The LC/LP Conference of the Parties (COP) is scheduled to run from October 29 to November 2. I don't know much about the agenda--maybe Chris Vivian can offer something?
Josh On Friday, October 19, 2012 11:59:30 AM UTC-4, andrewjlockley wrote: > > We could do with more posts on this list about how folks can influence > this process - and similar ones. > > Bearing in mind the expertise on this list, there's very little briefing > on the list for proactive involvement. I'm not sure.whether the scientists > are engaged in the political process properly. > > Anyone know of upcoming political events that people should be feeding in > to? > > A > On Oct 19, 2012 4:48 PM, "Josh Horton" <joshuah...@gmail.com<javascript:>> > wrote: > >> There are several inaccuracies in this report, but from this and other >> sources it *looks like* things will remain much as they were before. >> ETC Group and its allies were pushing for a full test ban, but they didn't >> get it. Instead, parties will "reaffirm" the 2010 moratorium, including >> its non-binding status. So we're basically back to where we were before >> the Russ George/Haida OIF story broke. Of course all this still needs to >> be adopted by the full COP. >> >> Josh Horton >> joshuah...@gmail.com <javascript:> >> http://geoengineeringpolitics.blogspot.com/ >> >> On Friday, October 19, 2012 5:31:30 AM UTC-4, andrewjlockley wrote: >>> >>> http://www.rtcc.org/**technology/un-agreement-urges-** >>> caution-over-geoengineering-**tests/<http://www.rtcc.org/technology/un-agreement-urges-caution-over-geoengineering-tests/> >>> >>> UN agreement urges caution over geoengineering tests >>> >>> 18 October 2012 >>> By Tierney Smith >>> RTCC in Hyderabad >>> >>> Guidelines on the deployment of geoengineering have been agreed at the >>> UN biodiversity summit in Hyderabad following intense >>> negotiations.Countries agreed on a text that specifies what geoengineering >>> means, outlines when it should be used, acknowledges its potential impacts >>> on biodiversity and the potential cross-border consequences of its use.The >>> document stresses the priority of addressing climate change through >>> mitigation measures, such as increasing natural carbon sinks, and calls on >>> all experiments to take into account international laws and conventions, >>> including the UNFCCC, the UN’s climate change convention.It also reaffirms >>> the decisions taken at COP10 in Nagoya that called for scientific evidence >>> for the need of geoengineering before any experiments take >>> place.Geoengineering is designed to tackle the effects of climate change by >>> either removing CO2 from the air – by pulling gas from the atmosphere or >>> increasing absorption in the sea – or limiting the amount of sunlight >>> reaching the earth’s surface.Large scale projects are still largely in the >>> concept phase but given the deadlocked state of mitigation efforts, many >>> think geoengineering will be essential for the world to avoid dangerous >>> climate change.The document aims to address the potential impacts to >>> biodiversity from large scale geoengineering projects aimed at mitigating >>> climate change (Source: CBD/Flickr)This agreement will come as unwanted to >>> news to the companies and countries wanting to invest in these technologies >>> as climate change predictions worsen. This year there have been two major >>> efforts to test methods of sucking CO2 from the atmosphere.In May a >>> UK-backed project that planned to inject 150 litres of water into the >>> atmosphere to create a cooling effect was cancelled at the last minute over >>> concerns that certain researchers had a conflict of interest.But in July, >>> the largest experiment to date took place off the west coast of Canada when >>> 100 tonnes of iron sulphate was dumped into the ocean. Iron in the sea can >>> create a ‘bloom’ of plankton that absorbs carbon dioxide and then sinks to >>> the ocean bed – storing the carbon there.Scientists have, however, raised >>> concerns that it can harm ecosystems, produce lifeless waters and >>> worsen ocean acidification. It was also revealed earlier this week that >>> the Canadian government may have known of the plans before they went >>> ahead.The test was criticised by the international community who said the >>> experiments breached moratoriums of two UN conventions, one under the CBD – >>> set out in the Nagoya outcome – and the other in the 1972 London >>> Convention that prohibits the for-profit dumping of iron into the sea.Test >>> banAhead of the conference, groups including Bolivia, the Philippines and >>> African nations, as well as indigenous peoples groups called for an >>> enforceable test ban on geoengineering experiments.However, the paragraph >>> calling on parties to ensure all tests of geoengineering technologies take >>> place in “controlled laboratory conditions” was removed from the text, >>> despite protests from countries including Peru and Argentina.Countries >>> traded giving up the paragraph with text that ‘reaffirms’ – over a weaker >>> ‘recalls’ – decisions agreed in Nagoya:“No climate-related geo-engineering >>> activities that may affect biodiversity take place, until there is an >>> adequate scientific basis on which to justify such…with the exception of >>> small scale scientific research studies that would be conducted in a >>> controlled setting.”Under a separate paragraph the parties also noted that >>> a ‘precautionary approach as well as international customary law’ should be >>> considered when geoengineering plans are being made, as well as other >>> conventions work in this area, including the London >>> Convention.Geoengineering?**There was also some discussion between >>> parties about what constitutes geoengineering. The outcome text called >>> parties to be aware of all existing definitions, and the ongoing work in >>> this area.It also lists several broad descriptions of such methods >>> including reducing solar insolation, carbon sequestration from the >>> atmosphere and large-scale manipulation of the global environment.The >>> sub-point on the ‘deliberate intervention in the planetary environment of >>> nature’ caused some concerns between countries.Brazil warned that this text >>> could be interpreted to include projects such as REDD+ or Carbon Capture >>> and Storage (CCS), which could also be considered as ‘deliberate >>> interventions’.The document will now be absorbed into the final outcome >>> document to be approved on the last day of the conference tomorrow. >>> >>> Tags: Biodiversity, CBD COP11, Geoengineering, ** >>> Hyderabad, IndiaCategory: **Technology >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/fq955SCl8-YJ. >> To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/URoxQRbc5yAJ. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
