[geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
As you already know, there's nothing bad about diatoms. After all, they were here first, and without them we certainly couldn't have emerged as the human species that we are. Most O2 dependent life on Earth owes everything to those diatoms. There's more science about Earth that's restricted, withheld or obfuscated to suit, than science made public. http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” On Jun 23, 3:16 am, BHASKAR M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards BhaskarOn Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.comwrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2)http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
Dear Michael and Bhaskar, Thanks for these thoughts - they could become the basis of something useful in the Arctic to suppress methane: 5. *Will this method address tundra methane release?* Not completely, however this method could seed even the smallest body of standing water within a tundra region and thus provide added O2 saturation and the associated methane oxidation. As the tundra continues to warm, more standing water will emerge and thus this potential enhanced oxidation will become more important. It would be simple to experiment on ponds which are producing methane, and see if a spray of diatoms, with or without nutrients, could have a significant effect. BTW, I would expect that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? Cheers, John P.S. Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. --- On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, BHASKAR M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.comwrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.comwrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.comwrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
It is not a safe assumption that anoxia in the water column is a factor in most methane emissions from water bodies. With fossil methane release, oxygenation is unlikely to be of much assistance. Only where methane is produced in the water column in anoxic or hypoxic conditions would this method be likely to assist significantly. In practical terms, hypoxia is best addressed indirectly, e.g. by controlling fertilizer runoff Only in stagnant bodies, such as the black sea, would oxygenation be likely to be beneficial. Methanogenesis usually occurs below the photic zone and mixed layer - and mixing of co2 could also be a limiting factor. Therefore biological methods would be unlikely to be effective. A On 26 Jun 2011 11:19, John Nissen johnnissen2...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Michael and Bhaskar, Thanks for these thoughts - they could become the basis of something useful in the Arctic to suppress methane: 5. *Will this method address tundra methane release?* Not completely, however this method could seed even the smallest body of standing water within a tundra region and thus provide added O2 saturation and the associated methane oxidation. As the tundra continues to warm, more standing water will emerge and thus this potential enhanced oxidation will become more important. It would be simple to experiment on ponds which are producing methane, and see if a spray of diatoms, with or without nutrients, could have a significant effect. BTW, I would expect that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? Cheers, John P.S. Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. --- On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, BHASKAR M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.com wrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
Andrew In practical terms, hypoxia is best addressed indirectly, e.g. by controlling fertilizer runoff This is as practical as reducing CO2 emissions. Methanogenesis usually occurs below the photic zone and mixed layer - and mixing of co2 could also be a limiting factor. Therefore biological methods would be unlikely to be effective. Biological methods can remove nutrients close to the source and in the photic layer of the tail end water body. It only when nutrients are not removed that they sink to the depths of the water. regards Bhaskar On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.comwrote: It is not a safe assumption that anoxia in the water column is a factor in most methane emissions from water bodies. With fossil methane release, oxygenation is unlikely to be of much assistance. Only where methane is produced in the water column in anoxic or hypoxic conditions would this method be likely to assist significantly. In practical terms, hypoxia is best addressed indirectly, e.g. by controlling fertilizer runoff Only in stagnant bodies, such as the black sea, would oxygenation be likely to be beneficial. Methanogenesis usually occurs below the photic zone and mixed layer - and mixing of co2 could also be a limiting factor. Therefore biological methods would be unlikely to be effective. A On 26 Jun 2011 11:19, John Nissen johnnissen2...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Michael and Bhaskar, Thanks for these thoughts - they could become the basis of something useful in the Arctic to suppress methane: 5. *Will this method address tundra methane release?* Not completely, however this method could seed even the smallest body of standing water within a tundra region and thus provide added O2 saturation and the associated methane oxidation. As the tundra continues to warm, more standing water will emerge and thus this potential enhanced oxidation will become more important. It would be simple to experiment on ponds which are producing methane, and see if a spray of diatoms, with or without nutrients, could have a significant effect. BTW, I would expect that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? Cheers, John P.S. Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. --- On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, BHASKAR M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.com wrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
