Balancing a budget or running a deficit? The offset regime of carbon removal and solar geoengineering under a carbon budget

Abstract: The idea of the carbon budget is a powerful conceptual tool to define and quantify the climate challenge. Whilst scientists present the carbon budget as the geophysical foundation for global net-zero targets, the financial metaphor of a budget implies figuratively the existence of a ‘budget manager’ who oversees the budget balance. Using this fictive character of budget manager as a heuristic device, the paper analyses the roles of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM) under a carbon budget. We argue that both CDR and SRM can be understood as ‘technologies of offset’. CDR offsets positive carbon emissions by negative emissions, whereas SRM offsets the warming from positive greenhouse gas forcing by the induced cooling from negative forcing. These offset technologies serve as flexible budgeting tools in two different strategies for budget management: they offer the promise of achieving a balanced budget, but also introduce the possibility for running a budget deficit. The lure of offsetting rests on the flexibility of keeping up an ‘appearance’ of delivering a given budget whilst at the same time easing budget constraints for a certain period of time. The political side-effect of offsetting is to change the stringency of budgetary constraints from being regulated by geophysics to being adjustable by human discretion. As a result, a budget deficit can be normalised as an acceptable fiscal condition. We suggest that the behavioural tendency of policymakers to avoid blame could lead them to resort to using offset technologies to circumvent the admission of failure to secure a given temperature target

An earth system governance research agenda for carbon removal

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) – the creation, enhancement, and upscaling of carbon sinks – has become a pillar of national and corporate commitments towards Net Zero emissions, as well as pathways towards realizing the Paris Agreement's ambitious temperature targets. In this perspective, we explore CDR as an emerging issue of Earth System Governance (ESG). We draw on the results of a workshop at the 2022 Earth System Governance conference that mapped a range of actors, activities, and issues relevant to carbon removal, and refined them into research questions spanning four intersecting areas: modeling and systems assessment, societal appraisal, policy, and innovation and industry. We filter these questions through the five lenses of the ESG framework and highlight several key ‘cross-cutting’ issues that could form the basis of an integrated ESG research agenda on CDR.</p

An earth system governance research agenda for carbon removal

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) – the creation, enhancement, and upscaling of carbon sinks – has become a pillar of national and corporate commitments towards Net Zero emissions, as well as pathways towards realizing the Paris Agreement's ambitious temperature targets. In this perspective, we explore CDR as an emerging issue of Earth System Governance (ESG). We draw on the results of a workshop at the 2022 Earth System Governance conference that mapped a range of actors, activities, and issues relevant to carbon removal, and refined them into research questions spanning four intersecting areas: modeling and systems assessment, societal appraisal, policy, and innovation and industry. We filter these questions through the five lenses of the ESG framework and highlight several key ‘cross-cutting’ issues that could form the basis of an integrated ESG research agenda on CDR

An earth system governance research agenda for carbon removal

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) – the creation, enhancement, and upscaling of carbon sinks – has become a pillar of national and corporate commitments towards Net Zero emissions, as well as pathways towards realizing the Paris Agreement's ambitious temperature targets. In this perspective, we explore CDR as an emerging issue of Earth System Governance (ESG). We draw on the results of a workshop at the 2022 Earth System Governance conference that mapped a range of actors, activities, and issues relevant to carbon removal, and refined them into research questions spanning four intersecting areas: modeling and systems assessment, societal appraisal, policy, and innovation and industry. We filter these questions through the five lenses of the ESG framework and highlight several key ‘cross-cutting’ issues that could form the basis of an integrated ESG research agenda on CDR

Three institutional pathways to envision the future of the IPCC

The IPCC has been successful at building its scientific authority but it will require institutional reform for staying relevant to new and changing political contexts. Exploring a range of alternative future pathways for the IPCC can help guide crucial decisions about redefining its purpose

Post-transplant inflow modulation for early allograft dysfunction after living donor liver transplantation

Background:To treat small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) after living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), many procedures were described for portal flow modulation before, during, or after transplantation. The selection of the procedure as well as the best timing remains controversial. Case presentation:A 43-year-old female with end-stage liver disease underwent LDLT with extended left with caudate lobe graft from her donor who was her 41-year-old brother (graft volume/standard liver volume (GV/SLV), 35.7%; graft to recipient weight ratio (GRWR), 0.67%). During the surgery, splenectomy could not be performed owing to severe peri-splenic adhesions to avoid the ruined bleedings. The splenic artery ligation was not also completely done because it was dorsal to the pancreas and difficult to be approached. Finally, adequate portal vein (PV) inflow was confirmed after portal venous thrombectomy. As having post-transplant optional procedures that are accessible for PV flow modulation, any other procedures for PV modulation during LDLT were not done until the postoperative assessment of the graft function and PV flow for possible postoperative modulation of the portal flow accordingly. Postoperative PV flow kept as high as 30 cm/s. By the end of the 1st week, there was a progressive deterioration of the total bilirubin profile (peak as 19.4 mg/dL) and ascitic fluid amount exceeded 1000 mL/day. Therefore, splenic artery embolization was done effectively and safely on the 10th postoperative day (POD) to reverse early allograft dysfunction as PV flow significantly decreased to keep within 20 cm/s and serum total bilirubin levels gradually declined with decreased amounts of ascites below 500 mL on POD 11 and thereafter. The patient was discharged on POD 28 with good condition. Conclusions:SFSS can be prevented or reversed by the portal inflow modulation, even by post-transplant procedure. This case emphasizes that keeping accessible angiographic treatment options for PV modulation, such as splenic artery embolization, after LDLT is quite feasible