I suspect the court case in Canada will "open a can of worms".  Consider
the (former) prolonged practice of NYC ocean dumbing of garbage,
multiple coastal cities' ocean outfall disposal of partially-treated
sewage, international shipping's habit of ocean disposal of bilge water,
offshore rigs' discharge of drilling fluids, massive annual ocean
discharge of high delta T cooling waters from power plants, etc.  An
FDEP emergency order to prevent failure of the Piney Pint Phosphate
strip-mine tailing pond resulted in this action [DEP03-0431 CASE NO.
03-0839] with GIS ship tracks and Gulf WQ data:

"Ocean Dispersion of Double-Stage Treated Water. On April 9, 2003, the
Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) issued an emergency permit to allow dispersion
of treated

water from the PPP stack system into the deep waters of the Gulf of
Mexico. The

permit authorizes the dispersion of up to 534.7 million gallons of
double-stage lime

treated and aerated process water. Dispersion of the treated water via
the barge New

York started on July 20, 2003. A second vessel, the Captain H. A.
Downing, was added

as of October 26, 2003 to supplement the barge New York in order to
optimize the rate

of ocean dispersion under the EPA emergency permit. As of November 17,
2003, a

total of 208 million gallons of treated water have been barged and
dispersed into waters

of the Gulf of Mexico. The EPA emergency permit is scheduled to expire
on

November 30, 2003. A request to extend the permit (to allow dispersion
of the volumes

of treated water previously authorized) was recently denied by EPA."

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg Rau
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 12:01 AM
To: geoengineering
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.

Reply via email to