John It would be simple to experiment on ponds which are producing methane, and see if a spray of diatoms, with or without nutrients, could have a significant effect. BTW, I would expect that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? I have been trying for past few years to find anyone else who has done this type of experiment. We use Diatoms to increase dissolved oxygen level but have never checked for Methane emissions. You can't grow Diatoms elsewhere and put them in lakes, they release O2 as they grow. All water bodies have Diatoms, the problem is to make them dominate. If left to nature Cyanobacteria dominates over time - this is called eutrophication. This is the problem being witnessed world over, please check for reports of algal blooms and dead zones. regards Bhaskar On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:49 PM, John Nissen johnnissen2...@gmail.comwrote: Dear Michael and Bhaskar, Thanks for these thoughts - they could become the basis of something useful in the Arctic to suppress methane: 5. *Will this method address tundra methane release?* Not completely, however this method could seed even the smallest body of standing water within a tundra region and thus provide added O2 saturation and the associated methane oxidation. As the tundra continues to warm, more standing water will emerge and thus this potential enhanced oxidation will become more important. It would be simple to experiment on ponds which are producing methane, and see if a spray of diatoms, with or without nutrients, could have a significant effect. BTW, I would expect that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? Cheers, John P.S. Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. --- On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, BHASKAR M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.comwrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.comwrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.comwrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have become aware that micro diatoms can be prepared in a dry form as a means to seed bodies of water to produce artificial diatom blooms for enhanced O2 saturation. This conceptual sketch proposes that this type of material be considered for atmospheric aerosol injection as a form of combined SRM/CCS/Enhanced Hydrate Burial and Ocean Acidification Mitigation. :A minimum of seven main technical issues concerning this type of biological aerosol medium can be anticipated. 1. *Will this form of aerosol stay suspended for a reasonable time?* The size of micro diatoms are such that proper dispersal could produce an aerosol which would stay suspended for a significantly reasonable periods of time. The engineering of the dispersal method is similar to previous aerosol concepts. The suspension time will depend on many factors ranging from altitude of injection, latitude of injection (atmospheric cell characteristics) and general tropospheric weather conditions. The rate (if any) of atmospheric moisture absorption needs further understanding. If it is found that this medium does absorb atmospheric moisture, this could represent a means to reduce that primary green house gas, as well as, possibly providing a means for cloud nucleation/brightening. 2. *Will the diatom aerosol reflect SR?* Typically, this diatom preparation is brown. I believe it may be possible that the diatom material can be engineered to be reflective. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Finding the right laminating material which does not substantially degrade suspension time, seed viability or produce accumulated environmental adverse effects will need investigating along with the associated high volume production needs. 3. *Will the diatom material remain viable through the aerosol phase into the aquatic environment?* Tropospheric injection avoids the higher altitude environmental stress issues. Such as, high UV, low ambient pressure and extreme low temperatures, which may effect seed viability. However, the possibility of laminating the material to address the high altitude concerns may also be possible in the future and will need further investigation. The added complications, relative to seed survival, of stratospheric injection indicates
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have become aware that micro diatoms can be prepared in a dry form as a means to seed bodies of water to produce artificial diatom blooms for enhanced O2 saturation. This conceptual sketch proposes that this type of material be considered for atmospheric aerosol injection as a form of combined SRM/CCS/Enhanced Hydrate Burial and Ocean Acidification Mitigation. :A minimum of seven main technical issues concerning this type of biological aerosol medium can be anticipated. 1. *Will this form of aerosol stay suspended for a reasonable time?* The size of micro diatoms are such that proper dispersal could produce an aerosol which would stay suspended for a significantly reasonable periods of time. The engineering of the dispersal method is similar to previous aerosol concepts. The suspension time will depend on many factors ranging from altitude of injection, latitude of injection (atmospheric cell characteristics) and general tropospheric weather conditions. The rate (if any) of atmospheric moisture absorption needs further understanding. If it is found that this medium does absorb atmospheric moisture, this could represent a means to reduce that primary green house gas, as well as, possibly providing a means for cloud nucleation/brightening. 2. *Will the diatom aerosol reflect SR?* Typically, this diatom preparation is brown. I believe it may be possible that the diatom material can be engineered to be reflective. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Finding the right laminating material which does not substantially degrade suspension time, seed viability or produce accumulated environmental adverse effects will need investigating along with the associated high volume production needs. 3. *Will the diatom material remain viable through the aerosol phase
