Folks, Up to this point I have been adamant about not permitting *ad hominim* posts to this email group. Some have asked me why I have apparently broken my own rules.
--- I have seen Margaret Leinen and her son, Dan Whaley, operate at negotiations over ocean iron fertilization under the London Convention and London Protocol. I got the distinct impression that both Margaret Leinen and Dan Whaley, then both formally associated with Climos, were working hard to keep open the possibility of an ocean fertilization equivalent of "scientific whaling" -- the ability of for-profit ventures to profit from nominally scientific experiments -- threatening a profit-driven scale-up. Climos seemed ready to profit from such an outcome. It appeared to me that in the episode, Margaret Leinen was seeking both to weaken governance of a geoengineering technique and put herself and/or her family members in a position to profit from such weakening. Since that time, as I understand it, Climos set up the Climate Response Fund, and Margaret Leinen left Climos to lead this new organization. After this history, it was somewhat disconcerting that Margaret Leinen appeared to be attempting to place herself and an organization with questionable provenance at the center of a process to develop governance for geoengineering experiments. This is especially odd because there is no shortage of well-established organizations willing to address this issue, including the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Risk Governance Council, the Royal Society of London, and so on. http://www.cfr.org/project/1364/geoengineering.html http://www.irgc.org/geoengineering http://royalsociety.org/Royal-Society-launches-major-study-on-the-governance-of-geoengineering/ These sorts of organizations do not raise the same sorts of alarm bells as do organizations created by Climos. --- Earlier, I wrote that: *Margaret Leinen can obviate my concerns by stating clearly (1) that the Fund will not support geoengineering field tests and (2) that the Fund would not directly or indirectly transfer resources to for-profit geoengineering companies like Climos (or other for-profit companies with significant financial participation by members of Margaret Leinen's family). *The Climate Response Fund board issued a statement of 19 March 2010 stating:* To be absolutely clear, Climate Response Fund will not fund field experiments for any climate intervention technique now or in the future including, but not limited to, ocean fertilization, solar radiation management by stratospheric aerosols, tropospheric aerosols, adding alkalinity to the ocean or any other particular climate mitigation techniques. * http://www.climateresponsefund.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147&Itemid=87 This addresses concern (1).* *The board statement does not address concern (2), but if the Climate Response Fund is not funding climate intervention field experiments then it is really no concern of mine how they spend their money.* *If my comments helped to motivate the issuance of this statement, then I accomplished my primary goal. *--- *Both the Scientific Organizing Committee and the attendees of the upcoming Asilomar meeting are truly stellar groups of people and the meeting will be a wonderful meeting. While I do not think it will be possible to acheive substantive consensus among a broad group on such controversial matters, I could be proven wrong and it will nevertheless be an important continuation and broadening of an important ongoing conversation. * --- *I am not a Christian, but I do believe in the redemption. I don't pray, but I do hope. I hope Margaret Leinen and the Climate Response Fund have committed themselves to playing a positive role in this discussion, working in a disinterested manner for the greater good. If this is the case, and I hope it is, then I wish Margaret Leinen the best of luck and apologize for any pain I may have caused. Regards, Ken Caldeira * * ___________________________________________________ Ken Caldeira Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA [email protected] http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Jane Long <[email protected]> wrote: > excellent news > j > > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 3:57 PM, David Keith <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Margaret, >> >> The board statement clarifies the goals of CRF. These goals seem admirable >> and entirely appropriate for an organization sponsoring a meeting like >> Asilomar. For my part, they answer the questions central I raised in my >> correspondence with Joe Romm. >> >> This relieves my concerns about attending the meeting. >> >> Thank you very much for this. >> >> I look forward to seeing you tomorrow. >> >> Yours, >> David >> >> >> From: [email protected] [mailto: >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Margaret Leinen >> Sent: March 21, 2010 1:08 PM >> To: Ken Caldeira; geoengineering >> Subject: Re: [geo] Joe Romm post and comment on attending the Asilomar >> meeting >> >> Some have speculated to this group about my motivation and that of the >> Climate Response Fund in sponsoring the upcoming Asilomar International >> Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies. >> >> Recently the Board of Directors of the Climate Response Fund (and I am a >> member of the Board) posted a statement explicitly stating that we will not >> fund climate intervention experiments now or in the future. The statement >> also addresses other concerns that have been raised in blogs. >> >> The statement is located at: >> >> http://*www.