Re: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations
Jim Thanks for your email. Could you cite emails where you think there have been ad hominem attacks on ETC? I'm reluctant to censor obvious satire. This thread has triggered useful debate. I'm also concerned at your attempts to apply the ad hominem principle to a group or organisation. This would make it harder for people to criticize governments, etc. Furthermore, can it really be said the ETC conduct in this regard has been at the standards by which it would ask others to be judged? Your response has been useful, and I'd welcome more contribution from ETC. This group's posts are widely read by an influential, but mostly silent, audience of policy makers, Journalists and scientists. It's a good opportunity to boost support for your cause. Andrew Lockley Moderator On Oct 22, 2012 5:23 AM, jim thomas j...@etcgroup.org wrote: Obviously this is patently silly. ETC Group are not a party to UNFCCC and if continuing to use air travel constitutes some sort of breach of a UN convention then many people and groups on this list are also 'in breach' . So is the IPCC etc etc. Also didn't there used to be some sort of moderation rule on this list about 'no ad hominem attacks'??? Andrew: what happened to that? More seriously however , can I ask you David to retract your language referring to ETC Group's Attack on the Haida and to be far more careful who you are smearing in your rather sloppy language below. To be clear: The ocean fertilization dump was not carried out by 'the Haida'- an indegenous nation of several thousand people. It was carried out by a commercial company called the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation (HSRC) established through the band council of the village of Old Massett. So this was a project of a small commercial company associated with one particular Haida Village. It is not a project of 'The Haida' and most press reports have been careful not to misrepresent it as you have. Nor do band council's represent 'The Haida'' - they are administrative units established mostly for provision of services set up by the Canadian Government under the Indian Act. The bodies that represent 'The Haida' as a sovereign People are The Council of the Haida Nation and the Council of Hereditary Chiefs. Both bodies issued a clear declaration on Thursday disassociating themselves from the ocean fertilization dump undertaken by HSRC and making it very clear they do not support ocean fertilization activities. See http://www.haidanation.ca/Pages/Splash/Public_Notices/PDF/Joint_Statement.pdf . In fact since this dump first became public a week ago the President of the Council of The Haida Nation, Guujaaw, has consistently made clear this was not an initiative of The Haida but of only of one village band council. Meanwhile ETC Group has been in constant constructive discussion with the Council of Haida Nations and other Haida Groups and indeed brought this matter to their attention before it was brought to any media. There has been no 'attack on the Haida' and as you'll see from our own press release where we have been diligent in communicating the difference between HSRC and 'The Haida': http://www.etcgroup.org/content/world%E2%80%99s-largest-geoengineering-deployment-coast-canada%E2%80%99s-british-columbiahttp://www.etcgroup.org/content/world’s-largest-geoengineering-deployment-coast-canada’s-british-columbia - may I respectfully ask that others take the same care. Best Jim Thomas ETC Group. On Oct 21, 2012, at 5:36 PM, David Lewis wrote: The ETC group is blatantly violating an international convention The ETC group, a href=http://www.etcgroup.org/people;as their website says/a, consists of nine staff members and nine board members scattered over five continents. Many wonder when these 18 people will finally confess what their combined greenhouse gas footprint is. Speculation persists that the total tonnage of GHG emitted in a single year by these ETC members may be massive, i.e. it may exceed the amount of material involved in what ETC has been denouncing as the world's largest geoengineering deployment, i.e. the 100 tonne BC Haida ocean fertilization project. If the total lifecycle GHG emissions of the ETC group are considered, the tonnage must dwarf what's involved in this Haida project. Experts agree that *the ETC effect*, i.e. increasing the GHG concentration in the atmosphere, will add to the forces driving global climate change and ocean acidification. By aggravating the widespread disruption of regional and global ecosystems which the expansion of civilization is already causing, the changing climate and the acidifying ocean are diminishing global biodiversity. As the areas most suitable for crop growing and for where people want to live change location, military analysts have concluded, tension of the type that has led in the past to conflict between human groups up to and including war between nation states
[geo] Solar Geoengineering Holds Promise for Addressing Climate Change | News | The Harvard Crimson
Teaser piece on Keith paper http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/10/22/solar-geoengineering-climate-change/ Solar Geoengineering Holds Promise for Addressing Climate Change By MELODY Y. GUAN, CONTRIBUTING WRITER Published: Monday, October 22, 2012 Stopping or reversing climate change can be achieved with significantly reduced side effects if solar radiation management efforts are optimized for the different seasons and latitudes, according to a new study by a team of researchers at Harvard University, the California Institute of Technology, and the Carnegie Institution for Science.The study, which will be published in the November issue of Nature Climate Change, examines how tailoring radiative forcing, the change of the radiation balance of the Earth, can improve the efficiency of geoengineering—the use of large-scale interventions to moderate climate change. These interventions can range from carbon dioxide removal to iron fertilization of the oceans.According to study co-author and Applied Physics Professor David Keith, solar engineering—putting aerosols in the stratosphere to reflect incoming sunlight back into space—is “the most credible idea in the near future.”