M. Granger Morgan

The imperative of responsibility : in search of an ethics for the technological age

Hans Jonas here rethinks the foundations of ethics in light of the awesome transformations wrought by modern technology: the threat of nuclear war, ecological ravage, genetic engineering, and the like. Though informed by a deep reverence for human life, Jonass ethics is grounded not in religion but in metaphysics, in a secular doctrine that makes explicit mans duties toward himself, his posterity, and the environment. Jonas offers an assessment of practical goals under present circumstances, ending with a critique of modern utopianism.

Learning from integrated assessment of climate change

The objective of integrated assessment of climate change is to put available knowledge together in order to evaluate what has been learned, policy implications, and research needs. This paper summarizes insights gained from five years of integrated assessment activity at Carnegie Mellon. After an introduction, in Section 2 we ask: who are the climate decision makers? We conclude that they are a diffuse and often divergent group spread all over the world whose decisions are primarily driven by local non-climate considerations. Insights are illustrated with results from the ICAM-2 model. In Section 3 we ask: what is the climate problem? In addition to the conventional answer, we note that in a democracy the problem is whatever voters and their elected representatives think it is. Results from studies of public understanding are reported. Several other specific issues that define the problem, including the treatment of aerosols and alternative indices for comparing greenhouse gases, are discussed. In Section 4 we discuss studies of climate impacts, focusing on coastal zones, the terrestrial biosphere and human health. Particular attention is placed on the roles of adaptation, value change, and technological innovation. In Section 5 selected policy issues are discussed. We conclude by noting that equity has received too little attention in past work. We argue that many conventional tools for policy analysis are not adequate to deal with climate problems. Values that change, and mixed levels of uncertainty, pose particularly important challenges for the future.

Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy

The elicitation of scientific and technical judgments from experts, in the form of subjective probability distributions, can be a valuable addition to other forms of evidence in support of public policy decision making. This paper explores when it is sensible to perform such elicitation and how that can best be done. A number of key issues are discussed, including topics on which there are, and are not, experts who have knowledge that provides a basis for making informed predictive judgments; the inadequacy of only using qualitative uncertainty language; the role of cognitive heuristics and of overconfidence; the choice of experts; the development, refinement, and iterative testing of elicitation protocols that are designed to help experts to consider systematically all relevant knowledge when they make their judgments; the treatment of uncertainty about model functional form; diversity of expert opinion; and when it does or does not make sense to combine judgments from different experts. Although it may be tempting to view expert elicitation as a low-cost, low-effort alternative to conducting serious research and analysis, it is neither. Rather, expert elicitation should build on and use the best available research and analysis and be undertaken only when, given those, the state of knowledge will remain insufficient to support timely informed assessment and decision making.

Categorizing Risks for Risk Ranking

Any practical process of risk ranking must group hazards into a manageable number of categories. Defining such categories requires value choices that can have important implications for the rankings that result. Most risk-management organizations will find it useful to begin defining categories in terms of environmental loadings or initiating events. However, the resulting categories typically need to be modified in light of other considerations. Risk-ranking projects can benefit from considering several alternative categorization strategies and drawing upon elements of each in developing their final categorization of risks. In principle, conducting multiple ranking exercises by using different categorizations could be interesting and useful. In practice, agencies are unlikely to have either the resources or patience to do this, but other groups in society might. Done well, such additional independent rankings could add valuable inputs to democratic risk-management decision making.

Research on global sun block needed now

Geoengineering studies of solar-radiation management should begin urgently, argue David W. Keith, Edward Parson and M. Granger Morgan — before a rogue state decides to act alone.

