Andrew: this is something of a great leap forward--Friends of the
Earth UK (as it then was) was very fast out of the traps re Climate
Change in the late '80s and has played a major role in bringing the
issue to public attention in the UK; it's good to see them move on
from the sterility of the emissions reduction alone policy.  That's a
problem of being an early adopter--it is easy to get stuck in place
with your once-new breakthrough turned old and stale.

I seem to remember you mentioning some months ago that such a motion
would be put to the FoE conference so kudos to all those who helped to
bring this about; it provides a welcome, & necessary, counterbalance
to Lomborg et al!

On Sep 15, 5:21 pm, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote:
> The following motion was passed at Friends of the Earth (England,
> Wales and Northern Ireland) conference:
>
> A
> PS There may have been some minor amendments to the wording - I
> apologise if it's not the latest version.
>
> Conference notes
> 1)      The failure to control emissions of greenhouse gases to date
> 2)      The rising global temperature
> 3)      The ever worsening risk of breaching the 2C limit
> 4)      The commencement of feedback effects such as Arctic shrinkage
> and Arctic methane release
> 5)      The emerging discipline of ‘geoengineering’, which seeks to
> directly reduce global warming
> 6)      The belief held by some scientists that climate change cannot
> be safely controlled without geoengineering
> 7)      That geoengineering consists of two distinct disciplines:
> carbon sequestration (e.g. biochar burial) and solar radiation
> management (e.g. stratospheric aerosol injection)
> 8)      The controversy surrounding some geoengineering techniques
>
> MOTION
> Conference calls on the board to:
>
> 1)      Consider whether or not geoengineering is necessary or
> desirable as a part of the solution to climate change – either now or
> in future
> 2)      Establish a stated and scientifically robust policy on geoengineering
> 3)      Consider the merits and shortcomings of various geoengineering
> techniques.
> 4)      Clearly establish a position on geoengineerinng field tests
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to