“In principle there is an infinite number of dimensions you could twist. You could control which season the radiative forcing is applied in,” said Keith. “You could have a layer of aerosol that is denser in the summer.”The study showed that the melting of sea ice could be stopped with two to three times less radiative forcing if it is tuned specifically.“People have done this crudely before, non-optimally, but this is first paper that tried to explicitly tune this effect. What we’ve shown is that we can tune it a lot,” Keith said.The technology for solar geoengineering already exists, but countries must decide whether to implement it.“[Solar geoengineering] is technically possible—whether that is a good thing to do or politically realistic is another thing,” said Keith. The biggest concern regarding the technology, he continued, is that people will cease trying to cut carbon dioxide emissions.“The biggest risks are the unknown unknowns,” he continued. “There are lots of examples in history when interventions like this didn’t work out.”According to Keith, it is physically impossible to stop or reverse warming in the article without geoengineering. Cutting emissions can only reduce the future contributions to global warming.Countries hesitate to take action, however, because the effects of climate change are not uniform across the globe.Keith said he hopes that there will be serious efforts by all countries to cut emissions and to invest in geoengineering in an effort to help protect the natural world. “We spend less than 1 percent of our GDP on agriculture so even if you double the cost you’re hardly going to notice it,” he said. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. 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.
Re: [geo] Haida Salmon Restoration Project - Legal and Commercial issues
For the record I agree (particularly on basis that they see this as Haida waters, that evidence from eruption plumes points to salmon benefit. On Monday, October 22, 2012, Bhaskar M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Haida Salmon Restoration Project Legal issues - The media advisory released by Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation's law firm - http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1055481/media-advisory-the-haida-salmon-restoration-corporation-october-19th-media-availability-on-salmon-enhancement-project MEDIA ADVISORY - The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation - October 19th media availability on salmon enhancement project VANCOUVER, Oct. 18, 2012 /CNW/ - The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation, founded and majority owned by the Old Massett Village Council of Haida Gwaii is engaged in on-going ocean research and environmental studies approximately 200 nautical miles west of Haida Gwaii. This work is lawful, on-going, self-funded and in compliance with the Law of the Sea Convention and Canada's Ocean Act. The purpose of this salmon-enhancement pilot research project, also called ocean restoration or ocean micronutrient replenishment, is to study conditions of the Haida Ocean, with particular attention to the collapse of ocean plankton blooms that traditionally provide nutrients to salmon and other marine life. The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation is studying and developing methods that may be useful in restoring the growth of phytoplankton and thereby sustain and enhance the production of all marine life and create a sustainable economy for Old Massett. Chief Councillor Ken Rea of the Old Massett Village Council will outline the project and how the village initiated and founded the company to proceed with the project. Mr. John Disney, the president of Haida Salmon Research Corporation will be available along with legal counsel James L. Straith whose firm completed a comprehensive international and domestic legal status review and legal position paper prior to the work done at sea. Where: Vancouver Aquarium 845 Avison Way in Stanley Park Media Registration at Aquaquest Reception (white trailer) between 9-9:20 a.m. When: Friday October 19, 2012 Time: 9:30 AM SOURCE: Haida Salmon Restoration Corp. For further information: Jay Straith or K. Joseph Spears at 604-921-1122 or e-mail at k...@oceanlawcanada.com Straith Litigation, 6438 Bay Street, West Vancouver British Columbia Canada V6W 2H1. --- So they are clear that their actions are legal and it appears that Russ George was only an adviser and not a beneficiary. Commercial Issues Living Oceans Society releases new evidence Re: Old Masset Iron Fertilization Scheme http://livingoceans.org/sites/default/files/media/uploads/Iron%20fertilization.pdf Northern Savings Credit Union's letter dated February 28th, 2011 to Old Masset Village Council Clearly the credit as structured really represents a loan being made on a fully secured basis with Term Deposits as collateral and as such one might argue that you are clearly borrowing your own money. Thus it appears that the Haida nation people were funding the project with their own money and conducted it in their own waters or at least close to their island to restore their fishing. They should be applauded and not condemned. regards Bhaskar -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. 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. -- *_* * * ANDREW C. REVKIN Dot Earth blogger, The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/dotearth Senior Fellow, Pace Acad. for Applied Env. Studies Cell: 914-441-5556 Fax: 914-989-8009 Twitter: @revkin Skype: Andrew.Revkin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. 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.