Elicitation of Expert Judgments of Climate Change Impacts on Forest Ecosystems

Detailed interviews were conducted with 11 leading ecologists to obtainindividualqualitative and quantitative estimates of the likely impact of a2 × [CO2] climate change onminimally disturbed forest ecosystems. Results display a much richer diversityof opinion thanis apparent in qualitative consensus summaries, such as those of the IPCC.Experts attachdifferent relative importance to key factors and processes such as soilnutrients, fire, CO2fertilization, competition, and plant-pest-predator interactions. Assumptionsand uncertaintiesabout future fire regimes are particularly crucial. Despite these differences,most of the expertsbelieve that standing biomass in minimally disturbed Northern forests wouldincrease and soilcarbon would decrease. There is less agreement about impacts on carbon storagein tropicalforests. Estimates of migration rates in northern forests displayed a rangeof more than fourorders of magnitude. Estimates of extinction rates and dynamic response showsignificantvariation between experts. A series of questions about research needs foundconsensus on theimportance of expanding observational and experimental work on ecosystemprocesses and ofexpanding regional and larger-scale observational, monitoring and modelingstudies. Results ofthe type reported here can be helpful in performing sensitivity analysis inintegrated assessmentmodels, as the basis for focused discussions of the state of currentunderstanding and researchneeds, and, if repeated over time, as a quantitative measure of progress inthis and other fieldsof global change research.

A model framework for integrated studies of the climate problem

Abstract Establishing research priorities and developing and evaluating alternative policy options in the domain of climate change are activities that require a broad look across all the elements of the climate problem. Such broad integrated assessment should involve different analytical approaches in different parts of the problem. However, appropriate computer model frameworks, into which a variety of specific alternative results and submodels can be inserted, can provide convenient vehicles for putting the pieces together. Such a framework is described. A simple version is used to illustrate how such frameworks can be used to perform uncertainty analysis, and how, together with expert judgment, they might be used in setting research priorities.

Marginal Emissions Factors for the U.S. Electricity System

There is growing interest in reducing emissions from electricity generation in the United States (U.S.). Renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy conservation are all commonly suggested solutions. Both supply- and demand-side interventions will displace energy-and emissions-from conventional generators. Marginal emissions factors (MEFs) give a consistent metric for assessing the avoided emissions resulting from such interventions. This paper presents the first systematic calculation of MEFs for the U.S. electricity system. Using regressions of hourly generation and emissions data from 2006 through 2011, we estimate regional MEFs for CO(2), NO(x), and SO(2), as well as the share of marginal generation from coal-, gas-, and oil-fired generators. Trends in MEFs with respect to system load, time of day, and month are explored. We compare marginal and average emissions factors (AEFs), finding that AEFs may grossly misestimate the avoided emissions resulting from an intervention. We find significant regional differences in the emissions benefits of avoiding one megawatt-hour of electricity: compared to the West, an equivalent energy efficiency measure in the Midwest is expected to avoid roughly 70% more CO(2), 12 times more SO(2), and 3 times more NO(x) emissions.

A Deliberative Method for Ranking Risks (I): Overview and Test Bed Development

Risk ranking offers a potentially powerful means for gathering public input to help set risk-management priorities. In most rankings conducted to date, the categories and attributes used to describe the risks have varied widely, the materials and procedures have not been designed to facilitate comparisons among risks on all important attributes, and the validity and reproducibility of the resulting rankings have not been assessed. To address these needs, a risk-ranking method was developed in which risk experts define and categorize the risks to be ranked, identify the relevant risk attributes, and characterize the risks in a set of standardized risk summary sheets, which are then used by lay or other groups in structured ranking exercises. To evaluate this method, a test bed involving 22 health and safety risks in a fictitious middle school was created. This article provides an overview of the risk-ranking method and describes the challenges faced in designing the middle school test bed. A companion article in this issue reports on the validity of the ranking procedures and the level of agreement among risk managers regarding ranking of risks and attributes.

Regional variations in the health, environmental, and climate benefits of wind and solar generation

When wind or solar energy displace conventional generation, the reduction in emissions varies dramatically across the United States. Although the Southwest has the greatest solar resource, a solar panel in New Jersey displaces significantly more sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter than a panel in Arizona, resulting in 15 times more health and environmental benefits. A wind turbine in West Virginia displaces twice as much carbon dioxide as the same turbine in California. Depending on location, we estimate that the combined health, environmental, and climate benefits from wind or solar range from