If the primary purpose is sewage placement, I believe you're correct under London convention.
However, it may not be ok under local law. A On 6 Feb 2014 09:39, <[email protected]> wrote: > Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2 > ------------------------------ > *From: * [email protected] > *Date: *Thu, 6 Feb 2014 09:35:39 +0000 > *To: *<[email protected]> > *ReplyTo: * [email protected] > *Subject: *Re: [geo] Company behind ocean fertilization experiment loses > court bid to block charges - CNTVNA > > I asked Greenpeace to look at the dumping of co2 into the ocean (via air) > at the London Convention, but i am not sure it got anywhere. Does anyone > work on the LC? > > We're also dumping reportedly 90percent of the heat from global warming > into the ocean. > > It strikes me that if ocean fertilisation were done with raw sewage it may > no longer be illegal :-( > > Best wishes, > Emily. > Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2 > ------------------------------ > *From: * Greg Rau <[email protected]> > *Sender: * [email protected] > *Date: *Wed, 5 Feb 2014 21:01:26 -0800 (PST) > *To: *geoengineering<[email protected]> > *ReplyTo: * [email protected] > *Subject: *Re: [geo] Company behind ocean fertilization experiment loses > court bid to block charges - CNTVNA > > From below: "Environment Canada said there was [a violation of Canadian > law], and it applies even if the dumping takes place outside Canadian > territorial waters. "(It) appeared to have been undertaken, at least in > part, with an eye to profit or financial gain and, in particular, the > generation and sale of carbon credits," [B.C. Supreme Court Justice Peter] > Voith wrote." > > So we're dumping, via our emissions to air, some 8 GT of CO2 into the > ocean/yr for a financial gain (by some estimates) of $2400/tonne (x 8 GT = > $19T), with impunity. Where's justice when you need it? > > Greg > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> > *To:* geoengineering <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 5, 2014 7:43 PM > *Subject:* [geo] Company behind ocean fertilization experiment loses > court bid to block charges - CNTVNA > > http://www.cntvna.com/News/2014-02/04/cms133257article.shtml > CANADA - The organization behind a controversial ocean fertilization > experiment off the coast of British Columbia faces potentially 10 charges > for environmental violations after losing a court bid that would have > brought an end to the investigation. The Haida Salmon Restoration Corp. > caused waves around the world in July 2012 when it dumped more than 100 > metric tonnes of iron into the ocean near Haida Gwaii, hoping it would > increase salmon returns and produce profits from carbon capture. The > practice is unproven. International scientists condemned the unsanctioned > experiment at a United Nations meeting and the federal environment minister > announced an investigation into what he called "rogue science." According > to court documents, last March an Environment Canada investigator obtained > three search warrants for the corporation's offices, the offices of F.A.S. > Seafood Producers and the vessel "Ocean Pearl," from which the iron was > dumped. The corporation, in turn, filed an application with B.C. Supreme > Court arguing its activities were not illegal and asked the judge to either > set aside the search warrants or declare the alleged offences unenforceable > under Canadian law. It also sought an injunction preventing the > investigator from taking any further steps on the matter. B.C. Supreme > Court Justice Peter Voith dismissed the application, saying the issues in > the case are best dealt with all at once at trial. "(Environment Canada) > continues to investigate the offences in question and it has yet to submit > a report to Crown counsel for charge approval," Voith wrote in a ruling > recently posted on the court website. Neither Environment Canada nor Haida > Salmon Restoration responded to requests for comment. The experiment > involved dumping iron dust, iron sulfate fertilizer and iron oxide over an > area of about one square kilometre, 300 kilometres west of Haida > Gwaii. Supporters believe the iron causes a phytoplankton bloom, which acts > as a natural sponge for carbon from the atmosphere. The proponents also > hoped the plankton would feed young salmon, bolstering the number that > would return to spawn in B.C.'s freshwater rivers and creeks. The > information to obtain the search warrants said there were several exchanges > between them and Environment Canada prior to the dumping. "In these > exchanges Environment Canada representatives explained their legal position > and requirements and were told by the parties identified above that (the > Canadian Environmental Protection Act) did not, for various reasons, > pertain and that the parties were satisfied, based on their own inquiries, > that their activities were legal," the judge wrote. Canada is a signatory > to several voluntary and mandatory international moratoriums on ocean > dumping and specifically on iron fertilization. A regulatory regime to > address exactly the kind of incident that took place off Haida Gwaii is > currently being negotiated by UN member nations. Lawyers for the Haida > Salmon Restoration argued that despite the intention of any international > protocols or negotiations there was no violation of Canadian > law. Environment Canada said there was, and it applies even if the dumping > takes place outside Canadian territorial waters. "(It) appeared to have > been undertaken, at least in part, with an eye to profit or financial gain > and, in particular, the generation and sale of carbon credits," Voith > wrote.Editor:Cherry | Source: The Canadian Press > -- > 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. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- > 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. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > 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. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
