Search results

The ethical merits of three major strategies to confront global warming -- prevention, adaptation, & geoengineering -- are considered. From the point of view of consequentialist ethics, the choice between prevention & adaptation depends on the exact set of consequences taken into consideration. Adaptation is likely to be the preferable option if only consequences for humans here & now are emphasized. By contrast, if one also takes into account effects for humans in other parts of the world, for future generations, or for other species, the case for prevention is strengthened. However, it is probably too late to avoid global warming altogether. The question is therefore if we should try to recreate the "original" climate through geoengineering. A number of ethical objections to this strategy are being discussed. The general conclusion is that, for now at least, we ought to prevent global warming as far as possible, & otherwise adapt as best we can to the climatic changes that nevertheless arise. 1 Table, 30 References. Adapted from the source document.