RE: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations
I still think we need to focus on the fact that the public do find geoengineers a viable community deserving the support. We should not be distracted by the negative lobby groups like ETC because the public realises that the real problem in quantitative terms is the pollution we put out, not the efforts of geoengineers to remedy it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15399832 How we can loose the main point and continuously stare at a rare healty individual trees while failing to see our pollution that makes the forest sickly in the mean time?Mitt Romney says CO2 does not cause global warming but distant supernovae and cosmic particles, ETC says that geoengineering is the real threat to our climate. The public does not believe any of these claims, they understand that the inventors of ETC have just invented fund raising machine to award jobs and international travel themselves. When I sponsored the geoengineering session at CMPCC summit, I paid the bills for flights, accommodation etc and people volunteered their time and presentations. No one was on anyone's payroll there. Does ETC people volunteer? Not, barring their fund raisers to stuff their pockets with the cash of donors they ply for. Good business for them. Regards, AlbertDate: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:48:58 +0100 Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations From: andrew.lock...@gmail.com To: j...@etcgroup.org; kcalde...@gmail.com; mmacc...@comcast.net CC: jrandomwin...@gmail.com; geoengineering@googlegroups.com Jim Thanks for your email. Could you cite emails where you think there have been ad hominem attacks on ETC? I'm reluctant to censor obvious satire. This thread has triggered useful debate. I'm also concerned at your attempts to apply the ad hominem principle to a group or organisation. This would make it harder for people to criticize governments, etc. Furthermore, can it really be said the ETC conduct in this regard has been at the standards by which it would ask others to be judged? Your response has been useful, and I'd welcome more contribution from ETC. This group's posts are widely read by an influential, but mostly silent, audience of policy makers, Journalists and scientists. It's a good opportunity to boost support for your cause. Andrew Lockley Moderator On Oct 22, 2012 5:23 AM, jim thomas j...@etcgroup.org wrote: Obviously this is patently silly. ETC Group are not a party to UNFCCC and if continuing to use air travel constitutes some sort of breach of a UN convention then many people and groups on this list are also 'in breach' . So is the IPCC etc etc. Also didn't there used to be some sort of moderation rule on this list about 'no ad hominem attacks'??? Andrew: what happened to that? More seriously however , can I ask you David to retract your language referring to ETC Group's Attack on the Haida and to be far more careful who you are smearing in your rather sloppy language below. To be clear: The ocean fertilization dump was not carried out by 'the Haida'- an indegenous nation of several thousand people. It was carried out by a commercial company called the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation (HSRC) established through the band council of the village of Old Massett. So this was a project of a small commercial company associated with one particular Haida Village. It is not a project of 'The Haida' and most press reports have been careful not to misrepresent it as you have. Nor do band council's represent 'The Haida'' - they are administrative units established mostly for provision of services set up by the Canadian Government under the Indian Act. The bodies that represent 'The Haida' as a sovereign People are The Council of the Haida Nation and the Council of Hereditary Chiefs. Both bodies issued a clear declaration on Thursday disassociating themselves from the ocean fertilization dump undertaken by HSRC and making it very clear they do not support ocean fertilization activities. See http://www.haidanation.ca/Pages/Splash/Public_Notices/PDF/Joint_Statement.pdf . In fact since this dump first became public a week ago the President of the Council of The Haida Nation, Guujaaw, has consistently made clear this was not an initiative of The Haida but of only of one village band council. Meanwhile ETC Group has been in constant constructive discussion with the Council of Haida Nations and other Haida Groups and indeed brought this matter to their attention before it was brought to any media. There has been no 'attack on the Haida' and as you'll see from our own press release where we have been diligent in communicating the difference between HSRC and 'The Haida': http://www.etcgroup.org/content/world%E2%80%99s-largest-geoengineering-deployment-coast-canada%E2%80%99s-british-columbia - may I respectfully ask that others take the same care. BestJim ThomasETC Group. On Oct 21, 2012, at 5:36
