Emily:
Thanks for a very well written summary. I'd like to see you update
this, as everything you imply has occurred.
Hope to see you at Asilomar.
Gregory Benford
-----Original Message-----
From: Emily <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tue, Mar 16, 2010 3:05 am
Subject: WWF also on geo-eng Re: [geo] Re: Friends of the Earth calls
for geoengineering research & states that mitigation is not enough to
stay safe
Dear all,
i will read the FoE briefing with great interest. I would also like to
raise your attention of a May 2009 publication written for and
published
by WWF. It also states that we have gone beyond standard mitigation
measures and now need to go further and suck CO2 out of the air. This
isn't a ref to CCS as I wrote some of their policy on CCS and it is
dealt with separately. This was a very new and bold move for wwf. When
I
was at WWF I arranged for Prof J Shepherd to come and talk to the org
and meet the head of cc. I also wrote the attached doc in 2008 which in
an internal briefing doc which went to the head of WWF across the
global
network. You will see that a key persopn is involved in both of these
papers, Stephan Singer. While he is very very over worked, he gets the
urgency of climate change and is the best chance within WWF we have of
some sensible discussion on geo-e.
There is real knee jerk reaction based on ill informed gut reations
amongst parts of NGOs, but others realise the situation we are in and
get the need for research into additional tools to help avoid run away
climate change.
I have sent the WWF reference to David Santillo, it would be good for
him/Greenpeace to receive the FoE one also. Shall I do this, or would
someone else like to?
Ref for the WWF report:
*The New Climate Deal - A Pocket Guide*
May 2009
“Even so, we will almost certainly require negative emissions after
2050
to get atmospheric CO2 concentrations down to acceptable levels. That
is, we will need to suck CO2 out of the air – by planting forests or by
other technological means.”
*http://www.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/climate_carbon_energy/climate_
deal/publications/?uNewsID=168985*
Best wishes,
Emily.
On 14/03/2010 11:37, Andrew Lockley wrote:
Oliver,
I wouldn't get too tied up on the details of what they support or
oppose. The critical facts are that they accept the fundamental case
for geoengineering and call for research. That is, to my knowledge,
a
world first for a major, mainstream, green NGO.
The tide, as I said, has turned.
A
On 14 March 2010 04:59, Oliver Wingenter <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear Group,
I am not sure if they are friend or FOE but they oppose several
types
of GE. From FOE's press release,
"Friends of the Earth opposes injection of aerosols. We also
currently
oppose the large-scale use of
afforestation, biomass with carbon capture and bio-char until
land use
competition issues with food
production and biodiversity are solved. And we oppose the GM
modification of plants to enhance the
albedo affect due to the unknown risks associated with GM
technologies."
http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefing_notes/geoengineering.pdf
Sincerely,
Oliver Wingenter
On Mar 13, 6:04 pm, Dan Whaley <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I asked Russell Long (on the FOE US Board of Directors) about
this
> when it came out last year... he confirmed that
(unfortunately) it
> does not reflect the US organizations point of view.
>
> D
>
> On Mar 13, 4:45 pm, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> > Following my group's motion to conference last year, Friends
of the Earth
> > has now called for geoengineering research, and recognised
that mitigation
> > is not enough to stay within 'safe' thresholds. I am
heartened by this, as
> > this makes FoE the first (to my knowledge) mainstream
environmental group to
> > publicly call for research into geoeng.
>
> > I hope that this will now further isolate the irrational and
vociferous
> > campaigning stance against geoeng which has been run by some
NGOs. The tide
> > has now turned, as the UKs most 'moderate' mainstream general
environmental
> > NGO has taken this new stance.
>
> > Motion text below, as passed at conference. The board's
response is below
> > the motion text. A full briefing is
athttp://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefing_notes/geoengineering.pdf
<http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefing_notes/geoengineering.pdf>
>
> > A
>
> > -------------------------------
>
> > Motion 7– Geo-engineering *(my bolding)*
> > This Conference calls upon the Board of Friends of the Earth
Ltd. to
> > consider:
> > 1. Whether or not geo-engineering could be a necessary or
desirable part of
> > the solution to climate change
> > 2. The merits and shortcomings of various notable
geo-engineering techniques
> > (e.g. bio-energy with carbon
> > storage, stratospheric sulphur aerosols, carbon air capture,
etc)
> > 3. Establish a publicly-stated and scientifically robust
position on both
> > geo-engineering field experiments and on
> > the full scale-implementation of geo-engineering
> > [The National Academy of Sciences defined geo-engineering as
"large-scale
> > engineering of our environment in order to
> > combat or counteract the effects of changes in atmospheric
chemistry."]
>
> > Board response: Following the passing of this motion staff
have prepared a
> > detailed position statement on Geoengineering
> > which can be obtained
at:http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefing_notes/geoengineering.pdf
> > Its conclusion is that: “Mitigation has to be the priority for
action;
> > action far in excess of currently being considered by
> > politicians is needed. *It is now clear that mitigation alone
cannot keep
> > global temperatures below a safer threshold of 1-*
> > *1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels*. However many of the
> > geo-engineering options suggested are totally
> > unacceptable due to the adverse environmental or social
impacts they bring
> > or risk bringing.”
> > The Royal Society report on the same subject in September 2009
is available
> > at:http://royalsociety.org/geoengineeringclimate/. The
recommendations of this
> > report are also relevant, as are its
> > ‘headline messages’: “The safest and most predictable method
of moderating
> > climate change is to take early and
> > effective action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. No
geo-engineering
> > method can provide an easy or readily
> > acceptable alternative solution to the problem of climate
change.
> > *Geo-engineering
> > methods could however potentially*
> > *be useful in future to augment continuing efforts to mitigate
climate
> > change by reducing emissions, and so should be*
> > *subject to more detailed research and analysis*. However, the
technology to
> > do so is barely formed, and there are major uncertainties
regarding its
> > effectiveness, costs, and environmental impacts.”
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:geoengineering%[email protected]>.
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.
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.
--
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.
--
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.
