To expand my point about the potential legal unacceptability of the CROPS proposal, I include chapter and verse from http://www.imo.org/home.asp?topic_id=1488 below
There are several ways in which the CROPS proposal could be argued to breach the exemption for 'organic material of natural origin' 1) Agribusiness could be argued to be 'unnatural' 2) There would be significant quantities of baler twine, netting, etc 3) GM material - bound to be present in large quantities from certain waste streams - could be regarded as unnatural 4) The combination of ballast, netting and sequestrate (if that's a word) could be argued to be an 'industrial product', in much the same way as is a sofa. You can't, one assumes, throw sofas into the sea - even if they are made of horsehair, wood and leather. This is just one clause, from one set of regulations. The lawyers would have a field day at the CROPS proposal. I'm all for making suggestions, but the idea that no-one is going to mount a credible legal or PR challenge to CROPS is, quite frankly, completely ludicrous. MAYBE the idea will pass these tests, but let's not count chickens. A ---boring legalspeak below--- Precautionary approach The 1996 Protocol introduces (in Article 3) what is known as the "precautionary approach" as a general obligation. This requires that "appropriate preventative measures are taken when there is reason to believe that wastes or other matter introduced into the marine environment are likely to cause harm even when there is no conclusive evidence to prove a causal relation between inputs and their effects." The article also states that "the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution" and it emphasizes that Contracting Parties should ensure that the Protocol should not simply result in pollution being transferred from one part of the environment to another. The 1972 Convention permits dumping to be carried out provided certain conditions are met, according to the hazards to the marine environment presented by the materials themselves. The 1972 Convention includes a "black list" of materials which may not be dumped at all. The 1996 Protocol is more restrictive. It states (in Article 4) that Contracting Parties "shall prohibit the dumping of any wastes or other matter with the exception of those listed" (in Annex 1 to the Protocol). These materials include: Dredged material Sewage sludge Fish waste, or material resulting from industrial fish processing operations Vessels and platforms or other man-made structures at sea Inert, inorganic geological material Organic material of natural origin Bulky items primarily comprising iron, steel, concrete and similar harmless materials, for which the concern is physical impact, and limited to those circumstances where such wastes are generated at locations, such as small islands with isolated communities, having no practicable access to disposal options other than dumping. 2009/2/4 Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>: > Well put some in a boat and see how far you get with it! > > I think you'll find the answer is 'not very far'. You are optimistic > (even complacent) about the legals. Look at the fuss they made of > LOHAFEX! > > A > > 2009/2/4 <[email protected]>: >>>> One important angle not yet considered here is the legal one. Dumping >> >> anything at sea is very controversial, and is probably unlawful on a >> large scale. This has been a major problem as regards LOHAFEX, and >> IMO will be much worst for this technology. >> >> >> Not so. Organic matter falls every day into the oceans from rivers, and no >> treaty prevents organic deposits. It is not legally "dumping" but rather >> part of a natural process. The residue we deposit would eventually end up in >> the deep ocean, as the majority of carbon on the planet has. This is covered >> ihn the Metzger-Benford paper as I recall from 2001. >> >> Gregory Benford >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
