Oliver,
 
Yes, this idea has been around for a few years, promoted by Victor Smetacek 
amongst others. See these links:
 
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18807-whale-poop-is-vital-to-oceans-carbon-cycle.html
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1699/3527
http://weirdscience.ca/category/ocean/
http://www.fbbva.es/TLFU/dat/02SMETACEKSEPARATA.pdf
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101012101255.htm
 
Chris.
 

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:40:00 PM UTC+1, Oliver Tickell wrote:

>  I believe this is well authenticated. I read a New Scientist feature on 
> the topic maybe a year ago. The main thrust was that this maintains the 
> populations of fish and other marine life. With the huge reductions in 
> whale populations the oceans as a whole have become less productive - and 
> fish catches have declined not only as a result of over-fishing. It turns 
> out that Greenpeace did well to choose the whales as their iconic life form 
> as they are "keystone species" in the functioning of global marine 
> ecosystems. Oliver.
>
> On 19/08/2013 21:34, Greg Rau wrote:
>  
>  If whales increase the ocean carbon sink (and I've got to read the fine 
> print to be convinced), then the obvious geoengineering response is to 
> breed more whales. And/or will whale harvesters now need to pay a carbon 
> tax? Could partnering with ETC and Greenpeace on this be far behind?�
> Greg
>
>   ------------------------------
>  *From:* Fred Zimmerman <[email protected]> <javascript:>
> *To:* geoengineering <[email protected]> <javascript:> 
> *Sent:* Monday, August 19, 2013 9:49 AM
> *Subject:* [geo] sperm whales and oif
>  
>  *Reference:�*Proc Roy SocB�http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0863
>  Sperm whale poo offsets carbon by fertilising the oceans with 
> iron<http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/06/16/sperm-whale-poo-offsets-carbon-by-fertilising-the-oceans-with-iron/>
>  
> By�Ed Yong <http://discovermagazine.com/authors?name=Ed+Yong>�| June 
> 16, 2010 8:00 am
> [image: 
> Sperm_whales]<http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/files/2010/06/Sperm_whales.jpg>
> While the world wrangles over ways of reducing carbon emissions, some 
> scientists are considering more radical approaches to mitigating the 
> effects of climate change. Dumping iron dust into the world�s oceans is 
> one such strategy. Theoretically,�the iron should act as 
> fertiliser<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization>, 
> providing a key nutrient that will spur the growth of photosynthetic 
> plankton. These creatures act as carbon dioxide pumps, removing the 
> problematic gas from the air and storing the carbon within their own 
> tissues. When the plankton die, they sink, trapping their carbon in the 
> abyss for thousands of years.
> It may seem like a fanciful idea, but as with much of our technology, 
> nature beat us to it long ago. Trish Lavery from Flinders University has 
> found that sperm whales fertilise the Southern Ocean in exactly this way, 
> using their own faeces. Their dung is loaded with iron and it stimulates 
> the growth of plankton just as well as iron dust does.
> Sperm whales <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_whale>�are prodigious 
> divers, descending to great depths in search of prey like squid. When 
> they�re deeply submerged, they shut down all their non-essential bodily 
> functions. Excretion is one of these and the whales only ever defecate when 
> they reach the surface. By happy coincidence, that�s where photosynthetic 
> plankton (phytoplankton) make their home � in the shallow column of water 
> where sunlight still penetrates. So by eating iron-rich prey at great 
> depths and expelling the remains in the shallows, the whales act as giant 
> farmers, unwittingly seeding the surface waters with fertiliser.
> There are approximately 12,000 sperm whales left in the Southern Ocean. By 
> modelling the amount of food they eat, the iron content of that food, and 
> how much iron they expel in their faeces, Lavery calculated that these 
> whales excrete around 50 tonnes of iron into the ocean every year.� And 
> based on the results of our own iron fertilisation experiments, the duo 
> calculated that every year, this amount of iron traps over 400,000 tonnes 
> of carbon in the depths, within the bodies of sinking plankton.
> Previously, scientists assumed that whales (and their carbon dioxide-rich 
> exhalations) would actually weaken the Southern Ocean�s ability to act as 
> a CO2�pump. But according to Lavery, this isn�t true. She worked out 
> that the whales pump out just 160,000 tonnes of carbon through their 
> various orifices. All of these figures are probably conservative 
> underestimates but even so, they suggest that sperm whales remove around 
> 240,000 more tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere than they add back in. 
> They are giant, blubbery carbon sinks.
> However, their true potential will go largely unfulfilled thanks to our 
> harpoons. Many sperm whales have been killed by industrial whalers, and the 
> population in the Southern Ocean has declined by some 90%. On the bright 
> side, the Southern Ocean�s population represent just 3% of the global 
> total, so this species may have an even greater role as a warden for carbon 
> than Lavery has suggested. Other seagoing mammals probably have a part to 
> play too, provided that they feed at depth and excrete near the surface. 
> Several other toothed whales do this, and some filter-feeding ones may do 
> too.
> *Reference:�*Proc Roy Soc B�http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0863
> *Image�*by�Cianc<http://www.flickr.com/photos/cianc/298211739/in/photostream/>
>  
>  --- 
> Fred Zimmerman
> Geoengineering IT! ��
> Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information technology
>  GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080�
>   -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>  
>
>    -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "geoengineering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
> 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to