Simon Shackley

Uncertainty, Complexity and Concepts of Good Science in Climate Change Modelling: Are GCMs the Best Tools?

In this paper we explore the dominant position of a particular style of scientific modelling in the provision of policy-relevant scientific knowledge on future climate change. We describe how the apical position of General Circulation Models (GCMs) appears to follow ‘logically’ both from conventional understandings of scientific representation and the use of knowledge, so acquired, in decision-making. We argue, however, that both of these particular understandings are contestable. In addition to questioning their current policy-usefulness, we draw upon existing analyses of GCMs which discuss model trade-offs, errors, and the effects of parameterisations, to raise questions about the validity of the conception of complexity in conventional accounts. An alternative approach to modelling, incorporating concepts of uncertainty, is discussed, and an illustrative example given for the case of the global carbon cycle. In then addressing the question of how GCMs have come to occupy their dominant position, we argue that the development of global climate change science and global environmental ‘management’ frameworks occurs concurrently and in a mutually supportive fashion, so uniting GCMs and environmental policy developments in certain industrialised nations and international organisations. The more basic questions about what kinds of commitments to theories of knowledge underpin different models of ‘complexity’ as a normative principle of ‘good science’ are concealed in this mutual reinforcement. Additionally, a rather technocratic policy orientation to climate change may be supported by such science, even though it involves political choices which deserve to be more widely debated.

The respectable politics of climate change: the epistemic communities and NGOs

Climate change is unusual compared with most environmental issues in the extent to which it has become accepted among orthodox policy institutions and public-and private-sector organizations. The authors explore the conditions that have led to the establishment of an epistemic community that brings together a broad array of actors, including the various NGOs, and the operational dimensions that define the participation of NGOs within the community. An epistemic community does not imply conformity of opinion or approach but allows for differentiation in terms of how its members construct the problem, and their objectives, core beliefs and favoured responses to climate change. Three broad styles of engagement through which NGOs contribute to this debate are identified: developing creative policy solutions, knowledge construction, and lobbying or campaigning. It should be noted that the authors refer primarily to development or environmental NGOs (ENGOs), though they do discuss business NGOs at a few points.

Burying Carbon Under the Sea: an initial exploration of public opinions

Geological and ocean sequestration of carbon dioxide is a potential climate change mitigation option that is currently receiving an increasing level of attention within business, academic and policy communities. This paper presents a preliminary investigation of possible public reaction to the technologies under consideration. Using a focus group approach, we consider the similarities between carbon storage technologies and analogous technologies that have generated strong reactions with the public. Initial results suggest that, in principle, carbon capture and storage may be seen as an acceptable approach as a bridging policy while other options are developed. However, concerns were raised regarding the safety of storage and trust in the ability of the various institutions to oversee the process in the long term. This analysis forms part of an on-going study which will continue to investigate the perceptions of a range of stakeholders.

Integrating knowledges for climate change: Pyramids, nets and uncertainties

This paper analyses two dominant ways of conceptualising the research agendas in the climate change sphere, the ‘knowledge pyramid’ and the ‘knowledge net’. Using the idea of a ‘certainty trough’ from sociology of science, and employing crop models as an example, it explores the sometimes terse relationship between climate modellers and the climate impacts community. The pressures to develop a more holisitic analysis are discussed, but we argue that much integrated assessment modelling still exhibits an implicit and acultural reductionism, and frequently misconstrues the character and significance of uncertainty as well as the role of analytical knowledge in policy making.

The feasibility and costs of biochar deployment in the UK

Biochar allows long-term (multi-centennial) soil carbon storage, with potential benefits for agricultural sustainability (e.g., productivity, reduced environmental impacts and water retention). Little is know about the costs of producing biochar and this study attempts to provide a ‘break-even selling point’ for biochar, accounting for costs from feedstock to soil application and revenues from electricity generation and gate fees. Depending on the assumptions used, biochar in the UK context may cost between GB£-148 t-1 and 389 t-1 (US

Stakeholder Perceptions of Climate Change Impacts at the Regional Scale: Implications for the Effectiveness of Regional and Local Responses

-222 to 584) produced, delivered and spread on fields, which is a provisional carbon abatement value of (GB£-144 tCO2–1 to 208 tCO2–1). A negative cost indicates a profit-making activity. The most profitable source of biochar is from wastes, but such materials will face complex regulatory issues and testing.

