Hi Folks, The IMBECS Protocol <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m9VXozADC0IIE6mYx5NsnJLrUvF_fWJN_GyigCzDLn0/edit> has been selected as a finalist within the MIT Climate CoLab <http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300401/planId/1306813> contest which is focused upon; *"... new and innovative actions or internal policies that U.S. federal agencies can implement to mitigate climate change."*. The Judges' comment upon selection: "*Excellent proposal that presents an actionable technology solution. Congratulations!*".
Below is the core USG Agency related aspects of the proposal. Under the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP <http://www.globalchange.gov/>) the Administration has an ability to bring a strong focus to carbon negative bioenergy and carbon sequestration (BECCS <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bio-energy_with_carbon_capture_and_storage>) in general and MBECS in particular. The IPCC (WG3) <http://www.ipcc-wg3.de/> has recently recognized BECCS as a priority global warming mitigation method. The MBECS technology avoids many of the limiting factors found within terestrial BECCS and is scalable to global needs within a relative and environmentally appropriate short time frame (<20yrs). With 'fast track' support from the Executive Branch, significant real world achievements in creating a new energy paradigm, can be realized within a few years. Below is a list of specific action requests concerning how the USG can initiate the IMBECS Protocol. • White House: A) Approve the IMBECS Foundations’ 501 (c) (3) mission statement (Private Operating Foundation <http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/irm_07-026-006.html>). This action will open up non-USG (philanthropic/corporate donation) co-funding for development and initial operations of the IMBECS Protocol. B) Fast track the IMBECS development through the Biofuel Interagency Working Group <http://www.biomassboard.gov/related_information/biofuels_interagency_working_group.html>, as well as, within the USGCRP <http://www.globalchange.gov/>. This action will initiate the broadest possible coordination of STEM related development focus for the IMBECS related technology. C) Direct the Department of State (Office of the Special Envoy for Climate Change) to support the IMBECS Protocol within the framework of the UNFCCC Green Climate Fund <http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/green_climate_fund/items/5869.php> . D) Direct the DoD to provide funding support for an MBECS pilot program ($30M) through the Operational Energy Plans and Programs <http://energy.defense.gov/> per DoD Energy Policy <http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/418001_2014.pdf>. E) Direct the DoE to develop a common MBECS (marine based carbon negative biofuel) focused funding/R&D program within the US Climate Change Technology Program <http://www.climatetechnology.gov/stratplan/final/CCTP-StratPlan-Sep-2006.pdf> (please see: Strategic Plan, Chapter 3.5 “CCTP Goals for Advanced Technology” for the rationale of advancing new biomass production means and methods.) . The above is within the established framework(s) which the Executive Branch has established in relationship to biofuel/climate change mitigation and does not rely upon Congressional action. The popular voting period for the MIT CoLab competition is now open and I would like to encourage the members of this list to support the 'Team Marine BECCS' proposal for the following reasons: *Reason 1) At the STEM level:* The basic technology platform, described within the IMBECS Protocol Draft <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m9VXozADC0IIE6mYx5NsnJLrUvF_fWJN_GyigCzDLn0/edit> document (Section 7), allows for the adaptation of multiple technologies which have been championed within this forum. In that, the MBECS cultivation platforms can accommodate: a) MCB <http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~robwood/papers/geoengineering/final_jl_philtv17101104.pdf> b) AWL <http://climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/20/phaseId/204/planId/1304119> c) Biochar <http://2012.biochar.us.com/profile/79/ronal-w-larson> d) Olivine <http://www.geo.uu.nl/Research/Geochemistry/O_Schuiling.html> e) Ocean Foresters <http://oceanforesters.org/> f) Salter Sinks <https://www.google.com/search?q=salter+sinks&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=667&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=S6QYVKCpBufniwKAtYFI&ved=0CB0QsAQ> g) Atmocean <https://atmocean.wordpress.com/> The above list is not exhaustive. *Reason 2) At the policy level:* The IMBECS Protocol provides, through the IMBECS Foundation, a *de facto* intergovernmental level co-ordination of actions and, most importantly, synthesis of the language within the various related treaties as they relate to marine centric large scale climate change mitigation efforts. Many of the relevant treaties have, roughly speaking, the same intent (i.e. per UNFCCC) yet offer different language. The IMBECS Foundation would attempt to reflect, to the highest degree possible, the various positions and provide continuity/clarity for the broadest possible stakeholder population. *Reason 3) At the financial level:* Through creating the non-profit IMBECS Foundation as the primary responsible actor, the following is made possible: *a)* Philanthropic and Corporate donations are allowed thus attracting co-funding support for the initial development/deployment work (in conjunction with the relevant USG agencies). The initial budget target is $30M for prototype/proof of concept level work which can provide funding for the technologies listed in 'Reason 1' listed above as well as the basic MBECS technology. *b)* The issue of overall ethical responsibility (i.e. legitimacy) is addressed as best as it can be through having a non-profit be the ultimate responsible party. Through this, the concerns of many critics over the issue of 'profits' directing the actions of large scale climate change mitigation projects is largely negated. Further, the use of the Social Benefit Corporation <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_corporation> legal construct, for contracting 'IMBECS (production) Franchise' actors, allows for both ethical (environmental) and profit motivations. *c)* The IMBECS Foundation would be committed to developing, purchasing and or licensing IP within the '*Global Scale Climate Change Mitigation Technology*' field of intellectual art and making those technologies available to the broadest spectrum of end users under well regulated contractual agreements (i.e. IMBECS Production Franchises). The IMBECS Protocol is rich with complexity, synergy and, yes, room for some refinement and the above 3 primary reasons for voting for the IMBECS Protocol are not exhaustive. The mission statement of the IMBECS Foundation provides the best overall synopsis of the goals of the IMBECS Protocol. *"The IMBECS Foundation mission is to support international cooperation in establishing carbon negative energy independence for all nations through providing scientific, technical and intergovernmental treaty support to all parties including the relevant for-profit industrial sector(s). This support would include the purchasing/leasing of relevant intellectual property rights and making such rights widely available through a social benefit for-profit corporation franchise structure. Further, it is also the mission of the foundation to establish a World Heritage Natural Resource Reserve of fossil fuels through trading carbon negative bio-fuels for fossil fuels as a form of inter-generational environmental protection.".* The votes of the members of this list for the Team Marine BECCS proposal, within the MIT Climate CoLab venue, would be an important and positive signal to many observers of the GE debate. Best regards, Michael -- 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/d/optout.
