IMO NEWS
•
SUMMER 2019
FEATURE
Precautionary approach over marine geoengineering solutions for climate change
A
dding iron or other nutrients into the oceans to enhance natural processes to draw carbon from the atmosphere and creating foams which float on the surface of the sea to reflect sunlight back into the atmosphere are among a wide range of geoengineering practices which have been put forward as potential tools for countering climate change. But, in a new report, marine and social scientists are urging a precautionary approach towards these techniques which involve deliberate large-scale manipulation of the environment. The report, published by the Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP), a body that advises the United Nations system on the scientific aspects of marine environmental protection, says that a coordinated framework for proposing and assessing marine geoengineering activities should be developed. “It is essential that the process of evidence-based assessment takes place in parallel with ongoing efforts to devise research governance structures, since both are inextricably linked in the marine geoengineering debate and the development of policy,” the report says. The High level review of a wide range of proposed marine geoengineering techniques is the first to comprehensively examine the many proposed ways to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or boost the reflection of incoming solar radiation to space (known as “albedo modification”) – or, in some cases, both. Co-editor Dr Philip Boyd, Professor of Marine Biogeochemistry www.imo.org
at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania in Hobart, Australia, said the report marks an important step in identifying marine geoengineering approaches and highlighting issues that policy makers, regulators and governments will need to consider. “The vast area, immense volume and potential large capacity for storing carbon dioxide of the world’s oceans mean that many approaches for marine geoengineering have been proposed. This report highlights the need for sound scientific evidence for each approach that may be considered by policy makers and regulators. There are legal, socio-economic, and geo-political considerations that will need to be taken into account,” said Dr Boyd. The report catalogues 27 approaches, mainly focussed on marine geoengineering but also on fisheries’ enhancement and integrated marine trophic aquaculture. It examines eight illustrative examples in detail. One of these, ocean iron fertilization, has already been addressed by the London Protocol and Convention, the treaties which regulate the dumping of wastes at sea – under which it is prohibited, except for legitimate scientific research. Parties to the London Protocol and Convention have adopted an “Assessment Framework for Scientific Research Involving Ocean Fertilization” (Resolution LC-LP.2(2010)), which guides Parties on how to assess proposals for ocean fertilization research and provides detailed steps for completing an environmental assessment, including risk management and monitoring.
25