Re: Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? Cheers, John PS Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. --- On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, BHASKAR MV bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.com wrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: MV Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms
[geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
John, Andrew - P.S. Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. Try to get Euan Nisbet, who lives there in London and deals with methane emissions, to take part. But if you specifically want to try to exploit methanotrophy, as in this chain, I'd also suggest trying to get microbiologists involved - try calling Lynn Margulis' lab, or emailing her at l...@sagantechnology.com (you can say I suggested you write her) - she knows so many people. My guess would be that there are all kinds of things that would also need to be considered: oxygen might be the limiting factor for many methanotrophs, but hardly the only one. Methanotrophy involves the MMO enzymes - pMMO or sMMO - and the active sites involve metallic complexes - copper and iron, so probably their availability would be important as well. I've read of bioremediation projects attempting to use methanotrophs that have proven frustratingly limited in effect. I think in soils the majority of the methanotrophy is 'low affinity' - so it occurs where the concentration is high near where the methanogenesis takes place but right around the border of the aerobic/anaerobic zones. Are there such divisions as low high affinity with oceanic methanotrophs? Also, if AOM (anaerobic oxidation) is also going on, too, that would be inhibited by the oxygenation proposed. In a totally different direction, since there are lots of proposals here that deal with potentially large negative side effects, the reaction of methane with atomic chlorine is very strong - I remember an atmospheric chemist once telling me how it was something like 60x more intense than methane with OH. If you could find a way to exploit that without making a total mess of everything, perhaps it would be of interest? And perhaps in a great enough emergency, what's acceptable might have to shift? Have you read Planetquake, a novel dealing with a large methane release, written under a pseudonym by a scientist involved with this issue? In a more political direction, what about trying to pressure the Arctic Council to demand that the big dirty oil companies have some kind of group emergency program in place, with various outsiders on its board, in exchange for their leasing rights on hydrate and other arctic fossil sources? There could be an arrangement where the companies together share the spoils of any trapped methane’s profits, but have the burden of maximally preventing atmospheric releases. They do have money and expertise, at least... On Jun 26, 6:05 pm, John Nissen johnnissen2...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Bhaskar, The conversation had turned to fertilizer run-off, which is not relevant to the Arctic. My rather brief and hurried email earlier today was intended to query whether the methods that you espouse would work in the Arctic - especially for (a) wetlands, where pools and lakes produce much of the methane in the atmosphere (b) shallow seas, such as ESAS [1] where the methane has already supersaturated most of bottom water and now could suddenly be emitted into the atmosphere in vast quantities [2]. Could diatoms, sprayed onto the water surface, produce oxygen that then filters down to methane-digesting microbes to increase their productivity? If so, could the microbial productivity (for digestion of methane) be further enhanced by mixing nutrients with the diatoms in the spray? Cheers, John [1] ESAS = East Siberian Arctic Shelf. [2] Shakhova et al:https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2ik=0edba1view=attth=130c25f9... --- On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:32 PM, BHASKAR M V bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Andrew Water flows with Nitrogen and Oxygen in it. These do not originate in the depths of the oceans. These originate on the surface of earth and oceans and sinks to the depths. So the biological methods would remove the Nitrogen and increase oxygen at the surface not in the depths. Any mechanical means would require equipment and energy, this would add to GHG emissions even when solar, wind and wave energy are partly used. How do you propose to install mechanical devices in the depths of the oceans? http://epa.gov/methane/reports/05-manure.pdf http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/805296-PRAO0M/native/805296.pdf A lot of methane is generated due to human activity on land. Manure, sewage, garbage land fills, rice fields, reservoirs behind dams, etc. Please suggest a solution to this. Wave making, flow diversions and impellers are but a few. These are used only in ponds and small WWTPs. They are more expensive or require more maintenance or require more land, for e.g., fine bubble diffuser aerators are very energy efficient but the ceramic plates or membranes used are expensive. regards Bhaskar On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Andrew Lockley andrew.lock...@gmail.comwrote: I'm not doubting that biological methods can produce oxygen.
