Technofixes Fail to ask the Right Questions – Allison Franko (CR #3)

Numerous unrealistic and socially unjust techno-fixes, including geoengineering, hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage, have been promoted by large corporations and governments as solutions to the twin climate change and energy crises.[1] In her article, Claire Fauset explains why these so-called solutions are simply not viable and will actually exacerbate the situation by further damaging the environment. Ironically, those who find techno-fixes most appealing – persons and corporations with an established hold on power and thus desire to maintain the status quo – are the ones in the best positions to investigate the science behind such solutions, expose critical flaws, and shift investment into more viable options. Fauset gives a number of reasons why techno-fixes can never be part of the solution, but in this response I will focus on the one I believe to be the fundamental concern: the failure of such technological solutions to ask the right questions.

Techno-fixes can certainly be seen as solutions when asking limited questions such as, “how can people run their cars without oil,”?[2] The problem with this question is it does not address climate change or the energy crisis; instead, it simply proposes a potentially equally or even more problematic alternative to oil.  A more multifaceted approach that both explicitly and implicitly addresses the underlying problem is needed when looking for, and ultimately investing valuable time and significant capital in, possible solutions. Fauset suggests instead asking, “how can people get where they need to go without contributing to climate change,”; this approach might prove more effective in evoking better alternatives (not just substitutes) that are equitable, socially just, sustainable, and accessible.[3]

The geo-engineered techno-fixes Fauset mentions in her article are shocking, but accurately represent the lengths corporations and governments are willing to impede or at least slow the world’s transition to a sustainable global economy; one not focused so greatly upon perpetual growth and its seemingly inescapable consumption of natural resources and society’s associated materialism. Some of the more radical notions Fauset discredits include blasting the stratosphere with sulfates to produce a cooling effect, mirrors in space to reflect solar radiation, covering deserts in reflective plastics, and dumping iron fertilizer into the oceans to reduce carbon dioxide.[4] These can be interpreted as efforts by private firms to avoid governmental regulation and thereby prevent stricter forms of action on climate change.[5] Carbon offsets, to a lesser extent, can also be seen as a mechanism to maintain corporate profit and growth, by paying for the shift of environmental responsibility onto others, often in the Global South. Is this just another form of western hegemony and xenocentrism? Efforts to reduce carbon emissions should be made by changing policies and behaviors aimed at reducing consumption, and through technical changes that invest in and shift towards lower carbon technologies- not by bribing others to offset emissions in the short term- a diversion of valuable investment.[6] This will only take place if society demands answers to the right questions. Why do we assume us humans are the masters of nature, and “why is economic growth seen as more important than survival,”?[7] The answer lies in the inherent greed and power-driven nature of capitalism itself; can we break the corporate cabal’s grip on environmental policies and solutions, change entire societies’ patterns of consumption and lifestyle, and thereby bring about meaningful and effective changes for a sustainable future?

One approach, and the one I find most meaningful and sustainable, is through social change. “Co-operation, lifestyle change, and appropriate technology,” are critical in this process that will be small-scale, localized, and carried out on a community basis.[8] Corporations as entities will always be run with making a profit as their basic function and this is not going to change; what will cause changes in the corporate world is a massive shift in collective demand by consumers, which will force corporations to adapt in order to remain profitable. The channeling of investment into viable technologies that are proven to be effective, less expensive, and socially equitable, also must factor into any transition towards sustainability. By first initiating a collective force from below, society can bring about changes to economic and political ideologies that bring about thoughtful investment in long term solutions to climate change and the energy crisis.

Learning what questions we should be asking ourselves will promote long-term lifestyle and behavioral changes that are absolutely essential if the unevenly large ecological footprints of developed societies are to be sustainably reduced. Without changes to our current capitalistic mode of thinking, technological solutions alone cannot be relied upon as viable in the long term. Demand will only continue to grow, inevitably requiring greater amounts of energy and likely exacerbating the current rate of climate change; technology alone cannot provide meaningful relief for the inexorable forces of such global demand. The central underlying issue is the materialistic nature of most developed countries and their consumption-based societies, and the simple fact that the vast majority of the world’s corporations are primarily focused on profit; in other words: capitalism.[9] We must ask how and what we, as society’s component individuals, can do to reduce our personal consumption, carbon footprints and energy use, and in turn create a societal movement imposing corporate change, in order to ameliorate climate change and soften the imminent energy crisis.

---

[1] C. Fauset, “The Techno-ix Approach to Climate Change and the Energy Crisis,” Corporate Watch (2008), http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=3126, 301.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid., 301-302.

[4] Ibid., 307-308.

[5] P. Newell and M. Paterson, “The Politics of the Carbon Economy,” in The Politics of Climate Change: A survey, ed. M. Boycoff, 91 (London: Routledge, 2009).

[6] A. G. Bumpus and D. M. Liverman, “Accumulation by Decarbonization and the Governance of Carbon Offsets,” Economic Geography 84, no. 2 (2008): 148.

[7] Fauset, 308-309.

[8] Ibid., 310.

[9] Ibid., 303.