>From below - "One of the key purposes of the liability regime could be to make >ocean users more cautious when exploring and exploiting the oceans through >charging cleaning costs or imposing compensation for damage. This paper aims >to identify such a preventative effect of the international liability regime, >in particular, state liability."
Then I'm really looking forward to those liability claims for ocean cleaning costs and damage compensation aimed at current, evil "ocean users" (i.e. us) who are dumping of CO2 into the ocean via the atmosphere. Focussing legal actions here would likely have a more beneficial effect on the ocean than the current flurry of legal activity to aimed at those of us interested in researching potentially useful marine conservation measures*. Such unconventional conservation approaches now must be contemplated because of the catastrophic failure of the legal/policy community to pass and enforce laws aimed at reducing CO2 emissions. So I guess it's asking too much to expect a legal defense of alternative approaches to saving the ocean and the planet. * e.g., http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n10/full/nclimate1555.html Greg From: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [geoengineering@googlegroups.com] on behalf of Andrew Lockley [andrew.lock...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2013 2:01 AM To: geoengineering Subject: [geo] Implications of Current Developments in International Liability for the Practice of Marine Geo-engineering Activities http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9083401 Asian Journal of International Law 2013 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S2044251313000283 Published online: 29 November 2013 Implications of Current Developments in International Liability for the Practice of Marine Geo-engineering Activities Jung-Eun KIM Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology, Republic of Korea ocean...@kiost.ac<mailto:ocean...@kiost.ac> Abstract Ocean fertilization was first introduced as a carbon dioxide mitigation technique in the 1980s. However, its effectiveness to slow down climate change is uncertain and it is expected to damage the marine environment. Consequently, international law, including the London Convention/Protocol and the Convention on Biological Diversity, limits this activity to scientific research purposes. The applicability and scope of existing treaties for regulating this activity have been reviewed within international legal systems, in particular within the London Protocol. The establishment of a liability regime with respect to these activities has also been raised during a discussion on regulation of ocean fertilization under the London Protocol. One of the key purposes of the liability regime could be to make ocean users more cautious when exploring and exploiting the oceans through charging cleaning costs or imposing compensation for damage. This paper aims to identify such a preventative effect of the international liability regime, in particular, state liability. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
