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
Justice in Conflict: The Effects of the International Criminal Court’s Interventions on Ending Wars and Building Peace by Mark Kersten
In this book, Mark Kersten convincingly shows that the implications of pursuing “during-conflict justice” are varied and fluid rather than dichotomous and deterministic. The nuanced ...
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 ...
Winter 2017 (31.4) • Feature
Carbon Emissions, Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, and Unintended Harms
In this article, Christopher J. Preston compares the culpability for any unintended harms resulting from stratospheric aerosol injection versus culpability for the unintended harms already ...