Andrew, The Scientific Community is represented by Prof Peter Burkill from Plymouth University representing the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research ( http://www.scor-int.org/) - a part of ICSU the International Council for Science. I have been abroad recently so have not responded to other invitations to respond on the Canadian project. Chris
On Sunday, 28 October 2012 16:13:01 UTC, andrewjlockley wrote: > Note forthcoming London convention meeting. Is anyone on this list going > to be representing the scientific community? > > > http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/sci-tech/b-c-geoengineering-experiment-attracts-worldwide-attention-at-un-1.1013948 > > VANCOUVER -- Canada may be called onto the carpet this week as nations > gather in the United Kingdom to negotiate the terms of an international > treaty to regulate the controversial practice of geoengineering. > A First Nations salmon restoration group in Haida Gwaii has attracted > worldwide attention after dumping more than 100 metric tonnes of iron into > the Pacific Ocean in a process known as ocean fertilization. > Many scientists from around the world have condemned the unsanctioned > experiment, and the federal government says it is investigating.But Canada > is a hotbed of geoengineering, says a watchdog group, and has been involved > in similar experiments in the past.Geoengineering is the deliberate > modification of the environment as a means of combating climate > change."Some countries would like to see geoengineering more acceptable > than it has been, and Canada's in that bunch of countries," said Jim > Thomas, spokesman for Montreal-based ETC Group, which opposes the > practice.Canada has pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, which committed the > country to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and geoengineering is > "potentially very attractive," Thomas said."You do have governments, and > some large industries and some of the think tanks they sponsor who would > prefer to see us go down the route of geoengineering. That if > geoengineering could be touted as a cheap and quick and easy fix, that > means we don't have to do all the heavy lifting of reducing emissions and > changing our economy, then they would prefer that."Canada funded and > participated in two ocean fertilization experiments in 1999 and 2002 prior > to signing onto a voluntary UN moratorium.In July 2002, Fisheries > Department scientists participated in a small-scale ocean project 1,500 > kilometres off the coast of British Columbia called Subarctic Ecosystem > Response to Iron Enrichment Study.The iron causes a phytoplankton bloom, a > natural sponge for carbon from the atmosphere. As organism feed off the > plankton and die, sinking to the bottom of the ocean, the carbon is trapped > down there. Previous, smaller-scale tests show the effect was > short-term.Fisheries and Oceans Canada's current research, though, is > limited to computer simulations, spokesman Frank Stanek said in an email > response to questions."Since that time, the department has not been > involved in the deployment of iron solution into the ocean," Stanek > wrote.ETC Group, which works on issues of how new technologies can impact > the world's poor and vulnerable, lists eleven projects that have taken > place or are in the works, including a hail suppression project in Alberta > that continues today.Funded by a consortium of insurance firms, the project > seeds clouds over the Prairie province with silver iodide, to shrink ice > stones. > > Such geoengineering projects are controversial, but on the rise in the > face of climate change.In the incident off Haida Gwaii, the Haida Salmon > Restoration Corp. of the village of Old Massett dumped iron into the ocean > in late July. The effort was two-fold: to create a phytoplankton bloom that > would one, spur salmon returns, and two, capture carbon for profit.The iron > causes a phytoplankton bloom, a natural sponge for carbon from the > atmosphere. As organism feed off the plankton and die, sinking to the > bottom of the ocean, the carbon is trapped down there. Previous, > smaller-scale tests show the effect was short-term.The negative reaction in > the scientific world was swift.There are several voluntary and mandatory > international moratoria on ocean dumping and specifically on iron > fertilization, and Environment Canada is investigating the experiment.A > regulatory regime to address exactly the kind of incident that took place > off Haida Gwaii is up for negotiation at the meeting next week in London > for the London Convention and Protocol, which bans dumping toxins at > sea.Adam Sweet, a spokesman for the Environment Department, said Canadian > officials will be in London for the meeting on the London Convention from > Oct. 29 to Nov. 2, and "in addition to the regular business at these > meetings... parties will be discussing the issue of ocean > fertilization."The delegates will stress that no permission was granted for > the experiment, and ocean fertilization is not allowed except for > accredited scientific research."Minister Kent will direct his officials to > inform conference delegates that over the past six years, Canada has > strengthened its enforcement regime, and that Canada will use the full > extent of our enforcement abilities to ensure that those who violate > Canadian environmental law are caught, and charged," Sweet wrote.The Old > Massett experiment will be a hot topic, said Wendy Watson-Wright, assistant > director general and executive secretary of the Intergovernmental > Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO."It has concerns for Canada, concerns > for the U.S., concerns for anybody on the Pacific but also, I think, for > anybody on an ocean because it is one ocean," Watson-Wright said in an > interview from Ottawa.The experiment, which has been condemned by several > Haida leaders, was much larger than any previous experiment, she pointed > out."There are just so many questions that we see this as a very dangerous > precedent."Now the important thing is to monitor the fallout, she said."But > monitoring of what and where? That's what needs to be decided and it does > require the international scientific community to be inputting into those > decisions." > -- 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/-/I9Z1hNyonigJ. 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.
