Those who fry the planet and geoengineering
Those who fry the planet and geoengineering
Silvia Ribeiro*
Recent Content Related to Climate & Geoengineering
Big Bad Fix
The Case Against Climate Geoengineering
ETC Group, BiofuelWatch and Heinrich Boell Foundation present a comprehensive argument against geoengineering in this report.
Related Fora:
Who Will Feed Us?
The Peasant Food Web vs. the Industrial Food Chain
(Read the news release about the report launch.)
Who Will Feed Us, now in its third edition, compares the industrial food system with peasant farming. Industrial farming gets all the attention (and most of the land). It accounts for more than 80% of the fossil fuel emissions and uses over 70% of the water supply used in agriculture, but it actually produces only about 30% of the world's food.
Related Fora:
Riding the Geostorm
A briefing from civil society on Geoengineering Governance
Is it possible to govern Geoengineering?
When speaking about geoengineering governance, a sensible first question is whether geoengineering, with its inherently high risks, unequal impacts, long term effects and broad geopolitical, military, environmental and global justice implications, is even possible to “govern.”
A civil society briefing on Geoengineering
Climate change, smoke and mirrors
For the past decade, a small but growing group of governments and scientists, the majority from the most powerful and most climate-polluting countries in the world, has been pushing for political consideration of geoengineering, the deliberate large-scale technological manipulation of the climate.
This briefing, prepared by ETC Group and Heinrich Böll Foundation in May 2017, gives an overview of what geoengineering is and why it is dangerous, as well as up-to-date information on proposed geoengineering technologies and governance.
Civil society: “Oil companies should not author IPCC report”
108 organizations urged IPCC to review flagrant conflict of interest of allowing two oil company employees to co-author a crucial report on global warming
12 May 2017
On 27 April 2017, 108 civil society organizations signed a letter requesting the IPCC to reconsider its list of authors for the upcoming Special Report on keeping global warming below 1.5°C. Two senior employees from major oil companies were selected among the authors for the Report, which the letter considers a major hurdle to make a fair report, and a violation of the IPCC's conflict of interest policy.
Trump Administration – A Geoengineering Administration?
Geoengineer David Keith first made his intention to launch a geoengineering trial public back in 2012 – saying then that it would take place “within a year” and naming Fort Sumner in New Mexico as the likely location.[1] All indications were that he was ready to move forward, but was first waiting to get a signal of public support from the US government, ideally in the form of funding. Tellingly, the experiment never came.
Why SRM experiments are a bad idea
Solar Radiation Management (SRM) describes a set of geoengineering techniques that aim to counter human-made climate change by artificially increasing the reflection of heat from sunlight (solar radiation) back into space. Some advocates have started using the term “solar geoengineering” – but these techniques are not related to solar power production.
Trump Administration Inflates Geoengineers’ Balloon
Harvard scientists in Washington talk up stratospheric geoengineering experiments that would violate UN decision
Washington, DC – The Trump administration’s repudiation of the UN’s 2015 Paris agreement on climate change and its rollback of the EPA and other US agencies on monitoring and mitigating global warming has created an unexpected opportunity for a rogue group of climate researchers to seek support for an alternative climate change strategy.
UN Convention still says “No” to manipulating the climate
UN Convention on Biological Diversity reaffirms its moratorium on climate-related geoengineering
CANCUN, MEXICO – The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which gathered at its 13th Conference of the Parties (COP 13) in Mexico from December 4-17, decided to reaffirm its landmark moratorium on climate-related geoengineering that it first agreed to in 2010.
Geoengineering at COP 13 - Convention on Biological Diversity
Briefing for Government Delegates
Key points:
• CBD Decision X/33, 8 (w) on geoengineering remains valid and should be affirmed and strengthened.
• The potential impacts of geoengineering on biodiversity have been scarcely studied. Studies and policy recommendations on the impacts on biodiversity and associated livelihoods caused by any geoengineering intervention are, and should remain, under the mandate of CBD and its bodies.
