Abstract
Planned small scale ocean experiments designed to learn the possibilities and limitations of direct ocean storage of CO2 have recently met with sufficient opposition to be stopped at the highest political level in Norway. In this case, sentiments and appeals to irrational feelings were decisive. Obligations through previous permits and commitments, freedom of research, and hard scientific facts were less important. The production of scientific knowledge was interrupted and may be set back for a long time because scientists and their institutions will prefer to work on other problems with less interference and disturbances. Some environmental organizations see the value and importance of science as a basis for decision-making. Global environmental problems facing mankind are complicated and interconnected. It is suggested that there is a need for a clean separation between the production of knowledge by scientists and the use of the knowledge in informed decisions by the public through democratically elected politicians and intergovernmental mechanisms. A higher public respect for unbiased and “value-free” natural science and improved communication between scientists and stakeholders is required. It is proposed that existing mechanisms and organizations may be used to promote consensus building and guide environmental impact assessments in the case of ocean sequestration.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call