical summary Scenarios compatible with the Paris agreement's temperature goal of 1.5 °C involve carbon dioxide removal measures – measures that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere – on a massive scale. Such large-scale implementations raise significant ethical problems. Van Vuuren et al. (2018), as well as the current IPCC scenarios, show that reduction in energy and or food demand could reduce the need for such activities. There is some reluctance to discuss such societal changes. However, we argue that policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily ethically problematic. Therefore, they should be discussed alongside techno-optimistic approaches in any kind of discussions about how to respond to climate change. Technical summary The 1.5 °C goal has given impetus to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, such as bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage, or afforestation. However, land-based CDR options compete with food production and biodiversity protection. Van Vuuren et al. (2018) looked at alternative pathways including lifestyle changes, low-population projections, or non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation, to reach the 1.5 °C temperature objective. Underlined by the recently published IPCC AR6 WGIII report, they show that demand-side management measures are likely to reduce the need for CDR. Yet, policy measures entailed in these scenarios could be associated with ethical problems themselves. In this paper, we therefore investigate ethical implications of four alternative pathways as proposed by Van Vuuren et al. (2018). We find that emission reduction options such as lifestyle changes and reducing population, which are typically perceived as ethically problematic, might be less so on further inspection. In contrast, options associated with less societal transformation and more techno-optimistic approaches turn out to be in need of further scrutiny. The vast majority of emission reduction options considered are not intrinsically ethically problematic; rather everything rests on the precise implementation. Explicitly addressing ethical considerations when developing, advancing, and using integrated assessment scenarios could reignite debates about previously overlooked topics and thereby support necessary societal discourse. Social media summary Policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily as ethically problematic as commonly presumed and reduce the need for large-scale CDR.","PeriodicalId":36849,"journal":{"name":"Global Sustainability","volume":"27 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reassessing the need for carbon dioxide removal: moral implications of alternative climate target pathways\",\"authors\":\"L. Voget-Kleschin, Christian Baatz, Clare Heyward, D. V. van Vuuren, N. Mengis\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/sus.2023.21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Non-technical summary Scenarios compatible with the Paris agreement's temperature goal of 1.5 °C involve carbon dioxide removal measures – measures that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere – on a massive scale. Such large-scale implementations raise significant ethical problems. Van Vuuren et al. (2018), as well as the current IPCC scenarios, show that reduction in energy and or food demand could reduce the need for such activities. There is some reluctance to discuss such societal changes. However, we argue that policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily ethically problematic. Therefore, they should be discussed alongside techno-optimistic approaches in any kind of discussions about how to respond to climate change. Technical summary The 1.5 °C goal has given impetus to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, such as bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage, or afforestation. However, land-based CDR options compete with food production and biodiversity protection. Van Vuuren et al. (2018) looked at alternative pathways including lifestyle changes, low-population projections, or non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation, to reach the 1.5 °C temperature objective. Underlined by the recently published IPCC AR6 WGIII report, they show that demand-side management measures are likely to reduce the need for CDR. Yet, policy measures entailed in these scenarios could be associated with ethical problems themselves. In this paper, we therefore investigate ethical implications of four alternative pathways as proposed by Van Vuuren et al. (2018). We find that emission reduction options such as lifestyle changes and reducing population, which