#15

Today I have had half a book writing day, with some 600 words written on my scientific monograph Captured: CCS and the fight for the soul of the environmental movement. So far this Spring I have had 15 writing days, including 12 book writing days.

Chronicle with CCS criticism, replies

My chronicle "Om 10.000 år, hvem tar regningen for vår karbon­fangst og -lagring?" was published in the daily newspaper Stavanger Aftenblad November 16th. A reply, "Alt tilsier at lagring er trygt over et tidsrom på 10.000 år" by professors Helge Hellevang and Snorre Olaussen, was published November 25, to which I replied with "Om 100 år er alt glemt?", published December 2nd.

#10

Today I have had an article writing day, the 10th this Autumn, with some work done involving my recently published article on CCS and climate justice, the book Semiotic agency: Science beyond mechanism, and the book procject Captured: CCS and the fight for the soul of the environmental movement, and some 100 words written. 

Article on CCS and generational climate justice published

My Norwegian language journal article on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) was published this week.

Reference: 

Tønnessen, Morten (2021). Karbonfangst i lys av generasjonsrettferdighet. Norsk filosofisk tidsskrift 56(2–3): 91–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1504-2901-2021-02-03-04 

The article is Open Access and thus freely available for full-text reading and download.

English language summary:

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) stands out from other climate mitigation measures by involving storage of CO2 in geological formations for several thousand years. Few if any other mitigation measures raise similar questions related to the long-term impact of the measure. This accentuates the issue of intergenerational justice in relation to CCS. Reliance on CCS represents a moral hazard, since it risks delaying and undermining the needed transition to a fossil-free energy system and society. It would also be fundamentally unjust in that it would burden future generations with much of the practical responsibility for dealing with environmental problems caused by current generations. Emphasis on intergenerational justice should lead us to commit to rapid climate gas emission reductions today rather than relying on negative emissions at some point in the future. Such an assessment is in line with central contemporary climate research as well as key norms in environmental ethics. It is also in line with some of the fundamental insights of deep ecology as developed by Arne Næss.  

Keywords: Carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), intergenerational justice, climate ethics, moral hazard, deep ecology

$41,5

Today I have had an article writing day devoted to proof-reading my Norwegian language article on CCS and climate justice ("Karbonfangst i lys av generasjonsrettferdighet"), and continuing my work on my wasted growth articles, primarily the first one, with work done on comparing wasted and wasteful growth in the Nordic countries with the performance of the USA. Some 150 words were added to the latter article manuscript. Total number of writing days this Spring is up to 41,5.

#27,5

Today I have had an article writing day, with some -500 words written net. I have looked through and made slight edits in the article now titled "Meaningful leisure in the outdoors – exploring the friluftsliv experience of adolescents at residential care", for which I am second author (first author is Joakim Jiri Haaland). I have also edited and shortened my article "Karbonfangst i lys av generasjonsrettferdighet" (CCS in light og generational justice). The former is now ready for resubmission; the latter has been resubmitted today.

Total number of writing days this Spring is up to 27,5.

#26,5

Today I have had half an article writing day devoted to editing and shortening my article on CCS and climate justice, with some 500 words deleted net. Accumulated number of writing days this Spring is up to 26,5.

#26

Today I have had half an article writing day devoted to formatting, editing and shortening my article on CCS and intergenerational justice, with some 100 words written net today. Total number of writing days so far this Spring is up to 26.

CCS article revised a second time

Yesterday I finished the second revision of my CCS paper "Karbonfangst i lys av generasjonsrettferdighet", with some 300 more words written.

#16,5

Half writing day. Almost done with the second revision of my CCS paper.

#9

Today, on this month´s 9th article writing day, I have revised and renamed my article now called "Karbonfangst i lys av generasjonsrettferdighet" (Carbon capture in light of generational justice), written for a special issue on climate ethics of Norsk filosofisk tidsskrift, with some 1.100 words written today.

#36

Today, mostly this evening, I have had what turned out to be a full article writing day, with some 1.200 words written on my article "Karbonfangst i lys av klimarettferdighet" (Carbon capture and storage (CCS) in light of climate justice), which I have now finished and submitted.

Total number of article writing days is up to 36 so far this autumn.

#35

Today I have had an article writing day devoted to my Norwegian article on CCS and climate justice, with some 1.900 words written. This is the 3rd most productive day this autumn by that measure. Total number of writing days this autumn is up to 35.

#34

Today I have had an article writing day devoted to my Norwegian article on CCS and climate justice, with some 1.100 words written. Total number of writing days so far this autumn is up to 34.

