Winter 2017 (31.4) Response

The Comparative Culpability of SAI and Ordinary Carbon Emissions

Abstract: In his article “Carbon Emissions, Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, and Unintended Harms,” Christopher J. Preston compares the culpability of carbon emitters versus that of geoengineers deploying stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI). This comparison relies on a parallel between carbon emitters and SAI deployers that requires both to be agents. However, both are not. While the harms of geoengineering will be caused by culpable agents acting intentionally, the harms connected to climate change emerge out of the uncoordinated actions of billions of people. Taken as a large group, carbon emitters cause harm but do not constitute an agent. Taken individually, carbon emitters are agents but do not cause the harms of climate change. As a result, the parallel collapses, and Preston’s “surprising” conclusion is one that he is not entitled to reach.

Keywords: climate engineering, solar radiation management, stratospheric aerosol injection, carbon emissions, unintended harms, doctrine of double effect, culpability, agency.

Full responses available to subscribers only. Click here for access.

More in this issue

Winter 2017 (31.4) Review

Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy by Philippe van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght

Basic Income offers by far the most comprehensive and up-to-date discussion of universal basic income (UBI) available today, including a fascinating intellectual history of UBI, ...

Winter 2017 (31.4) Response

Bringing Politics into SAI

In this response, Sikina Jinnah and Douglas Bushey unpack the political implications of some of Christopher J. Preston’s assumptions and framing decisions in an ...

Winter 2017 (31.4) Essay

Just War Theory and the Laws of War as Nonidentical Twins

In this essay, David Luban examines the similarities, but even more the dissimilarities, between just war theory and the laws of war. Specifically, he argues ...