* >> climateresponsefund.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147&Itemid=87 >> >> Margaret Leinen >> -- >> Margaret Leinen, PhD. >> Climate Response Fund >> 211 N. Union Street >> Suite 100 >> Alexandria, VA 22314 >> P 202-415-6545 >> F 703-842-8031 >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> > From: Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> >> > Reply-To: Ken Caldeira <[email protected]> >> > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:38:58 -0700 >> > To: geoengineering <[email protected]> >> > Subject: [geo] Joe Romm post and comment on attending the Asilomar >> meeting >> > >> > http://* >> climateprogress.org/2010/03/18/exclusive-chief-sponsor-of-landmark-clim >> > >> ate-manipulation-conference-maintains-close-financial-ties-to-controversial-ge >> > o-engineering-company/ >> > >> > A part that quotes me: >> > >> > -- >> > >> > *I have learned that the Asilomar geoengineering meeting is expected to >> play >> > an important role in legitimizing and helping raise funds for Margaret >> > Leinen's Climate Response Fund.* >> > >> > *I have not seen any statement from Margaret Leinen or her Fund saying >> that >> > the Fund will not support geoengineering field tests nor have I seen a >> > statement saying that the Fund would not directly or indirectly transfer >> > resources to for-profit companies like Climos.* >> > >> > *I am not comfortable with the the idea that a meeting set up to create >> > guidelines governing geoengineering field tests might be used to help >> raise >> > funds for geoengineering field tests, without the informed consent of >> > meeting participants. I am also concerned with possible conflicts of >> > interest related to the profit motive.* >> > >> > *Guidelines governing such tests should be developed as a product of an >> > ongoing process involving established professional societies and >> > organizations, established major non-profit institutions, >> intergovernmental >> > institutions, or others who do not have an apparent stake in specific >> > outcomes.* >> > >> > *Margaret Leinen can obviate my concerns by stating clearly (1) that >> the >> > Fund will not support geoengineering field tests and (2) that the Fund >> > would not directly or indirectly transfer resources to for-profit >> > geoengineering companies like Climos (or other for-profit companies with >> > significant financial participation by members of Margaret Leinen's >> family). >> > * >> > >> > *Without such statements, I cannot be confident that I am not being used >> > without my consent for purposes of which I do not approve. Thus, I >> cannot >> > attend the meeting.* >> > --- >> > >> > I would like to point out that the Scientific Organizing Committee for >> the >> > Asilomar meeting is a stellar collection of people whose integrity is >> beyond >> > reproach. I have no issue with the Scientific Organizing Committee. I >> simply >> > fear that they too are being used to advance the goals of Margaret >> Leinen >> > and her Fund. >> > >> > I have no fundamental problem with what is expected to occur within the >> > meeting proper. My problem lies with the apparent attempt of Margaret >> Leinen >> > and her Fund to use the credibility of the attendees and organizers of >> this >> > meeting to legitimize her Climate Response Fund and help raise money for >> > poorly defined purposes. >> > >> > --- >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > Ken >> > >> > ___________________________________________________ >> > Ken Caldeira >> > >> > Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology >> > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA >> > >> > [email protected] >> > http://*dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab >> > +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 >> > >> > -- >> > 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]<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]<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]<geoengineering%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at http://* >> groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. >> >> >> > > > -- > Jane C. S. Long > Fellow, Center for Global Strategic Research > and > Principal Associate Director at Large > Livermore National Laboratory > 925 422 0315 > 775 772 2250 primary cell > 510 610 0502 iphone > -- 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.
