[All] Fwd: ETC Group: Geoengineering Moratorium at UN Ministerial in Japan

[Robert Milligan]

FYI
Robert M

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "ETC Group" <civicrm at etcgroup.org>
> Date: October 28, 2010 10:19:31 PM GMT-04:00
> To: "mill at continuum.org" <mill at continuum.org>
> Subject: ETC Group: Geoengineering Moratorium at UN Ministerial in  
> Japan
> Reply-To: r.76.31294.3ea5a0bae00ec563 at etcgroup.org
>
>
> News Release
> 29 October 2010
> www.etcgroup.org
>
> Geoengineering Moratorium at UN Ministerial in Japan
> Risky Climate Techno-fixes Blocked
>
> NAGOYA, Japan – In a landmark consensus decision, the 193-member UN  
> Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) will close its tenth  
> biennial meeting with a de facto moratorium on geoengineering  
> projects and experiments.   “Any private or public experimentation  
> or adventurism intended to manipulate the planetary thermostat will  
> be in violation of this carefully crafted UN consensus,” stated  
> Silvia Ribeiro, Latin American Director of ETC Group.
>
> The agreement, reached during the ministerial portion of the two- 
> week meeting which included 110 environment ministers, asks  
> governments to ensure that no geoengineering activities take place  
> until risks to the environment and biodiversity and associated  
> social, cultural and economic impacts have been appropriately  
> considered. The CBD secretariat was also instructed to report back  
> on various geoengineering proposals and potential intergovernmental  
> regulatory measures.
>
> The unusually strong consensus decision builds on the 2008  
> moratorium on ocean fertilization.  That agreement, negotiated at  
> COP 9 in Bonn, put the brakes on a litany of failed “experiments”  
> – both public and private – to sequester atmospheric carbon  
> dioxide in the oceans’ depths by spreading nutrients on the sea  
> surface.  Since then, attention has turned to a range of futuristic  
> proposals to block a percentage of solar radiation via large-scale  
> interventions in the atmosphere, stratosphere and outer space that  
> would alter global temperatures and precipitation patterns.
>
> “This decision clearly places the governance of geoengineering in  
> the United Nations where it belongs,” said ETC Group Executive  
> Director Pat Mooney.  “This decision is a victory for common sense,  
> and for precaution.  It will not inhibit legitimate scientific  
> research.  Decisions on geoengineering cannot be made by small  
> groups of scientists from a small group of countries that establish  
> self-serving ‘voluntary guidelines’ on climate hacking.  What  
> little credibility such efforts may have had in some policy circles  
> in the global North has been shattered by this decision.  The UK  
> Royal Society and its partners should cancel their Solar Radiation  
> Management Governance Initiative and respect that the world’s  
> governments have collectively decided that future deliberations on  
> geoengineering should take place in the UN, where all countries have  
> a seat at the table and where civil society can watch and influence  
> what they are doing.”
>
> Delegates in Nagoya have now clearly understood the potential threat  
> that deployment – or even field testing – of geoengineering  
> technologies poses to the protection of biodiversity. The decision  
> was hammered out in long and difficult late night sessions of a  
> “friends of the chair” group, attended by ETC Group, and adopted  
> by the Working Group 1 Plenary on 27 October 2010.  The Chair of the  
> climate and biodiversity negotiations called the final text “a  
> highly delicate compromise.” All that remains to do now is gavel it  
> through in the final plenary at 6 PM Friday (Nagoya time).
>
> “The decision is not perfect,” said Neth Dano of ETC Group  
> Philippines. “Some delegations are understandably concerned that  
> the interim definition of geoengineering is too narrow because it  
> does not include Carbon Capture and Storage technologies.  Before  
> the next CBD meeting, there will be ample opportunity to consider  
> these questions in more detail. But climate techno-fixes are now  
> firmly on the UN agenda and will lead to important debates as the  
> 20th anniversary of the Earth Summit approaches.  A change of course  
> is essential, and geoengineering is clearly not the way forward.”
>
> In Nagoya, Japan
> Pat Mooney: mooney at etcgroup.org (Mobile +1-613-240-0045)
> Silvia Ribeiro: silvia at etcgroup.org (Mobile (local): + 81 90 5036  
> 4659)
> Neth Dano: neth at etcgroup.org (Mobile: + 63-917-532-9369)
>
>
> In Montreal, Canada:
> Diana Bronson: diana at etcgroup.org (Mobile: +1-514-629-9236)
> Jim Thomas: jim at etcgroup.org (Mobile: +1-514-516-5759)
>
>
> Note to Editors:
> The full texts of the relevant decisions on geoengineering are  
> copied below:
>
> Under Climate Change and Biodiversity (UNEP/CBD/COP/10/L.36)
>
> 8.  Invites Parties and other Governments, according to national  
> circumstance and priorities, as well as relevant organizations and  
> processes, to consider the  guidance below on ways to conserve,  
> sustainably use and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services  
> while contributing to climate‑change mitigation and adaptation:
> ....
> (w) Ensure, in line and consistent with decision IX/16 C, on ocean  
> fertilization and biodiversity and climate change, in the absence of  
> science based, global, transparent and effective control and  
> regulatory mechanisms for geo-engineering, and in accordance with  
> the precautionary approach and Article 14 of the Convention, that no  
> climate-related geo-engineering activities[1] that may affect  
> biodiversity take place, until  there is an adequate scientific  
> basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate  
> consideration of the associated risks for the environment and  
> biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts,  
> with the exception of small scale scientific research studies that  
> would be conducted in a controlled setting  in accordance with  
> Article 3 of the Convention, and only if they are justified by the  
> need to gather specific scientific data and are subject to a  
> thorough prior assessment of the potential impacts on the environment;
>
> [1] Without prejudice to future deliberations on the definition of  
