Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement

New technology won’t save us from climate disaster

A belief that new technologies such as nuclear fusion or carbon capture and storage will ‘save’ us from climate change is counterproductive and enabling delay, according to researchers from Lancaster University.

Their research published in Nature Climate Change calls for an end to a ‘longstanding cycle of technological promises’ and changing climate change targets. Instead, it suggests we should focus on cultural, social and political transformation to tackle the crisis.

The paper points to several proposals that have been hailed as solutions to climate change including nuclear fusion power, giant carbon sucking machines, ice-restoration using millions of wind-powered pumps, and spraying particulates in the stratosphere.

It also charts a history of how the overarching international goal of avoiding dangerous climate change has been reinterpreted and differently represented in the light of new modelling methods, scenarios and technological promises.

The researchers argue that the targets, models and technologies have co-evolved in ways that enable delay.

It says: ‘Each novel promise not only competes with existing ideas, but also downplays any sense of urgency, enabling the repeated deferral of political deadlines for climate action and undermining societal commitment to meaningful responses.’

Researchers Duncan McLaren and Nils Markusson from Lancaster Environment Centre said: ‘For forty years, climate action has been delayed by technological promises.

‘Contemporary promises are equally dangerous. Our work exposes how such promises have raised expectations of more effective policy options becoming available in the future, and thereby enabled a continued politics of prevarication and inadequate action.

‘Prevarication is not necessarily intentional, but such promises can feed systemic “moral corruption”, in which current elites are enabled to pursue self-serving pathways, while passing off risk onto vulnerable people in the future and in the global South.

‘Putting our hopes in yet more new technologies is unwise. Instead, cultural, social and political transformation is essential to enable widespread deployment of both behavioural and technological responses to climate change.’

In related news, a study from earlier month suggested that the UK will reach its net-zero emissions target faster if it invests in smaller scale, affordable low-carbon technologies rather than large projects like high-speed rail or nuclear power plants.

Photo Credit – Pixabay

Thomas Barrett
Senior journalist - NewStart Follow him on Twitter
Help us break the news – share your information, opinion or analysis
Back to top