Science, Technology, and Public Policy

Ely Sandler and Daniel Schrag propose a new approach to Article 6 of the Paris agreement, arguing that states must use cross-border investment to finance the energy transition. By linking additionality to an investment’s impact on cost of capital, Sandler and Schrag demonstrate how Article 6 can leverage blended finance to de-risk private investment, creating a new model of public private partnership. The paper uses case studies from the Middle East and North Africa region to demonstrate the potential economic, environmental and political benefits of cooperation on Article 6.  

David Keith argues that either or both carbon removal or solar geoengineering  is needed to cool the planet this century. There are no other options.

Kelly Sims Gallagher asserts that politicians' pledges of dramatic long-term reductions should not let them off the hook for their failure to achieve more modest progress in the short term.

Joel Clement writes that while climate change is a scientific matter, climate action is a political one, and, if done right, can usher in dramatic social, economic and ecological improvements.

Ian Masters and Joel Clement assess how much time has been lost by governments in facing the looming crisis of climate change, in particular here in the U.S. where the last four years were not only wasted, but were steps backwards from the urgent challenges made clear by yesterday's alarming IPCC report.

Joel Clement describes the influence of U.S. Senators Lisa Murkowski and Joe Manchin over the Department of the Interior and advises that a forward-looking legislator in a fossil-fuel state would be wise to fight aggressively for financial commitments to make the people in their state part of the vanguard of the new clean energy economy, rather than set back the U.S. economy by fighting the inevitable energy transition itself.

Joel Clement outlines why he is vexed by global negligence with regards to investments in the fossil fuel industry.

 The Gazette spoke with John Holdren, Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and professor of environmental science and policy in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, about what the incoming Biden-Harris administration reinstalling science as a foundation for government policy means.

The Arctic of today does not resemble the Arctic of fifty years ago, and the Arctic of 2070 will be different still, based on everything we know now. Warmer temperatures on land and in the ocean, retreating sea ice and glaciers, thawing permafrost, rapidly changing ecosystems, range expansion of novel species and stress in native species, changing ocean chemistry, and altered seasons all contribute to significant alteration of a region in an extremely compressed timescale. At the same time, globalization and the increasing international interest in the region add new pressures for access, development and geopolitical positioning in the Arctic. Concerns about the implications and impacts of that intensified engagement generate even more anxiety about the transformation to a brand-new Arctic in the 21st Century.

In this episode of Resources Radio, host Daniel Raimi talks with David Keith, a physics and public policy professor at Harvard University and one of the world's leading experts on solar geoengineering. Keith outlines prominent examples of solar geoengineering technologies in development—from ambitious ideas, such as sending aerosols to the stratosphere, to more operational solutions, like painting roofs white to reflect more sunlight into space. An advocate for research on solar geoengineering, Keith discusses how coalitions among like-minded nations and clearer guidance from policymakers could expand deployment of promising technologies.