Pyrolysis biochar systems for recovering biodegradable materials: A life cycle carbon assessment

Interviews and three workshops with a wide range of stakeholders to explore their perceptions of climate change impacts and responses were conducted in two English regions (East Anglia and north-west England) as part of a UK government-funded research project on the integrated assessment of climate change impacts in the following domains: biodiversity, the coastal zone, agriculture and water resources. The findings suggest that whilst local and regional impacts are of considerable interest to regional stakeholders, their ability to respond through adapted policy and practice depends upon their existing frames of reference with respect to their understanding of the policy- and decision-making systems, and the operation of current institutional processes and response mechanisms. The authors use the empirical and conceptual findings to support the notion of the co-production of knowledge with institutional frameworks and processes.

Imagine complexity: The past, present and future potential of complex thinking

A life cycle assessment (LCA) focused on biochar and bioenergy generation was performed for three thermal treatment configurations (slow pyrolysis, fast pyrolysis and gasification). Ten UK biodegradable wastes or residues were considered as feedstocks in this study. Carbon (equivalent) abatement (CA) and electricity production indicators were calculated. Slow pyrolysis systems offer the best performance in terms of CA, with net results varying from 0.07 to 1.25tonnes of CO(2)eq.t(-1) of feedstock treated. On the other hand, gasification achieves the best electricity generation outputs, with results varying around 0.9MWhet(-1) of feedstock. Moreover, selection of a common waste treatment practice as the reference scenario in an LCA has to be undertaken carefully as this will have a key influence upon the CA performance of pyrolysis or gasification biochar systems (P/GBS). Results suggest that P/GBS could produce important environmental benefits in terms of CA, but several potential pollution issues arising from contaminants in the biochar have to be addressed before biochar and bioenergy production from biodegradable waste can become common practice.

Stakeholder opinion of a proposed 21.5 MWe biomass gasifier in Winkleigh, Devon: Implications for bioenergy planning and policy

Given all the intellectual excitement surrounding the new ideas on complexity, it is easy to overlook the fact that the apparent simplicity of the past was often more a function of the constraints put on the framing of the issue or problem at hand, both conceptually and in policy making, than it was a reflection of any inherent properties. Revisiting several case studies helps to illustrate the point that complexity, now or in the past, resides especially in the social relationships within and between institutions and agents. Much current thinking about complexity is moving towards development of ever more sophisticated methodologies with which to probe complex systems, hence to facilitate their management and control. We argue that such methodological elaboration frequently acts as a direct substitute for institutional development and reflexivity, and we urge instead for exploration of new forms of institutional mediation.

Competing uses for China's straw: the economic and carbon abatement potential of biochar

Abstract A detailed survey of local opinion of a proposed 21.5 MWe bioenergy power plant in Devon, England, has revealed a high level of public opposition and a distrust of the relevant authorities, particularly the Regional Development Agency. Local people view the project as unreasonably large in scale and expect a significant deterioration in their quality of life if it is constructed. They doubt that farmers in the region can be contracted to grow sufficient miscanthus grass as fuel and suspect that the real motivation for the plant is as a regional waste management facility. Local people object strongly to the late stage at which the project became public knowledge and the presentation of a fait accompli. The paper documents the main themes evident in focus groups and interviews with local people and stakeholders. The implications for bioenergy planning and policy are also discussed. It is recommended that large bioenergy power plant are sited away from residential areas and sensitive landscapes, and that the concerns of UK government advisors regarding policy support for advanced bioenergy plant for electricity generation be taken more seriously by the UK Department for Trade and Industry.