are typically perceived as ethically problematic, might be less so on further inspection. In contrast, options associated with less societal transformation and more techno-optimistic approaches turn out to be in need of further scrutiny. The vast majority of emission reduction options considered are not intrinsically ethically problematic; rather everything rests on the precise implementation. Explicitly addressing ethical considerations when developing, advancing, and using integrated assessment scenarios could reignite debates about previously overlooked topics and thereby support necessary societal discourse. Social media summary Policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily as ethically problematic as commonly presumed and reduce the need for large-scale CDR.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Sustainability\",\"volume\":\"27 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2023.21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2023.21","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

摘要

摘要 非技术性摘要 与《巴黎协定》的 1.5 °C 温度目标相符的方案涉及大规模清除二氧化碳的措施--从大气中主动清除二氧化碳的措施。这种大规模的实施会引发重大的伦理问题。Van Vuuren 等人(2018 年)以及目前的 IPCC 情景都表明,减少能源和或粮食需求可以减少对此类活动的需求。有些人不愿意讨论这种社会变革。然而,我们认为,促进社会变革的政策措施并不一定存在伦理问题。因此,在任何有关如何应对气候变化的讨论中,这些措施都应与技术乐观主义方法一起讨论。技术摘要 1.5 °C的目标推动了二氧化碳清除(CDR)措施的发展,如生物能源与碳捕集与封存的结合,或植树造林。然而,陆基 CDR 方案与粮食生产和生物多样性保护存在竞争。Van Vuuren 等人(2018 年)研究了实现 1.5 °C 温度目标的替代途径,包括改变生活方式、低人口预测或非二氧化碳温室气体减排。最近发布的 IPCC 第六次评估报告第三工作组报告强调,他们表明需求方管理措施可能会减少对 CDR 的需求。然而,这些设想方案中的政策措施本身也可能存在伦理问题。因此,我们在本文中研究了 Van Vuuren 等人(2018 年)提出的四种替代路径的伦理影响。我们发现,改变生活方式和减少人口等减排方案通常被认为存在伦理问题,但进一步研究发现,这些方案的伦理问题可能较少。与此相反,与社会转型程度较低和技术乐观主义较强相关的方案则需要进一步审查。所考虑的绝大多数减排方案在本质上并不存在伦理问题,而是取决于具体的实施。在制定、推进和使用综合评估方案时,明确解决伦理方面的考虑,可以重新引发对以前被忽视的话题的讨论,从而支持必要的社会讨论。社会媒体总结 有利于社会变革的政策措施并不一定像人们通常认为的那样存在伦理问题,而且还能减少对大规模 CDR 的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reassessing the need for carbon dioxide removal: moral implications of alternative climate target pathways
Abstract Non-technical summary Scenarios compatible with the Paris agreement's temperature goal of 1.5 °C involve carbon dioxide removal measures – measures that actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere – on a massive scale. Such large-scale implementations raise significant ethical problems. Van Vuuren et al. (2018), as well as the current IPCC scenarios, show that reduction in energy and or food demand could reduce the need for such activities. There is some reluctance to discuss such societal changes. However, we argue that policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily ethically problematic. Therefore, they should be discussed alongside techno-optimistic approaches in any kind of discussions about how to respond to climate change. Technical summary The 1.5 °C goal has given impetus to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, such as bioenergy combined with carbon capture and storage, or afforestation. However, land-based CDR options compete with food production and biodiversity protection. Van Vuuren et al. (2018) looked at alternative pathways including lifestyle changes, low-population projections, or non-CO2 greenhouse gas mitigation, to reach the 1.5 °C temperature objective. Underlined by the recently published IPCC AR6 WGIII report, they show that demand-side management measures are likely to reduce the need for CDR. Yet, policy measures entailed in these scenarios could be associated with ethical problems themselves. In this paper, we therefore investigate ethical implications of four alternative pathways as proposed by Van Vuuren et al. (2018). We find that emission reduction options such as lifestyle changes and reducing population, which are typically perceived as ethically problematic, might be less so on further inspection. In contrast, options associated with less societal transformation and more techno-optimistic approaches turn out to be in need of further scrutiny. The vast majority of emission reduction options considered are not intrinsically ethically problematic; rather everything rests on the precise implementation. Explicitly addressing ethical considerations when developing, advancing, and using integrated assessment scenarios could reignite debates about previously overlooked topics and thereby support necessary societal discourse. Social media summary Policy measures enabling societal changes are not necessarily as ethically problematic as commonly presumed and reduce the need for large-scale CDR.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Sustainability
Global Sustainability Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
3.60%
发文量
19
审稿时长
17 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