Articles | Volume 49
https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-49-37-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-49-37-2019
22 Aug 2019
 | 22 Aug 2019

Moral Conflicts of several “Green” terrestrial Negative Emission Technologies regarding the Human Right to Adequate Food – A Review

Patrick Hohlwegler

Cited articles

Anderson, K. and Peters, G.: The trouble with negative emissions, Science, 354, 182–183, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah4567, 2016. 
Arora, V. K. and Montenegro, A.: Small temperature benefits provided by realistic afforestation efforts, Nat. Geosci., 4, 514–518, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1182, 2011. 
Baatz, C.: Can We Have It Both Ways? On Potential Trade-Offs Between Mitigation and Solar Radiation Management, Environ. Value, 25, 29–49, https://doi.org/10.3197/096327115X14497392134847, 2016. 
Böhm, F. and Ott, K.: Impacts of Ocean Acidification. An analysis from an environmental ethics perspective, in: Beiträge zur Theorie und Praxis starker Nachhaltigkeit, 11, Metropolis, Marburg, 2019. 
Boysen, L. R., Lucht, W., Gerten, D., Heck, V., Lenton, T. M., and Schellnhuber, H. J.: The limits to global-warming mitigation by terrestrial carbon removal, Earth's Future, 5, 463–474, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000469, 2017. 
Download
Short summary
Since current efforts are insufficient to limit global warming “to well below 2 °C” until 2100, as agreed upon in the Paris Agreement, the need to rely on new technological solutions, designated as geoengineering, is almost unavoidable. I found that even ‘green’ forms of geoengineering would conflict with the human right to adequate food. Therefore, I conclude that we should not rely on a single geoengineering technology but favorize a mix of various technologies and increase mitigation efforts.