Re: [geo] Haida Salmon Restoration Project - Legal and Commercial issues
HTTP://WWW.EENEWS.NET/GREENWIRE/PRINT/2012/10/22/9 OCEANS: Canadian village defends Pacific iron ore dumping Published: Monday, October 22, 2012 Leaders of a small Canadian village on Friday defended the dumping of 120 tons of iron ore into the Pacific Ocean, saying it was a legal experiment to revive salmon stocks. In August, the Old Massett Village Council conducted the $2.52 million experiment in the water surrounding Haida Gwaii, an archipelago to the west of British Columbia. The council, with the help of scientists, biologists and technicians, poured the iron into the water (Greenwirehttp://www.eenews.net/Greenwire/2012/10/17/archive/12, Oct. 17). It had pushed forward with the project after finding correlations between a 2008 volcanic eruption in the Aleutian Islands and increased plankton pastures, council economic development officer John Disney said. Some believe that iron ore, rich with mineral micronutrients, would restore the plankton, which salmon and other marine animals eat. When we added iron ore to the ocean, we discovered an almost immediate impact on marine life, Disney said. But Canadian officials are investigating the incident, saying it might have been what is considered ocean fertilization, which is not currently allowed under the country's environmental laws. Environment Canada warned the group that depositing the iron ore would be considered a form of disposal at sea and would not be allowed unless it was for legitimate research. The village council received legal advice that found it was a legal experiment, Disney said. It consulted several federal ministries and research councils, he said (Nicole Mordant, Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/19/us-environment-dumping-idUSBRE89I1CV20121019, Oct. 19). -- JE From: Bhaskar M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.commailto:bhaskarmv...@gmail.com Reply-To: bhaskarmv...@gmail.commailto:bhaskarmv...@gmail.com bhaskarmv...@gmail.commailto:bhaskarmv...@gmail.com Date: Monday, October 22, 2012 1:37 AM To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.commailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com Subject: [geo] Haida Salmon Restoration Project - Legal and Commercial issues Haida Salmon Restoration Project Legal issues - The media advisory released by Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation's law firm - http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1055481/media-advisory-the-haida-salmon-restoration-corporation-october-19th-media-availability-on-salmon-enhancement-project MEDIA ADVISORY - The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation - October 19th media availability on salmon enhancement project VANCOUVER, Oct. 18, 2012 /CNW/ - The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation, founded and majority owned by the Old Massett Village Council of Haida Gwaii is engaged in on-going ocean research and environmental studies approximately 200 nautical miles west of Haida Gwaii. This work is lawful, on-going, self-funded and in compliance with the Law of the Sea Convention and Canada's Ocean Act. The purpose of this salmon-enhancement pilot research project, also called ocean restoration or ocean micronutrient replenishment, is to study conditions of the Haida Ocean, with particular attention to the collapse of ocean plankton blooms that traditionally provide nutrients to salmon and other marine life. The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation is studying and developing methods that may be useful in restoring the growth of phytoplankton and thereby sustain and enhance the production of all marine life and create a sustainable economy for Old Massett. * Chief Councillor Ken Rea of the Old Massett Village Council will outline the project and how the village initiated and founded the company to proceed with the project. * Mr. John Disney, the president of Haida Salmon Research Corporation will be available along with legal counsel James L. Straith whose firm completed a comprehensive international and domestic legal status review and legal position paper prior to the work done at sea. Where: Vancouver Aquarium 845 Avison Way in Stanley Park Media Registration at Aquaquest Reception (white trailer) between 9-9:20 a.m. When: Friday October 19, 2012 Time: 9:30 AM SOURCE: Haida Salmon Restoration Corp. For further information: Jay Straith or K. Joseph Spears at [X] 604-921-1122tel:604-921-1122 or e-mail at k...@oceanlawcanada.commailto:k...@oceanlawcanada.com Straith Litigation, 6438 Bay Street, West Vancouver British Columbia Canada V6W 2H1. --- So they are clear that their actions are legal and it appears that Russ George was only an adviser and not a beneficiary. Commercial Issues Living Oceans Society releases new evidence Re: Old Masset Iron Fertilization Scheme http://livingoceans.org/sites/default/files/media/uploads/Iron%20fertilization.pdf Northern Savings Credit Union's letter dated February 28th, 2011 to Old Masset Village Council
