Insights Into European Commission Views on Geoengineering

Comments made at the recent "International Governance of Climate Engineering" forum held in Brussels in June shed interesting light on official thinking about geoengineering within the European Commission.  One of the featured speakers at the event was Jacob Werksman,  who serves as Principal Advisor to the Commission's Directorate-General (DG) for Climate Action.  Werksman noted that the Commission itself has no explicit position on geoengineering, and cited two important reasons why.  First, the Commission does not want to undermine or destabilize ongoing negotiations within the UNFCCC by injecting such a charged issue into climate talks.  Second, the Commission is keen to emphasize non-climate benefits of mitigation actions such as improvements in public health and economic competitiveness, and does not want to jeopardize this message with potentially controversial statements or policies on geoengineering.

Werksman also offered his opinion on the preferred institutional setting for international deliberations on climate engineering.  In his view, the CBD has become excessively politicized due to the actions of certain NGOs and developing country members, and in the process has alienated key governments such as the US.  The UNFCCC, rather than the CBD, should coordinate discussions on geoengineering since it has a nearly global membership and a history of constructive institutional flexibility.  The extent to which Werksman's preference is shared by other staff at DG Climate Action is unknown.

EPA Advancing CCS Rule for New Power Plants

Following President Obama's high-profile climate speech last week, the EPA is quickly pushing forward with its 2012 draft New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) effectively requiring CCS for all new coal-fired power plants (for more, see Calls Intensify for More Global Action on CCS, 5/16/12).  A revised NSPS rule reflecting public feedback collected over a year-long comment period was originally due to be released in April, but publication was delayed in response to strong push back by the coal industry, which argued that the draft standard was too stringent.  Last week, however, Obama indicated that a revised standard would be released to the public no later than September 20, with final issuance planned for June 2014.  Obama also instructed EPA to present a draft performance standard for existing power plants by next June, with final release set for 2015.

To comply with this accelerated timeline, EPA reportedly delivered its revised NSPS draft to the White House on Monday, for further consideration by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and other agencies.  The contents of the revised draft are confidential and unknown, although subject to intense speculation regarding what concessions Big Coal may have managed to extract from the administration.  OMB will communicate its findings to EPA in the next several weeks.

IMechE Calls on UK Government to Support BECCS

The influential British Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) has called on the UK government to expand its support for BECCS technology.  In a recent policy statement, IMechE considered the potential for future land-use tensions between crops grown for electricity production and crops grown for food.  According to its analysis, realistic projections of land required for BECCS power generation in 2050 range between 0.18 gigahectares (Gha) and 0.27 Gha globally.  This is compared to 4.13-8.83 Gha required for food production, out of a total 10 Gha capable of supporting biomass at the global level.  Such deployment of BECCS would result in 2.9-4.4 Gt of carbon sequestered per year.

Given the modest land-use requirements for BECCS compared to food production, IMechE concludes that, "in the case of current global aspirations for electricity production from biomass, those [land-use] tensions may be small.  Furthermore, through the use of an integrated management approach to food and biomass-based electricity production, ... they may indeed be eliminated."  Further taking into account the significant carbon storage potential of BECCS, IMechE recommends the UK government increase domestic and international support for BECCS, including "pursuing the future inclusion of 'negative emissions' credits in international climate change mitigation agreements."

Documents Shed Additional Light on 2012 Canadian Government Meeting

Newly available documents, both marked "SECRET," offer additional information on the previously undisclosed high-level Canadian government meeting on geoengineering held last summer (see Senior Canadian Government Meeting Looked at Geoengineering, 6/25).  The first document, an internal Natural Resources Canada memo written in preparation for the July 5 meeting, indicates that geoengineering was the primary focus of the meeting, and that invitees consisted of officials at the deputy minister level.  The memo is heavily redacted.

The second document is a slide deck that evidently served as Environment Canada's main presentation at the gathering.  Titled "Geoengineering: Science and Governance," the deck provides a standard overview of geoengineering and its conventional breakdown into CDR and SRM methods.  Interestingly, the concluding section, "Looking ahead," is completely redacted from the slide presentation.

Senior Canadian Government Meeting Looked at Geoengineering

The Ottawa Citizen is reporting that a "secret" Canadian government meeting on worst-case climate scenarios took place last summer, and examined geoengineering as one potential response.  The meeting was convened by the former deputy minister of Environment Canada, Paul Boothe, and was closed to the public.  It is unclear who attended the meeting, but invitees included representatives from the Department of National Defence, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service, Natural Resources Canada, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.  Prime Minister Stephen Harper's national security advisor declined to attend.

The newspaper obtained a presentation made by Environment Canada under Canada's freedom of information law.  In its presentation, the department stated that, "To avoid surpassing it [the 2 C warming target], global CO2 emissions must level off immediately, and decline to negative values before end of century (implying net CO2 extraction from atmosphere), or other means of moderating warming would be needed."  More specific details of the discussions on geoengineering are unavailable.  The inclusion of geoengineering on the meeting agenda was apparently spurred by a March 2012 email exchange between Boothe and Harvard professor David Keith.  It should be noted that this meeting occurred prior to last fall's disclosures regarding rogue OIF experiments off the coast of Haida Gwaii.

June Haida OIF Test Postponed Indefinitely

Hot off the heels of removing Russ George as CEO (see Haida Boot Russ George, 5/25), the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation (HSRC), controlled by the Village of Old Massett, has cancelled a second OIF field test scheduled for June.  "I can't say if it will be done again ever.  I won't know until we get the results of the strategic review," said chief councillor Ken Rea, referring to a corporate review being conducted in the aftermath of George's abrupt termination.  For his part, George is contesting his removal as a director of HSRC, claiming that his private company Ocean Pastures owns 48% of HSRC shares and is therefore entitled to two of the four board seats.  According to George, "I shall remain a director of the HSRC and look forward to moving the business plan of the company forward."  George is not, however, disputing his removal as CEO.

Haida Boot Russ George

Days after publishing a curious opinion piece/sales pitch about the supposed success of OIF "ecoengineering" off Haida Gwaii, Russ George has been fired as CEO of the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation (HSRC).  The board of directors removed George as a director, terminated his employment, and named current president John Disney as interim CEO.  Disney has been a strong backer of the project all along, but evidently George's antics proved too much for him and other leaders of the Haida Village of Old Massett, which controls the company.  As Disney put it,  "While we are confident in the technology, process and buy-in are key.  That's why our emphasis is putting the right leadership and business plan in place."