Re: Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
...@gmail.comwrote: It is not a safe assumption that anoxia in the water column is a factor in most methane emissions from water bodies. With fossil methane release, oxygenation is unlikely to be of much assistance. Only where methane is produced in the water column in anoxic or hypoxic conditions would this method be likely to assist significantly. In practical terms, hypoxia is best addressed indirectly, eg by controlling fertilizer runoff Only in stagnant bodies, such as the black sea, would oxygenation be likely to be beneficial. Methanogenesis usually occurs below the photic zone and mixed layer - and mixing of co2 could also be a limiting factor. Therefore biological methods would be unlikely to be effective. A On 26 Jun 2011 11:19, John Nissen johnnissen2...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Michael and Bhaskar, Thanks for these thoughts - they could become the basis of something useful in the Arctic to suppress methane: 5. *Will this method address tundra methane release?* Not completely, however this method could seed even the smallest body of standing water within a tundra region and thus provide added O2 saturation and the associated methane oxidation. As the tundra continues to warm, more standing water will emerge and thus this potential enhanced oxidation will become more important. It would be simple to experiment on ponds which are producing methane, and see if a spray of diatoms, with or without nutrients, could have a significant effect. BTW, I would expect that such an experiment has been done already - does anybody know? Cheers, John PS Any brainstorming ideas like this for the methane-busting workshop, London 3-4 September, are most welcome. --- On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:16 AM, BHASKAR MV bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.com wrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: MV Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder
Re: Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long %2 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
Hi Folks, Bhaskar, Thanks for the clarification(s). I was hoping to encourage you to give us more information. The list of questions you posted is a challenge. Can you venture a guess as to the answers. I know you would prefer proof backing any ventured comment, yet your questions are far reaching and thus would take years to establish the many facts sought out by your questions. This forum is not a Formal Peer Review Journal. You have the freedom to speculate. Trust me, being wrong is not that painful with this group. I have yet to be right. I personally would like to hear your. opinions. concerning the possible answers to your questions. Thanks, Michael On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Sam Carana sam.car...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for this. I do hope the IPCC will take this on board as well, realizing that geoengineering also encompasses such ways to tackle methane. Cheers! Sam Carana On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:07 AM, M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have become aware that micro diatoms can be prepared in a dry form as a means to seed bodies of water to produce artificial diatom blooms for enhanced O2 saturation. This conceptual sketch proposes that this type of material be considered for atmospheric aerosol injection as a form of combined SRM/CCS/Enhanced Hydrate Burial and Ocean Acidification Mitigation. :A minimum of seven main technical issues concerning this type of biological aerosol medium can be anticipated. 1. *Will this form of aerosol stay suspended for a reasonable time?* The size of micro diatoms are such that proper dispersal could produce an aerosol which would stay suspended for a significantly reasonable periods of time. The engineering of the dispersal method is similar to previous aerosol concepts. The suspension time will depend on many factors ranging from altitude of injection, latitude of injection (atmospheric cell characteristics) and general tropospheric weather conditions. The rate (if any) of atmospheric moisture absorption needs further understanding. If it is found that this medium does absorb atmospheric moisture, this could represent a means to reduce that primary green house gas, as well as, possibly providing a means for cloud nucleation/brightening. 2. *Will the diatom aerosol reflect SR?* Typically, this diatom preparation is brown. I believe it may be possible that the diatom material can be engineered to be reflective. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Finding the right laminating material which does not substantially degrade suspension time, seed viability or produce accumulated environmental adverse effects will need