> geo-engineering activities, understanding that any technologies that  
> deliberately reduce solar insolation or increase carbon  
> sequestration from the atmosphere on a large scale that may affect  
> biodiversity (excluding carbon capture and storage from fossil fuels  
> when it captures carbon dioxide before it is released into the  
> atmosphere) should be considered as forms of geo-engineering which  
> are relevant to the Convention on Biological Diversity until a more  
> precise definition can be developed. Noting that solar insolation is  
> defined as a measure of solar radiation energy received on a given  
> surface area in a given hour and that carbon sequestration is  
> defined as the process of increasing the carbon content of a  
> reservoir/pool other than the atmosphere.
> AND
>
>
> 9. Requests the Executive Secretary to:
> ….
> (o) Compile and synthesize available scientific information, and  
> views and experiences of indigenous and local communities and other  
> stakeholders, on the possible impacts of geo‑engineering techniques  
> on biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural  
> considerations, and options on definitions and understandings of  
> climate-related geo-engineering relevant to the Convention on  
> Biological Diversity and make it available for consideration at a  
> meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and  
> Technological Advice prior to the eleventh meeting of the Conference  
> of the Parties;
> (p)    Taking into account the possible need for science based  
> global, transparent and effective control and regulatory mechanisms,  
> subject to the availability of financial resources, undertake a  
> study on gaps in such existing mechanisms for climate-related geo- 
> engineering relevant to the Convention on Biological Diversity,  
> bearing in mind that such mechanisms may not be best placed under  
> the Convention on Biological Diversity, for consideration by the  
> Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice  
> prior to a future meeting of the Conference of the Parties and to  
> communicate the results to relevant organizations;
>
> Under New and Emerging Issues UNEP/CBD/COP/10/L.2 :
>
> 4.    Invites Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations  
> to submit information on synthetic biology and geo-engineering, for  
> the consideration by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical  
> and Technological Advice, in accordance with the procedures of  
> decision IX/29, while applying the precautionary approach to the  
> field release of synthetic life, cell or genome into the environment;
>
> Under Marine and Coastal Biodiversity UNEP/CBD/COP/10/L.42
>
> 13 Reaffirming that the programme of work still corresponds to the  
> global priorities, has been further strengthened through decisions  
> VIII/21, VIII/22, VIII/24, and IX/20, but is not fully implemented,  
> and therefore encourages  Parties to continue to implement these  
> programme elements, and endorses the following guidance, where  
> applicable and in accordance with national capacity and  
> circumstances, for enhanced implementation:
>
> (e)    Ensuring that no ocean fertilization takes place unless in  
> accordance with decision IX/16 C and taking note of the report (UNEP/ 
> CBD/SBSTTA/14/INF/7) and development noted para 57 – 62;
>
> Impacts of ocean fertilization on marine and coastal biodiversity
> 57.    Welcomes the report on compilation and synthesis of available  
> scientific information on potential impacts of direct human-induced  
> ocean fertilization on marine biodiversity (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/14/INF/ 
> 7), which was prepared in collaboration with United Nations  
> Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP- 
> WCMC) and the International Maritime Organization in pursuance of  
> paragraph 3 of decision IX/20;
> 58.    Recalling the important decision IX/16 C on ocean  
> fertilization, reaffirming the precautionary approach, recognizes  
> that given the scientific uncertainty that exists, significant  
> concern surrounds the potential intended and unintended impacts of  
> large-scale ocean fertilization on marine ecosystem structure and  
> function, including the sensitivity of species and habitats and the  
> physiological changes induced by micro-nutrient and macro-nutrient  
> additions to surface waters as well as the possibility of persistent  
> alteration of an ecosystem, and requests Parties to implement  
> decision IX/16 C;
> 59.    Notes that the governing bodies under the London Convention  
> and Protocol adopted in 2008 resolution LC-LP.1 (2008) on the  
> regulation of ocean fertilization, in which Contracting Parties  
> declared, inter alia, that given the present state of knowledge,  
> ocean fertilization activities other than legitimate scientific  
> research should not be allowed;
> 60.    Recognizes the work under way within the context of the  
> London Convention and London Protocol to contribute to the  
> development of a regulatory mechanism referred to in decision IX/16  
> C, and invites Parties and other Governments to act in accordance  
> with the Resolution LC-LP.2(2010) of the London Convention and  
> Protocol ;
> 61.     Notes that in order to provide reliable predictions on the  
> potential adverse impacts on marine biodiversity of activities  
> involving ocean fertilization, further work to enhance our knowledge  
> and modelling of ocean biogeochemical processes is required, in  
> accordance with decision IX/16 (c) and taking into account decision  
> IX/20 and LC-LP.2 (2010);
> 62.    Notes also that there is a pressing need for research to  
> advance our understanding of marine ecosystem dynamics and the role  
> of the ocean in the global carbon cycle;
> Geopiracy: The Case Against Geoengineering is a new publication by  
> ETC Group that provides an overview of the issues involved.
>
>
> -----
>
> For more information about our work, please visit our website at http://www.etcgroup.org/
>
> Interested in supporting our work? Donate Here! http://www.etcgroup.org/en/node/5195
>
> ETC Group is a registered Charity in Canada. ETC Headquarters are at:
> 431 Gilmour Street, Second Floor
> Ottawa, ON K2P-0R5
> Canada
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20101030/a38170c1/attachment.html>