Background
In recent years, there has been growing interest in ocean intervention techniques (known previously as marine geoengineering), particularly to mitigate the deleterious effects of climate change. However, concerns have been raised about widespread marine environmental impacts of such interventions. Thus, WG 41 was created to better understand these proposed ocean interventions, initially from bothscientific and socio-economic perspectives.
Workshops and report
WG 41 met in May 2016 at IMO in London and in April 2017 at WMO in Geneva to review currently proposed ocean intervention techniques. They then worked intersessionally to prepare a report of their deliberations. It was published in 2019 as GESAMP Reports and Studies 98, “High level review of a wide range of proposed marine geoengineering techniques”.
Please find WG 40’s Phase 2 revised Terms of Reference on page 122 of this report.
Main findings
This initial report was the first dedicated assessment of a wide range of proposed ocean intervention techniques – with their potential variants – for climate mitigation. The review focused on the efficacy, practicality, side-effects, knowledge gaps, verification, and potential environmental socio-economic impacts of 27 interventions.
The information underpinning each approach varied widely from sufficient to insufficient to permit thorough scientific assessment.
WG 41 concluded that none of the 27 interventions reviewed had adequate levels of information (both in the permanent public record and/or as peer-reviewed documents), and therefore, robust scientific assessment was impossible for all techniques. Much less an assessment that could be readily compared with other climate intervention approaches.
Ultimately, available information on many of the examined interventions was viewed as insufficient for evidence-based policy decision making. However, it was possible to evaluate 8 ocean intervention approaches, primarily focused on Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) techniques, and Solar Radiation Modification (SRM).
Due to the limited information, WG 41 suggests that a sequence of developments (from concept development through to pilot studies, modelling and further studies) will help fill the knowledge gaps and provide comprehensive enough information to make an informed scientific evaluation.
Recommendations for future work
· Firstly, further work is required to address more fully the 2nd Term of Reference. Particularly, to comprehensively assess the potential environmental and socio-economic impacts that interventions may have on the marine environment.
· Secondly, to foster the development of a holistic approach to intervention assessment. Assessments should take into account social, political, economic, ecological, ethical and other societal dimensions (see National Research Council, (2015) Climate Intervention - Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration). This will require new members to be added to WG 41 to provide expertise and analysis of major gaps in a wider range of societal issues and geopolitics.
A multi-faceted approach can apply the lessons learned from other large-scale environmental issues, such as the international efforts to combat the ‘ozone hole’ caused by human activity. A holistic approach can also be informed by current debates around other new technologies with wider societal implications, such as genetically modified food, artificial intelligence, and nanotechnology.
WG 41 recommends developing a holistic framework for assessment.
· Thirdly, to also develop a flow chart and questionnaire with associated guidance to elicit relevant information from proposers of new ocean interventions. This will help to establish a preliminary assessment (including constructive feedback) of their technique.
Design of this flow chart and questionnaire should centre on WG 41’s views of what fundamental knowledge is required to guide the London Protocol’s “Guidance for Consideration of Marine Geoengineering Activities” (IMO, 2015). Questions should also align with the knowledge relevant for underpinning effective policy to govern these activities.
These dual tools, with associated guidance from WG 41, could provide a recommended (non-binding) procedure for the consideration of interventions prior to activating the LP guidance referred to above (IMO, 2015).
This proactive, consultative approach would also be useful for national authorities and other institutions considering ocean intervention proposals.
Policy
WG 41 agreed that it is not possible to provide solid policy recommendations beyond providing guidelines as to how to proceed.