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) 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) Response

Calculating the Incalculable: Is SAI the Lesser of Two Evils?

Mike Hulme responds to Christopher J. Preston, questioning whether it is possible to determine and quantify climate harms and to distinguish forensically between their causes.

Winter 2017 (31.4) Review

Briefly Noted: When States Come Out: Europe’s Sexual Minorities and the Politics of Visibility

A brief review of Philip Ayoub's When States Come Out: Europe’s Sexual Minorities and the Politics of Visibility.