Re: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations
After I read Geopiracy: The Case Against Geoengineeringhttp://www.etcgroup.org/content/geopiracy-case-against-geoengineering on the ETC website, I, mistakenly as I see now, concluded that ETC couldn't possibly be serious. I thought their contribution was aimed at provoking laughter. Hence, my satirical response. Readers may understand why I made my mistake if they read that ETC *Geopiracy *webpage, especially the paragraph that appears under the subhead* Actors: * In this paragraph, ETC describes* a conspiracy*, which is* at present led in public by* *an alliance of* *two main groups*. The first group is made up of the leading scientific institutions that exist in the world. Named specifically are the UK Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences, which are joined by counterparts in other countries such as Canada, Germany and Russia. The second group is described as conservative think tanks (the very ones that used to deny climate change). * * * * *But the ETC tells us, these groups are just the public front who are taking the heat at the moment, for the real villains. * The group that is remaining in the background, for now, are waiting for their front groups to deliever the shock - that climate chaos is upon us and GHG emissions won't be reduced in time, after which, at the appropriate time, they will step forward to deliver their techno-fixes, i.e. geoengineering. The group dictating the marching orders the National Academy, the Royal Society, and various conservative think tanks are marching to at the moment is: major energy, aerospace and defence industries, i.e. I presume they imply Exxon-Mobil, Haliburton, and what, Boeing? Hence, the ETC feels fully justified using their label for all this: geopiracy, and all who read their argument will now oppose it, presumably. *What else could I assume but that ETC presents this argument as entertainment? * I had no idea they were serious.* *(I may have had an inkling...) Perhaps JimETC will respond with some evidence. How about some email records of the key communications between Rex Tillerson and Ralph Cicerone? On Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:23:04 PM UTC-7, JimETC wrote: Obviously this is patently silly. ETC Group are not a party to UNFCCC and if continuing to use air travel constitutes some sort of breach of a UN convention then many people and groups on this list are also 'in breach' . So is the IPCC etc etc. Also didn't there used to be some sort of moderation rule on this list about 'no ad hominem attacks'??? Andrew: what happened to that? Best Jim Thomas ETC Group. On Oct 21, 2012, at 5:36 PM, David Lewis wrote: The ETC group is blatantly violating an international convention The ETC group, a href=http://www.etcgroup.org/people;as their website says/a, consists of nine staff members and nine board members scattered over five continents. Many wonder when these 18 people will finally confess what their combined greenhouse gas footprint is. Speculation persists that the total tonnage of GHG emitted in a single year by these ETC members may be massive, i.e. it may exceed the amount of material involved in what ETC has been denouncing as the world's largest geoengineering deployment, i.e. the 100 tonne BC Haida ocean fertilization project. If the total lifecycle GHG emissions of the ETC group are considered, the tonnage must dwarf what's involved in this Haida project. Experts agree that *the ETC effect*, i.e. increasing the GHG concentration in the atmosphere, will add to the forces driving global climate change and ocean acidification. By aggravating the widespread disruption of regional and global ecosystems which the expansion of civilization is already causing, the changing climate and the acidifying ocean are diminishing global biodiversity. As the areas most suitable for crop growing and for where people want to live change location, military analysts have concluded, tension of the type that has led in the past to conflict between human groups up to and including war between nation states will increase. There is less agreement about *the Haida effect*, i.e. what the ultimate effect of fertilizing the ocean is. One reason some scientists call for experimentation of the type conducted by the Haida is to find out if this type of activity* might reduce what the ETC effect causes*. *Some say that the ETC attack on the Haida is a stunt designed to divert public attention away from their own questionable activities *which have been going on for a very long time. Consider how the two groups behave. The Haida are acting as if they have nothing to hide: they publicly applied their possibly one time application of ocean fertilizer in the full light of day on an ocean they knew was under constant satellite surveillance. But consider *the egregious eighteen*, the members of the ETC,
