I. Introduction
This post examines ethical issues that arise when a government does not take action to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from coal fired powered plants because it plans to eventually use carbon capture and geologic storage technology (geologic carbon storage) to sequester carbon dioxide produced in coal combustion.

As more fully set out in a prior post, geologic carbon sequestration is a hopeful but unproven technology for reducing climate change’s threat which raises a number of ethical issues that should be considered in regard to its deployment. (http://climateethics.org/?p=38)

This post looks in more detail at one of these ethical issues, that is, ethical issues that arise by waiting for this hopeful but unproven technology to be perfected while continuing to emit GHG from existing coal fired power plants.

Read the rest of this entry »

I. Introduction
Climate change is already impacting many regions and nations that have historically contributed little to almost nothing to current levels of atmospheric carbon and other greenhouse gases. Numerous models relied upon by IPCC project that adverse impacts in many of these vulnerable regions will grow in severity and range as global average temperatures increase. The majority of the most vulnerable countries do not have the capacity, in terms of scientific know how or technological infrastructure, to predict and respond to harmful climate impacts. Using the specific examples of climate impacts in the Kingdom of Bhutan, this post investigates some of the main ethical issues entailed by existing approaches to funding proposals for compensation and capacity building help the most vulnerable populations cope with the impacts from climate change.

Read the rest of this entry »

I. Introduction
This post reviews certain ethical issues and concerns that need to be considered in climate change policy formation in upcoming international negotiations. Topics examined here include:

• Links Between Ethics and Climate Change Policy Formation.
• Ethical Limits of Certain Economic Analytical Tools.
• Ethics and Interpretation of the Goal of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
• Ethics and Greenhouse Gas Atmospheric Stabilization Levels.
• Ethical Principles and National Greenhouse Gas Allocations.
• Ethical Issues and National Greenhouse Gas Allocations.
• Conclusions and Recommendations.

Read the rest of this entry »

I. Introduction
Human rights are often thought of as applying to such things as rights to a fair trial or protection from torture.  Environmental problems have rarely been understood to trigger human rights violations, yet there is a growing interest in potential links between climate change and human rights issues. This post examines whether nations who are responsible for human-induced climate change should be understood to create human rights violations and what is the significance of classifying climate change inaction as a human rights problem.

This post summarizes a longer examination of this subject that will soon be published. (Brown, 2008).

Read the rest of this entry »

I. Introduction
This post examines the ethical issues raised by geologic carbon storage, a somewhat promising but not yet fully proven potential solution to human-induced climate change.

Carbon capture and storage technologies are comprised of a variety of technologies for removing carbon dioxide from fuel combustion (capture) and storing the CO2 in reservoirs other than the atmosphere (e.g., by injecting the carbon dioxide into geologic formation for long-term storage instead of releasing it into the atmosphere). This post focuses on the questions arising from CO2 storage in geological reservoirs.

As more fully identified below, there are some open questions about some of the risks of geologic carbon storage. These issues are under consideration in numerous studies and demonstration projects around the world. Also, several governments around the world are in various stages of development of siting criteria to deal with at least some of these potential risks.

This post summarizes conclusions on this technology reached at a workshop of scientific experts, ethicists, policy makers, and members of civil society that took place in Rio de Janeiro on October 30 to November 1, 2007. The workshop was hosted by Petrobas (Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.), and co-sponsored by Brazilian Forum on Climate Change, the Graduate School of Engineering at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, the National School of Tropical Botany at the Botanical Garden of Rio de Janeiro, and the Rock Ethics Institute at the Pennsylvania State University.
Read the rest of this entry »

I. Introduction
One frequently hears the argument that it would be unfair to the United States to commit to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions because some large emitting countries including China and India have not done so. Although this argument has waned somewhat since it was first strongly made in opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, recently this contention has arisen again in response to proposed new US climate change laws and in discussions about what the US position should be when it negotiates a post-Kyoto regime this December in Poland and next December in Copenhagen.

In response to this argument, proponents of US government emissions reduction commitments often argue that the world needs the United States to take action to show leadership to the rest of the world even if China and India do not commit to binding emissions reductions targets. This response appears to concede that the United States has no duty to act until other emitting nations agree to act but, nevertheless, the United States should act to show “leadership” to reduce climate change’s great threat. The ideas seems to rest on the conclusion that if the United States acts to reduce emissions others will follow and therefore as a matter of “prudence” the US should make commitments given climate change’s potential catastrophic impacts. This position seems to concede that the United States has no ethical obligation to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, the reason for moving ahead despite the fact that other countries have not done so is the practical need to show leadership. Can a case be made that the United States and other high-emitting nations have an ethical duty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions even if other nations do not do so?
Read the rest of this entry »

I. Introduction
Economic analysis of climate change issues can help policy makers in many ways including identification of the least costly methods to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and how to structure incentives to encourage society’s maximum reduction of carbon footprints. Without doubt, economic analyses of climate change reduction strategies are vital to finding the most efficient solutions to human-induced climate change’s immense threat. The more low-cost solutions to climate change are found, the more hope there is to reduce climate change’s immense menace. Yet there are ethical limits to the use of some economic arguments frequently made in opposition to proposed government action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of some environmental regulatory programs can help identify proposed market regulatory interventions whose costs significantly outweigh environmental benefits. Yet CBA of some government environmental programs including climate change emissions reduction strategies often ignore serious ethical limitations on the use of this tool to guide climate change policy. Read the rest of this entry »