• New research papers continue to demonstrate high risks and uncertainties associated with the full range of geoengineering proposals.
ETC Group Activities at World Social Forum 2016!
Where to find us and what we'll be up to at the World Social Forum in Montreal, QC, from August 9-14, 2016.
Date:
Tuesday, August 9, 2016 (All day) to Sunday, August 14, 2016 (All day)
Webinar: Outsmarting Nature?
Available to watch on Synbiowatch.org
What’s the role of synthetic biology in our food system and how does it relate to “climate-smart” agriculture? What are the costs and risks?
Available to watch at http://www.synbiowatch.org/2016/07/outsmarting-nature-webinar/
No to 1.5°C with geoengineering!
Sign-on letter
Paris, 11 December 2015
Seemingly out of the blue (or rather, out of the black smog of the UNFCCC process), some of the largest historical culprits for climate change, countries including the United States, Canada and the European Union, have decided to back an "ambitious goal" of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C. To achieve this, radical emissions cuts would be needed from now, but in the case of these countries, that's not their real intention.
Report Release: Outsmarting Nature?
New Report Questions Risky Synthetic Biology Developments Promoted Under “Climate-Smart” Guise
Paris, 27th November 2015 – Some of the world’s largest agro-industrial corporations will be flying the flag for ‘climate-smart agriculture’ at the upcoming Climate Summit. They will claim that hi-tech crops and intensive industrial agriculture are needed to rescue farmers (and the hungry) from a warming world – a claim widely dismissed by peasant movements and civil society groups.
Outsmarting Nature?
Synthetic Biology and Climate Smart Agriculture
Many of the world's largest agro-industrial corporations are pushing forward the poorly-defined idea of "Climate-Smart Agriculture"(CSA) to re-market industrial agriculture as 'climate-ready'. This report uncovers how some advocates of CSA are embracing the extreme genetic engineering tools of synthetic biology ("Syn Bio") to develop a set of false solutions to the climate crisis.
The 20-page report includes:
- An overview of the Players lining up behind the “Climate-Smart” brand and the Global Alliance for Climate Smart Agriculture (GACSA).
Report Release: Extreme Biotech meets Extreme Energy
New report exposes biotech’s big bet to prop up fossil fuels + International video release.
Paris, 24th November 2015 - At the upcoming Climate summit in Paris, some governments and much of civil society will be pushing for an urgent transition away from the carbon-rich fossil fuels responsible for climate chaos. However, one hi-tech sector, the multi-billion dollar Synthetic Biology industry, is now actively tying its future to the very oil, coal and gas extraction it once claimed to be able to displace. That’s the conclusion of a new report released jointly today from the ETC Group and Heinrich Böll Foundation. Titled “Extreme Biotech meets Extreme Energy”, the report predicts that as the extreme biotech industry and the extreme extraction industry move towards deeper collaboration, the biosafety risks and climate threats emanating from them will become ever more entangled.
Extreme Biotech meets Extreme Energy
an ETC Group and Heinrich Böll Stiftung Report
As the synthetic biology industry and the extreme extraction industry move towards deeper collaboration, the climate and biosafety risks and threats from both will become more entangled.
Related Fora:
Chegou a hora de içar a bandeira branca para o fracasso de um remendo tecnológico?
O escândalo da Volkswagen é um aviso que os Grandes dos Combustíveis Fósseis não são confiáveis para controlar as emissões de Gases do Efeito Estufa
Time to Wave the White Flag for a Failed Techno-Fix?
The Volkswagen scandal is a warning that the Fossil Majors can’t be trusted to control GHG emissions
Try though they might, Volkswagen can’t seem to get off the air those three little old ladies in their television commercials waving a white scarf in front of a Volkswagen diesel exhaust pipe. (See cartoon.) Volkswagen’s emission scandal is just a prelude to a much bigger emissions sleight of hand that will be rolled out in Paris this December at the Climate Change Summit.
Pages
