Technologies to modify the Earth’s climate are at least conceivable and, in the absence of a comprehensive national and international climate change policy, may soon emerge as practical alternatives, a new survey of the subject from the Congressional Research Service suggests.
“The term ‘geoengineering’ describes this array of technologies that aim, through large-scale and deliberate modifications of the Earth’s energy balance, to reduce temperatures and counteract anthropogenic climate change,” the CRS report said. However, “Most of these technologies are at the conceptual and research stages, and their effectiveness at reducing global temperatures has yet to be proven.”
“Moreover, very few studies have been published that document the cost, environmental effects, sociopolitical impacts, and legal implications of geoengineering. If geoengineering technologies were to be deployed, they are expected to have the potential to cause significant transboundary effects.” See “Geoengineering: Governance and Technology Policy” (pdf), August 16, 2010.
The Congressional Research Service — acting at congressional direction — does not permit direct public access to its publications. Some other recent CRS reports obtained by Secrecy News include the following (all pdf).
“Federal Civil and Criminal Penalties Possibly Applicable to Parties Responsible for the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill,” August 16, 2010.
“Public Employees’ Right to Privacy in Their Electronic Communications: City of Ontario v. Quon in the Supreme Court,” July 28, 2010.
“Samantar v. Yousef: The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and Foreign Officials,” August 24, 2010.
“The European Union’s Response to the 2007-2009 Financial Crisis,” August 13, 2010.
“Turkey: Politics of Identity and Power,” August 13, 2010.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.
When properly structured — with specific numeric targets, secured financial obligations, independent monitoring, and meaningful enforcement — CBAs transform data center deals into durable community partnerships.