|
Technologies to keep Earth cool could one day provide a radical fixfor climate change and, in a world struggling to control itsgreenhouse-gas emissions, could also prove highly lucrative forinventors. But should individual researchers, or companies, be allowed to ownthe intellectual property (IP) behind these world-changingtechniques? The issue was thrust into the spotlight last week aftera controversial geoengineering field trial was cancelled amidconcerns about a patent application by some of those involved inthe project, as first reported by Nature 1 . The 1.6-million (US$2.5-million) Stratospheric ParticleInjection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project was funded by theUK government to investigate whether spurting reflective aerosolsinto the stratosphere could help to bounce some of the Sun swarming rays back into space. As part of this project, SPICE hadplanned to test a possible delivery system: pumping water up a1-kilometre-long hose to a balloon, where it would be sprayed intothe sky. The project had already sparked protests from environmentalistswary of geoengineering 2 . But a potentially significant conflict of interest over apatent application for SPICE s technology, which some team membersonly recently became aware of, was a decisive factor in thecancellation, says project leader Matthew Watson, an Earthscientist at the University of Bristol, UK. The patent wassubmitted by Peter Davidson, a consultant based on the Isle of Manwho was an adviser at the workshop that gave rise to SPICE, andHugh Hunt, an engineer at the University of Cambridge, UK, who isone of the SPICE project investigators. UK funding bodies require anyone assessing or applying for grantsto declare relevant potential conflicts of interest. Davidson andHunt say that they were clear about their patent application beforeSPICE was awarded funding, and there is no suggestion that theyacted inappropriately. But at least one of the funding councils isnow investigating the circumstances surrounding the SPICE grant,and the patent in question, says Watson. Hunt blames a culture clash for the confusion. It is completelynormal for engineering projects to be protected by IP, he says. The issue here is that in climate science there is mistrust ofIP, and I understand that now. He says he does not expect to earnany money from the patent. SPICE s climate modelling and other technology development workwill continue, but the incident is another blow for a field alreadytroubled by concerns over governance. In 2010, researchers andpolicy-makers gathered at the Asilomar Conference Center nearMonterey, California, to agree a set of guiding principles for thefield an effort that largely failed 3 . The following year, a smaller group produced the OxfordPrinciples , stating that geoengineering should be regulated asa public good . The lead authors of those principles later warnedthat patenting of geoengineering technologies could have seriousnegative impacts , by creating a culture of secrecy that coulddelay much-needed developments. The e-commerce company in China offers quality products such as Automotive Diagnostic Software , China OBD Diagnostic Cable, and more. For more , please visit Truck Diagnostic Tool today!
Related Articles -
Automotive Diagnostic Software, China OBD Diagnostic Cable,
|
