Dr Wingenter Can you please elaborate on the Fe you are referring too in your post -
> Stimulating the phytoplankton for either purpose would mean raising the Fe > concentration from ~ 0.2 nanmolar to a few nm. I am not sure the optimal > amount Fe has been determined yet. The type of Fe and the way in which Fe is delivered would have an impact the quantity to be used. If a superior solution is available you could get the desired result with lesser amount of Fe used. One member of this group said in a private email to me that our product does not contain enough Fe. The fact is that it is able to produce the required bloom of Diatom Algae with very little Fe, due to the use of nano technology. best regards Bhaskar www.kadambari.net On Nov 29, 12:36 pm, [email protected] wrote: > Dear Ken, > > We described a way to cool the SO region by iron fertilizing a few percent > of the SO. At the scale need for OIF to be effective for CO2 > sequestration, to much cooling would likely occur. > > Our calculation were done an a spread sheet and therefore do not include > feedbacks. The DOE is working on a more complete Earth System model but > it will be a quite a while before we can use that. > > Stimulating the phytoplankton for either purpose would mean raising the Fe > concentration from ~ 0.2 nanmolar to a few nm. I am not sure the optimal > amount Fe has been determined yet. > > Oliver > > > > > Oliver, > > > Repeating my earlier email in different words: > > > Do I understand correctly that your objection to ocean iron fertilization > > is > > that it is too effective at cooling the Earth via the DMS pathway to ever > > be > > of much use in cooling the Earth via the CO2 removal pathway? > > > Does your objection apply only to using ocean iron fertilization to cool > > the > > Earth via the CO2 removal pathway or does it extend to cooling the Earth > > via > > the DMS pathway? > > > Best, > > > Ken > > > ___________________________________________________ > > Ken Caldeira > > > Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology > > 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA > > > [email protected]; [email protected] > >http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/CIWDGE/labs/caldeiralab > > +1 650 704 7212; fax: +1 650 462 5968 > > > On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Oliver Wingenter <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Dear Group, > > >> Dan Whaley thought I should pass these paper along. Let me know if you > >> have a hard time getting any of the references. > > >> Sincerely, > > >> Oliver Wingenter > > >> Dan Whaley wrote: > >> > Oliver-- If you didn't mind, I would be inclined to repost these to > >> > the forum so that everyone can benefit-- w/ gracious acknowledgment of > >> > course. Pls let me know if this seems ok to you. > > >> > Dan > > >> > On 11/28/2009 3:21 PM, Oliver Wingenter wrote: > >> >> I don't think Kelly got all of the papers I sent. > > >> >> Oliver > > >> >> Oliver Wingenter wrote: > > >> >>> Oliver Wingenter wrote: > > >> >>>> Oliver Wingenter wrote: > >> >>>>> My pdfs did not attach. I will send you the pdfs tonight. > > >> >>>>> Dan Whaley wrote: > >> >>>>>> Oliver-- > > >> >>>>>> A private request, one more time. > > >> >>>>>> For both Kelly (cc'd here) and I. > >> >>>>>> \ > >> >>>>>> Could you, as an expert on the subject, pls foward the 2-5 papers > >> >>>>>> on DMS (yours or others) that you think are most relevant-- we > >> >>>>>> would both be quite thankful to you. > > >> >>>>>> She was the initiator of the original request to me this summer, > >> >>>>>> that I forwarded along-- so either way, you might send them along > >> >>>>>> to her. Thanks for your consideration. > > >> >>>>>> Cheers, > > >> >>>>>> Dan > > >> >>>>>> On 11/27/2009 7:58 PM, Oliver Wingenter wrote: > >> >>>>>>> Dear Dan, > > >> >>>>>>> The literature is quit rich in regards to DMS and albedo. I > >> >>>>>>> suggest you hire a student that has access to the literature and > >> >>>>>>> direct them to get the knowledge you need. > > >> >>>>>>> Sincerely, > > >> >>>>>>> Oliver Wingenter > > >> >>>>>>> PS. However, I can write that OIF will never worked based on a > >> >>>>>>> severe increased in albedo based on our research. As a > >> >>>>>>> scientist, or investment recruiter, I would think you would have > >> >>>>>>> wanted to know this in 2004 when we first alluded to this in our > >> >>>>>>> PNAS paper. > > >> >>>>>>> Dan Whaley wrote: > >> >>>>>>>> Great... so what seems to be the problem? > > >> >>>>>>>> Can you please attach your papers? > > >> >>>>>>>> D > > >> >>>>>>>> On 11/26/2009 8:44 AM, Oliver Wingenter wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>> Dear Dan, > > >> >>>>>>>>> It seems you have not read our Atmospheric Environment papers > >> >>>>>>>>> or our > >> >>>>>>>>> PNAS paper. We already are advocating enhancing iron on a > >> very > >> >>>>>>>>> limited basis (~ 2%) for cloud brightening. What we mean by > >> >>>>>>>>> this is, > >> >>>>>>>>> all around the Southern Ocean several strips a few km wide > >> >>>>>>>>> will be > >> >>>>>>>>> enhanced with a nanomolar of iron. > > >> >>>>>>>>> Sincerely, > > >> >>>>>>>>> Oliver Wingenter > > >> >>>>>>>>> Dan Whaley wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>> Oliver.... > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Really surprised by your comments, and by your unwillingness > >> >>>>>>>>>> to engage in detail. i asked for the paper that you feel > >> >>>>>>>>>> covers these points in detail. i also, again, would > >> >>>>>>>>>> respectfully ask that if you have papers on DMS that Kelly > >> >>>>>>>>>> and I should be aware of, that you provide them. I asked > >> >>>>>>>>>> about 6 months ago and, you said to wait... you were > >> >>>>>>>>>> rethinking some things. > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Do you feel the need to have a public contest about this? > >> >>>>>>>>>> can't we all get along? > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Also-- i have nowhere advocated for "Full scale fertilization > >> >>>>>>>>>> of the Southern Ocean". If you can locate this-- please > >> >>>>>>>>>> provide. I am advocating for research-- at somewhat larger > >> >>>>>>>>>> scales-- to get data. Do you oppose this? > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Dan > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 26, 9:30 am, Dan Whaley<[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>> What is it that I don't get? At the risk of repeating > >> myself: > > >> >>>>>>>>>> "The idea that any of these geoengineering techniques would > >> get > >> >>>>>>>>>> globally > >> >>>>>>>>>> deployed immediately seems impossible to imagine. We have > >> >>>>>>>>>> always > >> >>>>>>>>>> assumed that one would scale up gradually. Large, long time > >> >>>>>>>>>> series > >> >>>>>>>>>> research efforts in more and more places in the oceans, etc. > >> >>>>>>>>>> So--- > >> >>>>>>>>>> wouldn't you be able to measure or model any cooling effect > >> long > >> >>>>>>>>>> before it became 'abrupt and severe'. " > > >> >>>>>>>>>> If I simply follow your logic, then why do you need to go to > >> >>>>>>>>>> "full > >> >>>>>>>>>> scale" if there is substantial cooling at an intermediary > >> level? > > >> >>>>>>>>>> And, if you really feel like this is an effective way to > >> provide > >> >>>>>>>>>> cooling, then why aren't you advocating for more research > >> >>>>>>>>>> here instead > >> >>>>>>>>>> of talking about ponzi schemes. > > >> >>>>>>>>>> D > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Nov 26, 8:22 am, Oliver Wingenter<[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear Dan, > >> >>>>>>>>>>> You and other still don't get it. Full scale fertilization > >> >>>>>>>>>>> of the > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Southern Ocean will lead to extraordinary amounts of DMS > >> >>>>>>>>>>> which will > >> >>>>>>>>>>> oxidize to sulfate aerosol and massive and abrupt cooling. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> It is that > >> >>>>>>>>>>> simple. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely, > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Oliver Wingenter > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Dan Whaley wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Oliver, > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I know you've read the recent papers re a next generation > >> of > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> projects. (Buesseler, et al; Watson, et al; Lampitt, et > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> al; Smetacek > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> and Naqvi, etc.) Clearly some persons feel there are still > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> questions > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth asking. There are others (Chisholm, Cullen, > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> yourself, etc.) > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> that do not. It's great that we have a big world to > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> accommodate > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> everyone. A few more OIF projects will not diminish it. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> But to call > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> it a Ponzi scheme? The interest is coming from a fair > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> number of > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> people. The recent AGU Chapman conference on the > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Biological Pump at > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Southampton was a good indicator. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> To me, the open question is: Did increased productivity in > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> the past > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> result in accelerated atmospheric withdrawal, and: can we > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> simulate-- > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> even crudely-- some of those conditions in the modern > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> ocean. Does > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> increased productivity lead to increased export? And of > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> course, what > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is the cost, and what are the impacts of doing so. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ethically, should > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> we? etc. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Obviously you think the answer is no, which leaves other > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> territory for > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> you to explore. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I do find your comment about DMS rather odd. Obviously DMS > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is a bit > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> of an interesting question (Kelly and I asked for your best > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> several > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> papers on this about six months ago... you demurred pending > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> some > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> further analysis). But what is strange is your comment on > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> "abrupt and > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> severe cooling". > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> ??? > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't cooling what we're trying to achieve? And of course, > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> the idea > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> that any of these geoengineering techniques would get > >> globally > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> deployed immediately seems impossible to imagine. We have > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> always > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> assumed that one would scale up gradually. Large, long > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> time series > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> research efforts in more and more places in the oceans, > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> etc. So--- > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't you be able to measure or model any cooling effect > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> long > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> before it became 'abrupt and severe'. And if we get carbon > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> sequestration and > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