[geo] Arctic warming and ocean productivity
As many of you know, Jennifer Francis has published interesting research in GRL recently regarding the amplified warming in the Arctic and how this may affect the jet stream; see [1] http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012GL051000.shtml [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4spEuh8vswE [3] http://e360.yale.edu/feature/linking_weird_weather_to_rapid_warming_of_the_arctic/2501/ Has anyone looked into how this may affect the ocean currents and upwelling? It seems that a weaker jet stream would produce weaker ocean currents and weaker upwelling, with less minerals/nutrients available for phytoplankton growth. The eastern boundary currents of oceans may be especially susceptible. The email below relates to such a current, and speaks of the collapse of ocean plankton blooms that traditionally provide nutrients to salmon and other marine life. Could this collapse be linked with Arctic warming amplification? Sincerely, David Mitchell Associate Research Professor Desert Research Institute Division of Atmospheric Sciences 2215 Raggio Parkway Reno, Nevada, USA Phone: 775-674-7039 E-mail: david.mitch...@dri.edu mailto:david.mitch...@dri.edu On 10/22/2012 1:37 AM, Bhaskar M V wrote: Haida Salmon Restoration Project *Legal issues -* The media advisory released by Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation's law firm - http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1055481/media-advisory-the-haida-salmon-restoration-corporation-october-19th-media-availability-on-salmon-enhancement-project MEDIA ADVISORY - The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation - October 19th media availability on salmon enhancement project VANCOUVER, Oct. 18, 2012 /CNW/ - The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation, founded and majority owned by the Old Massett Village Council of Haida Gwaii is engaged in on-going ocean research and environmental studies approximately 200 nautical miles west of Haida Gwaii. This work is lawful, on-going, self-funded and in compliance with the Law of the Sea Convention and Canada's Ocean Act. The purpose of this salmon-enhancement pilot research project, also called ocean restoration or ocean micronutrient replenishment, is to study conditions of the Haida Ocean, with particular attention to the collapse of ocean plankton blooms that traditionally provide nutrients to salmon and other marine life. The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation is studying and developing methods that may be useful in restoring the growth of phytoplankton and thereby sustain and enhance the production of all marine life and create a sustainable economy for Old Massett. * Chief Councillor Ken Rea of the Old Massett Village Council will outline the project and how the village initiated and founded the company to proceed with the project. * Mr. John Disney, the president of Haida Salmon Research Corporation will be available along with legal counsel James L. Straith whose firm completed a comprehensive international and domestic legal status review and legal position paper prior to the work done at sea. *Where: * Vancouver Aquarium *845 Avison Way in Stanley Park* Media Registration at Aquaquest Reception (white trailer) between 9-9:20 a.m. *When:* Friday October 19, 2012 *Time:* 9:30 AM SOURCE: Haida Salmon Restoration Corp. For further information: *Jay Straith or K. Joseph Spears at 604-921-1122 tel:604-921-1122* or e-mail at k...@oceanlawcanada.com mailto:k...@oceanlawcanada.com Straith Litigation, 6438 Bay Street, West Vancouver British Columbia Canada V6W 2H1. --- So they are clear that their actions are legal and it appears that Russ George was only an adviser and not a beneficiary. *Commercial Issues* Living Oceans Society releases new evidence Re: Old Masset Iron Fertilization Scheme http://livingoceans.org/sites/default/files/media/uploads/Iron%20fertilization.pdf Northern Savings Credit Union's letter dated February 28th, 2011 to Old Masset Village Council Clearly the credit as structured really represents a loan being made on a fully secured basis with Term Deposits as collateral and as such one might argue that you are clearly borrowing your own money. Thus it appears that the Haida nation people were funding the project with their own money and conducted it in their own waters or at least close to their island to restore their fishing. They should be applauded and not condemned. regards Bhaskar -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. 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. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group.
