@article {Gunderson:2019:1356-3467:696,
title = "The Political Economy of Geoengineering as Plan B: Technological Rationality, Moral Hazard, and New Technology",
journal = "New Political Economy",
parent_itemid = "infobike://routledg/cnpe",
publishercode ="routledg",
year = "2019",
volume = "24",
number = "5",
publication date ="2019-09-03T00:00:00",
pages = "696-715",
itemtype = "ARTICLE",
issn = "1356-3467",
eissn = "1469-9923",
url = "https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/cnpe/2019/00000024/00000005/art00008",
doi = "doi:10.1080/13563467.2018.1501356",
keyword = "Solar radiation management, framing, Marcuse, Frankfurt School, technology studies, stratospheric sulfate injection",
author = "Gunderson, Ryan and Stuart, Diana and Petersen, Brian",
abstract = "Geoengineering would mask and reproduce capitals contradictory needs to self-expand, on the one hand, and maintain a stable climate system, on the other. The Plan B frame, which presents geoengineering as a back-up plan to address climate change in case there is a failure to
sufficiently reduce emissions (Plan A), is one means to depict this condition to the public and is a product of, and appeals to, a prevalent technological rationality. Despite its misleading simplicity, logical flaws, and irrational rationality, the Plan B frame is a relatively
valid representation of geoengineering in current political-economic conditions. Although the Plan B frame will gain traction because Plan A is too expensive in the short term and does not serve powerful interests, there are alternative social futures in which technology could be used to address
climate change in ways that preserve the environment and reduce social risks.",
}