Sustainable Cities International (SCI) and the SCI Energy Lab is a participant in the Sustainable Energy Development project.
(http://www.arctic.ucalgary.ca/research/sustainable_energy_development)

The Sustainable Energy Development project is supported by John Hopkins University Masters of Science: Energy Policy and Climate Program.

EPC students are welcome to support the SCI Energy Lab through their Capstone projects.

A call for candidate cities for Sustainable Cities International for the SCI Energy Lab 2013-2016 program is currently underway.

In order to participate, please complete and send the attached statement of interest to Jane McRae, [email protected], by February 20th, 2013
.
Energy is the defining issue of the 21st century. Our cities, the powerhouses of our economies and home to more than half of humanity, require large, reliable sources of energy to meet the needs of individuals, companies and institutions. Our current reliance on fossil fuels, for the generation of electricity and to power our industries and transportation systems, is at the heart of the climate change challenge. How we develop our energy sources, distribute and use energy will impact our future on the planet.

Organizations and cities around the globe report that the technical challenges of sustainable energy systems are not the greatest barriers to implementation, rather it is in the lack of capacity in the organizations and individuals that can move these ideas into action.

The Sustainable Cities International (SCI) Energy Lab is a program designed to improve this capacity through a series of learning exchanges between cities as well as providing a framework for analysis, action and evaluation to assist cities to move forward with their work on sustainable energy. Working with an initial cohort of 10-12 cities, the SCI Energy Lab aims to go well beyond being a simple exchange of pre-existing “best practices.” Structured as an Innovations Lab, the goal is to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for collaborative problem solving and idea generation around all aspects of the design, implementation and regulation of urban renewable and local energy systems.

The purpose of the SCI Call for Cities invitation_Jan30_2013Energy Lab is to accelerate the transformation towards sustainable energy development by supporting the “next wave” of cities that have an interest in learning from leading cities and sufficient capacity to act on what they learn.

The call for candidate cities is directed at intermediate cities with 200,000 to 5 million inhabitants.

In order to qualify, a candidate city:
1. Has the capacity to undertake sustainability energy planning within the city (capacity includes expertise you can provide in the fields of: planning, sustainability, energy, engineering and/or finances);
2. Has undertaken or planned 1-2 sustainability/energy initiatives and can provide evidence for local level government support of these programs;
3. Designates 2 representatives to attend the annual SCI Energy Lab workshop event;
4. Commits to host a peer exchange event (at least once over the 3 year program), should they be selected as a host city;
5. Will be expected to actively participate in city exchanges and web-based events in addition to the annual workshop event;
6. Have the capacity to communicate in English, as well as organize events and read/write documents in English.
The decision on which cities are selected will be announced in March 2013. Selected cities will be invited to attend the SCI Energy Lab launch on May 28-30th 2013 (location to be announced).

Participating cities will benefit from:
Improved effectiveness of practitioners and accelerated action implementation;
In-depth learning from other cities that are leaders in sustainable energy solutions and their implementation;
Cross-sector exposure, access to expertise, and the opportunity to develop valuable professional relationships to support their sustainable energy initiatives;
Increased support from local stakeholders and decision makers as SCI Energy Lab participation is profiled globally;
Travel costs provided for two city representatives to attend the annual SCI Energy Lab workshop.

Instructors who include a climate geoengineering module usually seek to engage students on ethical and moral issues associated with research and/or potential deployment of geoengineering technologies. Professor Stephen Gardiner of the University of Washington has done some of the most interesting work in this context. In his most recent article, Gardiner examines one of the primary arguments advanced by proponents of geoengineering, that deployment would be ethical if those countries most vulnerable to climatic impacts either opted to initiate geoengineering, or requested that other countries do so on their behalf. Gardiner labels this the “desperation argument.”

Among the take-aways from the article:

1. From an ethical perspective, it is problematic to argue that the desperation argument provides a measure of consent by vulnerable countries to deploy geoengineering technologies:

• There’s usually only a small percentage of countries invoked as candidates for “desperation” appeals for geoengineering. However, the universe of those potentially affected by geoengineering’s impacts are much broader, including future generations and other vulnerable States;
• The concept of “consent” is attenuated when one is essentially doing it at “gunpoint,” i.e. when the only alternative is the full force of climate impacts;
• There are far broader normative considerations at stake in this debate, including the moral implications of deploying technologies that “exert control over the planetary system;”

2. A second interpretation of the desperation argument is that it comports with a right to “self-defense. However, this is also ethically and morally questionable:

• The right only applies where other strategies have proved unavailing; it is not clear that other options don’t exist to address climate change;
• Self-defense, even when it can be invoked, must be proportionate; it is not clear that geoengineering approaches that exert profound influence on the environment, e.g. sulfur dioxide injection, meet this test;
• The right to self-defense can be invoked by many parties, some of whom may wish to defend themselves with different kinds or levels of intervention. This can “give rise to a new emergency scenario, that of competition and conflict . . .”

3. It would likely be a fiction to argue that a vulnerable State could unilaterally deploy geoengineering technologies given the logistical issues involved. Moreover, powerful states would have the military and economic capability to shut down such deployment if they wished.

I think this piece would generate some good class discussion. Among the questions that might be pertinent:

• How should principles of intergenerational equity be considered in the context of climate geoengineering?
• Given how close we are to the 2C “cliff,” is it legitimate to invoke “self-defense” to justify climate geoengineering on the grounds that is now a “last resort” option?;
• What are the moral and legal grounds for requiring the consent of other States to deploy geoengineering technologies?
  • What constitutes “consent” in this context?  Does it require unanimity? If not, what is the pertinent metric?