Comparative planetology as a foundation for associating space law with
solar geoengineering governance: stratospheric aerosol injection
and variations of sulfur dioxide
in Venus’s atmosphere
B. Nuhija, Stefani Stojchevska, A. Jashari, Arta Selmani-Bakiu
{"title":"Comparative planetology as a foundation for associating space law with\nsolar geoengineering governance: stratospheric aerosol injection\nand variations of sulfur dioxide\nin Venus’s atmosphere","authors":"B. Nuhija, Stefani Stojchevska, A. Jashari, Arta Selmani-Bakiu","doi":"10.24818/tbj/2022/12/3.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mankind often seeks solutions to climate change and environmental crises, but\nrarely considers the feasibility of outer space to overcome such critical issues. Among many\nsolar geoengineering approaches is stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) whose concept\nsuggests artificial control of the global temperature by spreading tones of sulfur dioxide into\nEarth’s stratosphere. Given that the classic ‘technology control dilemma’ represents the\ncentral problem of solar geoengineering governance, however, this paper adopts a VenusEarth comparative planetology method by addressing volcanology and atmospheric\ncirculation aspects. An international regulatory framework engaging space law in solar\ngeoengineering governance is consequently presented, which classifies two separate\nlegislations: (1) research-based legislation (comparative planetology and Earth science) and\n(2) non-research-based legislation (national and international governance, ethical issues,\neconomic factors, military utilization). Further highlighting climate change issues, SAI\nmanifests the Anthropocene and regards Earth’s stratosphere as an “inner environment”,\nwhile comparative planetology manifests the Anthropocosmos and regards space as an\n“outer environment”. This polymorphous consideration of atmospheric and space elements\nidentifies a new approach of climate change techniques. Human relations that concern both\nenvironments should examine how social scientists would regard these separate boundaries\nor perceive them as a mergence between the two major epochs.","PeriodicalId":41903,"journal":{"name":"Juridical Tribune-Tribuna Juridica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Juridical Tribune-Tribuna Juridica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24818/tbj/2022/12/3.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mankind often seeks solutions to climate change and environmental crises, but
rarely considers the feasibility of outer space to overcome such critical issues. Among many
solar geoengineering approaches is stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) whose concept
suggests artificial control of the global temperature by spreading tones of sulfur dioxide into
Earth’s stratosphere. Given that the classic ‘technology control dilemma’ represents the
central problem of solar geoengineering governance, however, this paper adopts a VenusEarth comparative planetology method by addressing volcanology and atmospheric
circulation aspects. An international regulatory framework engaging space law in solar
geoengineering governance is consequently presented, which classifies two separate
legislations: (1) research-based legislation (comparative planetology and Earth science) and
(2) non-research-based legislation (national and international governance, ethical issues,
economic factors, military utilization). Further highlighting climate change issues, SAI
manifests the Anthropocene and regards Earth’s stratosphere as an “inner environment”,
while comparative planetology manifests the Anthropocosmos and regards space as an
“outer environment”. This polymorphous consideration of atmospheric and space elements
identifies a new approach of climate change techniques. Human relations that concern both
environments should examine how social scientists would regard these separate boundaries
or perceive them as a mergence between the two major epochs.