An Environment Canada (EC) document entitled Geoengineering: Science and Governance, dated July 5, 2012, admits that there is ‘risk and uncertainty’ pertaining to geoengineering, and that there is a need for governance of these activities, effectively acknowledging that such governance is not already in place in Canada.
The EC document defines geoengineering as ‘the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s climate system in order to moderate global warming’.
Geoengineering: Science and Governance refers to the ‘Oxford principle’ in its conclusions:
‘The “Oxford principle” (2012) states that geo-engineering should be regulated as a public good; there should be public participation in decision-making; research should be disclosed and results published openly; impacts should be assessed independently; and decisions to deploy the technologies should be made within a robust governance framework’.
Under the heading “Geoengineering Governance” we find tacit admission by EC that the state of scientific knowledge on geoengineering is deficient:
‘Some treaties have made statements and resolutions to curtail geoengineering until the state of knowledge increases and global governance is put in place.
‘UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) – In 2010, no geoengineering should take place that may affect biodiversity until there is an adequate scientific basis.
‘Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD) (1978) – bans environmental modification for hostile purposes. Signed by all major countries with the exception of China and Israel.’
The heavily redacted document is marked ‘declassified’, leading this writer to believe that the redacted sections pertain to references made to atmospheric and stratospheric geoengineering already ongoing in Canada.
This Scribd. document, showing redacted sections blocked out, is linked in the comments section of this post.
– Gregory Paul Michael Hartnell, Editor