RE: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations
We do not choose to focus on problems based on an objective appraisal of threats posed, but rather largely based on which actions we find to be most ethically repugnant. Apparently, dumping raw sewage simply to save the cost of sewage processing is less repugnant than fertilizing the ocean in hopes of increasing fish yields. One suspects that the real ethical boundary that Russ George is inferred to have transgressed is the desire to personally profit from unconventional mariculture. Ken Kaldeira's comment is particularly pertinent, as another similar project by fossil fuel industry to artificially to alter pH of ocean has received no criticism at all: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18045733 It seems to me from the above that the facts and fiction are increasingly getting mixed up by ideological lobbies whose self interest is to just raise money. Somehow I am getting both tired and angry about these pointless debates instigated by the climate change denialists, and people who try to prevent even research attempts of geoengineering while turning blind eye when oil companies intentionally seed ocean with carbon dioxide, hydrocarbons etc stuff, and as Ken pointed out raw sewage is often allowed to the sea and farmers pour tons of fertilisers on sea side fields in Sweden every year when floods occur each spring on those sea side fields. I think geoengineers should strike back when even the water spraying on UK coast was stopped due to some supposed environmental risk last year. I suppose if we re-labelled geoengineering as oil field related research project, we would be only congratulated and said it is welcome project like the one currently polluting ocean with CO2 in Scotland. Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:39 -0400 Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations From: mmacc...@comcast.net To: joshuahorton...@gmail.com; andrew.lock...@gmail.com CC: bhaskarmv...@gmail.com; kcalde...@carnegiescience.edu; Geoengineering@googlegroups.com Re: [geo] Re: Pacific iron fertilisation is 'blatant violation' of international regulations Were HSRC really interested in solid and verifiable carbon credits, investing their money and effort in improving efficiency almost anywhere in the world would seem to have been a much better investment and chance of return. In addition to the actual costs of doing iron fertilization, the transaction costs in terms of lawyers and legal vulnerability would seem to me so high it is hard to understand on what basis they would be drawing in investors. Thus, in addition to being ecologically and legally suspect, isn’t the whole idea economically suspect as well? Were global emissions way down and the CO2 costs way up and ocean acidification causing significant impacts, there might be reason for re-consideration, but I just don’t understand the rationale for this idea when global emissions are headed up, overall efficiencies of energy use are so low, and CO2 permit costs are so low. What am I missing here? Mike MacCracken On 10/20/12 3:36 PM, Joshua Horton joshuahorton...@gmail.com wrote: According to multiple sources, the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation (HSRC) had planned to sell carbon credits resulting from the experiment (for example, see CBC http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/19/bc-ocean-fertilization-haida.html). Setting aside the fact that there's no way currently to do this, neither Russ George, John Disney (president of HSRC), nor any other corporate or community official has disputed this assertion, not even during the press conference they organized in Vancouver yesterday. As for the Assessment Framework, the point is not whether or not the experiment was small-scale, but whether or not it was submitted to the LC/LP for approval under the Framework, which apparently it was not (presumably because it wouldn't have passed scientific muster). Josh On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.com wrote: Not wishing to take sides, but I don't agree with the points raised. It's not clear to me what, if any, commercial purpose there was. I don't see any evidence of selling credits, specifically. It's probably harder to judge the fisheries issue - which may have been within the definition of commercial. However, it may be that the intended fisheries impact was research, not directly commercial, on this specific occasion. Secondly, the assessment framework expressly permits small scale research. 100t is pretty small scale (two petrol tankers) even if the effect was spatially dispersed. Surely it's for objectors to prove a violation, not the converse. Innocent until proven guilty, and all that A On Oct 20, 2012 7:01 PM, Josh Horton joshuahorton...@gmail.com wrote: Circling back to Ken's original question, given what we know it seems pretty clear that the Haida
[geo] ScienceDirect.com - Process Safety and Environmental Protection - Ocean fertilization for geoengineering: a review of effectiveness, environmental impacts and emerging governance
(Full abstract wouldnt copy from page) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095758201200119X?v=s5 Williamson, Phillip; et al. (2012): Ocean fertilization for geoengineering: a review of effectiveness, environmental impacts and emerging governance Williamson, Phillip; Wallace, Douglas W.R; Law, Cliff S.; Boyd, Philip W.; Collos, Yves; Croot, Peter et al. (2012): Ocean fertilization for geoengineering: a review of effectiveness, environmental impacts and emerging governance. In: Process Safety and Environmental Protection. DOI 10.1016/j.psep.2012.10.007 (in press) Fertilization using iron can increase the uptake of CO2 across the sea surface. But most of this uptake is transient; long-term sequestration is difficult to assess -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. 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.
