GEOENGINEERING AND THE HUMANITARIAN CHALLENGE: WHAT ROLE FOR THE MOST
VULNERABLE? (OPINION ARTICLE)
Suarez et al (2013) – GE and the Humanitarian Challenge
(Includes video)
As research practitioners working on climate and disasters in the
humanitarian sector, we are at once fascinated and
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=pilot-projects-bury-co2-in-basaltWT.mc_id=SA_CAT_ENGYSUS_20130801
Pilot Projects Bury CO2 in Basalt
Two experiments are testing the viability of sequestering emissions in
porous layers of hard rock
By Jeff Tollefson and Nature magazine
By early
This is very odd. Based on the abstract only (article behind paywall) it
appears that they attribute the diatom bloom to iron fertilisation.
Oddly they have not considered the role of silicic acid from the
dissolution of Mg silicate species in the finely powdered volcanic ash.
Silicic acid is
I have not found an open source version of this paper yet, but here is a
related one.
http://www.biogeosciences.net/10/3715/2013/bg-10-3715-2013.pdf
They do recognise that diatoms need silicic acid but do not seem to have
thought of volcanic ash as a source of silicic acid, only of iron.
Re
*Reference: *Proc Roy SocB http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0863
Sperm whale poo offsets carbon by fertilising the oceans with
ironhttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/06/16/sperm-whale-poo-offsets-carbon-by-fertilising-the-oceans-with-iron/
By Ed Yong
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
I'm trying to find some data on ocean albedo with/without phytoplankton
blooms. This is in order to assess whether the albedo impact of Ocean Iron
Fertilization is likely to be significant on the Earth's radiation budget.
The current data sources I have suffer from a couple of issues.
1.