#33

Today I have had half an article writing day, with some 300 words written on an article in Norwegian on CCS and climate justice.

Paper abstract on CCS and climate justice approved for special issue

My paper abstract for a special issue of Norsk Filosofisk tidsskrift on climate ethics (cf. previous post) has been approved by the guest editors of the issue. The article will undergo normal peer-review procedures. The full-text manuscript of my paper "Karbonfangst og klimarettferdighet" (Carbon capture and climate justice) is due December 15th.

3rd writing day

Today I have had an article writing day, bringing this autumn´s total up to 3, with some 700 words written on a prospective article titled "Karbonfangst og klimarettferdighet" (Carbon capture and climate justice) and on my Routledge handbook book chapter "Neurosemiotics across species", in the form of two abstracts.

Article abstract on carbon capture and climate justice

I have today composed and submitted an article abstract entitled "Karbonfangst og klimarettferdighet" (Carbon capture and climate justice) for a special issue of Norsk filosofisk tidsskrift on climate ethics.

***

Karbonfangst og klimarettferdighet

Av de mest politisk aktuelle klimatiltakene skiller karbonfangst seg ut med sin forutsetning om lagring av CO₂ i geologiske formasjoner i flere tusen år. Mens tidsperspektivet for lagring av avfall i det store og hele ligner den type tidsperspektiv kjernekraft opererer med, er det få om noen andre klimatiltak som reiser tilsvarende problematikk. Dette gjør spørsmål om generasjonsrettferdighet særlig aktuelt for karbonfangstens del. Dersom karbonfangst får petroleumsprodusenter som Norge til å forlenge oljealderen, f.eks. i håp om å utvikle «utslippsfri» blå hydrogen, kommer også spørsmål om rettferdighet mellom rike og fattige land inn i bildet.

Det hefter både praktiske og etiske problemer ved de storstilte planene om karbonfangst som bl.a. FNs klimapanel har stilt seg bak. Disse har i liten grad vært gjenstand for diskusjon. Mens CO₂ fra dagens rundt 20 store karbonfangst-prosjekter internasjonalt i de fleste tilfellene benyttes som trykkstøtte for økt utvinning av olje og gass, er de karbonfangstprosjektene det nå etterlyses flere tusen av fram mot 2050 tenkt å være såkalt «dedikert geologisk lagring», uten kommersiell nyttiggjøring av lagret CO₂.

Sikker lagring av CO₂ forutsetter en tidshorisont på flere tusen år. Studier fra forsknings- og industrihold argumenterer for at det finnes nok av lagringssteder hvor man kan være trygge på at CO₂ ikke lekker ut av CO₂-reservoarene. Jeg vil argumentere for at troen på at vi kan forutsi fremtidig geologisk utvikling så langt fram i tid på bakgrunn av dagens vitenskapelige kunnskap er naiv og bygger på et utdatert mekanistisk natursyn.

Overvåkningsteknologi er under utvikling som vil kunne melde fra dersom lekkasjer inntreffer og tiltak må settes inn. Om det skulle være mulig å bruke teknologi utviklet i vår tid i flere tusen år – en tvilsom forutsetning – så ville det imidlertid låse oss til en høyteknologisk utviklingsbane, og dermed gjøre menneskehetens fremtidige handlingsrom mindre.

Jeg vil argumentere for at planene om storstilt karbonfangst strider mot prinsippet om at forurenseren skal betale. Det er fullstendig urealistisk å tro at kostnadene for lagring av CO₂ over flere tusen år skal kunne dekkes av de bedriftene og landene som i dag er ansvarlige for størsteparten av CO₂-utslippene. Ikke noe land, og ingen bedrift – heller ikke noe forsikringsselskap – har eksistert over så lang tid. Det sannsynlige resultatet er derfor at fremtidens generasjoner vil måtte bære en stor del av byrden for vår tids klimagassutslipp, dersom storstilt karbonfangst blir en sentral klimaløsning.

Klimaøkonomen William Nordhaus antar at fortsatt økonomisk vekst de neste århundrene sannsynligvis uansett vil gi fremtidens generasjoner bedre levekår enn vi har i dag. Den antagelsen må imidlertid problematiseres både med tanke på hva som er mulig, og med tanke på hva som er ønskelig gitt en bærekraftig fremtid.

Jeg vil endelig argumentere for at karbonfangst strider med føre-var prinsippet, siden en stor satsning på dette innebærer betydelig moralsk risiko om det ikke skulle lykkes å forhindre katastrofale klimaendringer med denne strategien. Det finnes klimatiltak som vil ha like rask og kanskje mer varig effekt og ikke innebære den samme risikoen eller urettferdigheten.