This proposal would not ban OIF, rather it would create a procedural 
mechanism for regulating other types of geoengineering under the London 
Convention/London Protocol, while making current voluntary restrictions on 
OIF (i.e., no commercial activities) legally binding.  Here's a brief 
summary from my blog that lays out the essentials as I understand them.

Josh Horton  (http://geoengineeringpolitics.blogspot.com/)

New London Protocol Proposal to Regulate Marine Geoengineering
Australia, Nigeria, and South Korea have jointly proposed 
amendments<http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/australia-seeks-to-limit-ocean-geoengineering-20130515-2jmkn.html>
 to 
the London Protocol (LP) that would formally extend the instrument's remit 
beyond ocean fertilization to include other possible forms of marine 
geoengineering (such as enhanced weathering or ocean liming).  The proposal 
defines "marine geoengineering" broadly as "deliberate intervention in the 
marine environment to manipulate natural processes, including to counteract 
anthropogenic climate change and/or its impacts, and that has the potential 
for widespread, long-lasting or severe effects."  A new annex to the 
Protocol would serve as a "positive list" specifying particular 
geoengineering techniques to be regulated under the LP; techniques not 
included on this list would remain subject to the regime's general 
prohibition on dumping of materials at sea.  The only activity listed in 
the proposed annex is ocean fertilization, which would continue to be 
permitted only in cases of "legitimate scientific research."  The proposal 
also includes a generic assessment framework (modeled on the existing 
Assessment Framework for ocean fertilization--see *LC/LP Agrees on Ocean 
Fertilization Assessment 
Framework<http://geoengineeringpolitics.blogspot.com/2010/10/lclp-agrees-on-ocean-fertilization.html>
*, 10/19/10) intended to serve as the basis for more specific frameworks 
used to arrive at permitting decisions for other geoengineering approaches 
added to the annex in the future.

In essence, this proposal establishes a procedural mechanism for regulating 
any geoengineering technique involving the introduction of materials to the 
sea, based on processes previously developed to address ocean 
fertilization.  Since the proposal takes the form of amendments to the 
London Protocol, if it is adopted, regulations covering ocean fertilization 
and other technologies would be legally binding rather than voluntary, as 
is currently the case with respect to operative resolutions on ocean 
fertilization.  Parties to the LC/LP will take up the proposal at a meeting 
this October.


On Friday, May 17, 2013 7:23:03 AM UTC-4, Wil Burns wrote:
>
>
> FYI, Australian move to ban OIF under the London Convention: 
> http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/australia-seeks-to-limit-ocean-geoengineering-20130515-2jmkn.html
> -- 
> Dr. Wil Burns, Associate Director
> Master of Science - Energy Policy & Climate Program 
> Johns Hopkins University
> 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
> Room 104J
> Washington, DC  20036
> 202.663.5976 (Office phone)
> 650.281.9126 (Mobile)
> [email protected] <javascript:>
>
> http://advanced.jhu.edu/academic/environmental/master-of-science-in-energy-policy-and-climate/index.html
>  
> SSRN site (selected publications): http://ssrn.com/author=240348
>
>  
> Skype ID: Wil.Burns
>
> Teaching Climate/Energy Law & Policy Blog: 
> http://www.teachingclimatelaw.org
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to