https://www.newscientist.com/article/2133372-geoengineering-fears-make-scrutiny-of-ocean-seeding-test-vital/

Geoengineering fears make scrutiny of ocean seeding test vital

Talk of dumping iron into the ocean off Chile to boost plankton is a return
of a controversial idea that warrants questions, says *Olive Heffernan*
[image: naturally occurring phytoplankton bloom]
Can science imitate nature?

Copernicus Sentinel data (2016), processed by ESA

By Olive Heffernan

If a Canadian team gets its way, 10 tonnes of iron dust will be dumped into
waters off the coast of Chile. The Oceaneos Marine Research Foundation, a
non-profit organisation based in Vancouver, aims to use “ocean seeding” to
replenish the sea with nutrients essential for the growth of phytoplankton.
The idea is to boost the food chain and revive declining fish stocks.

This has obvious appeal. Globally, fisheries are in dire straits, and if
exploitation continues at the same rate, we will run out of seafood by 2048
<https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10433-no-more-seafood-by-2050/>.
Chile is a case in point – overfishing has decimated nearly all its major
commercial fisheries.

But the proposal has sparked concern among some scientists sceptical of the
technique’s benefits and worried about other possible implications. The
backlash comes – in part – because of the legacy of a similar scheme in
2012 off the coast of British Columbia, Canada
<https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22390-independent-geoengineers-ocean-field-test-condemned/>.
It caused an outcry and there was no evidence of benefits to the sockeye
salmon population it was hoping to revive, or to the Haida community that
helped fund the project.

Advertisement

Some critics worry that trials of the sort proposed in Chile could set the
scene for something far more elaborate and potentially profitable – using
ocean seeding to slow climate change, with the know-how largely in private
hands.

The idea that ocean seeding could cool the climate by removing carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere isn’t new. It was first proposed in 1998 by a
US biochemist named John Martin
<https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Martin/martin_4.php> who said:
“Give me half a tanker of iron, and I’ll give you an ice age.”
Plankton blooms

Martin’s idea was that restoring nutrients to parts of the ocean lacking
them would stimulate plankton blooms, which would suck carbon out of the
atmosphere as they grew. Once they died, the plankton would sink to the
ocean floor, taking the carbon with them and burying it for centuries.

Since 1990, at least 12 open-ocean experiments have collectively shown that
– as a concept – this has merit; one five-week test in the Southern Ocean
<https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11229.html>
triggered
a large bloom, at least half of which sank below 1000 metres to the seabed.
But the fear that we will end up nourishing deadly toxic algal blooms or
trigger some other unintended outcome led the UN to ban commercial ocean
fertilisation in 2008. International law only permits non-commercial
small-scale seeding for research purposes.

The proposed trial off Chile fits this bill, so why the outcry? Oceaneos’s
Chilean plans are clouded in obscurity, with details of its compounds and
methods yet to be spelled out. And in its previous incarnation, the
organisation sought to draw down carbon from the atmosphere, a technology
it tried to patent.

Given the pace of climate change, it is conceivable that we will have to
turn to geoengineering in the future, whether that’s seeding oceans with
iron or deflecting the sun’s rays. While neither option is desirable, in
choosing the best course of action, research – like the proposed trial off
Chile – will be vital.

It’s equally vital that any trials that inform geoengineering – whether
intended for this or not – are always conducted for the public good.

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to