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have become aware that micro diatoms can be prepared in a dry form as a means to seed bodies of water to produce artificial diatom blooms for enhanced O2 saturation. This conceptual sketch proposes that this type of material be considered for atmospheric aerosol injection as a form of combined SRM/CCS/Enhanced Hydrate Burial and Ocean Acidification Mitigation. :A minimum of seven main technical issues concerning this type of biological aerosol medium can be anticipated. 1. *Will this form of aerosol stay suspended for a reasonable time?* The size of micro diatoms are such that proper dispersal could produce an aerosol which would stay suspended for a significantly reasonable periods of time. The engineering of the dispersal method is similar to previous aerosol concepts. The suspension time will depend on many factors ranging from altitude of injection, latitude of injection (atmospheric cell characteristics) and general tropospheric weather conditions. The rate (if any) of atmospheric moisture absorption needs further understanding. If it is found that this medium does absorb atmospheric moisture, this could represent a means to reduce that primary green house gas, as well as, possibly providing a means for cloud nucleation/brightening. 2. *Will the diatom aerosol reflect SR?* Typically, this diatom preparation is brown. I believe it may be possible that the diatom material can be engineered to be reflective. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Finding the right laminating material which does not substantially degrade suspension time, seed viability or produce accumulated environmental adverse effects will need investigating along with the associated high volume production needs. 3. *Will the diatom material remain viable through
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
Dr Gorman I am referring to all three - Diatomaceous Earth and live diatoms as a SRM solution. Nano silica with micro nutrients to keep the live diatoms alive and cause further bloom after they fall into the oceans. DE is NOT in nano size. Is is in microns. Michael I understand that Crystalline silica of 1 micro or more is carcenogenic and amorphous silica is not. Diatoms are amorphous silica. DE is approved by EPA for human contact use and indirect consumption - water filters, grain silos. It can be sprinkled on beds to kill bed bugs, rubbed into pet fur to kill bugs, etc. regards Bhaskar On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Dr. Gorman, My conceptual sketch was just that...a sketch of an idea. If diatom blooms can be triggered at long range and at low cost, it would be a useful tool on a number of levels. I do need to admit to a serious lack of background research before offering the sketch. I made an assumption which has proven out to be wrong. I have, today, found that DE has significant lung cancer implication. I withdraw the conceptual sketch. Thanks for your patience, Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:57 AM, John Gorman gorm...@waitrose.comwrote: ** I am not clear as to whether live diatoms are being suggested or just diatoms because they are nano silica particles as in diatomous earth. If the latter then Gregory Benford suggested the spreading of diatomous earth as diatoms in the stratosphere, about four years ago (1) as an SRM method. From a separate direction I suggested that the particles could be produced by adding tetra ethyl silicate to aviation fuel.(2) This might have various practical advantages such as exact control of particle size. Such particles in the troposphere would have very short lifetime -rather like the Icelandic ash clouds so limited SRM effect and all the disadvantages to air travel etc wouldn't they? john gorman (1) Search for saving the Arctic in this group- I cant make teh link work! (2) http://www.naturaljointmobility.info/grantproposal09.htm - Original Message - From: M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com To: geoengineering geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:07 AM Subject: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have become aware that micro diatoms can be prepared in a dry form as a means to seed bodies of water to produce artificial diatom blooms for enhanced O2 saturation. This conceptual sketch proposes that this type of material be considered for atmospheric aerosol injection as a form of combined SRM/CCS/Enhanced Hydrate Burial and Ocean Acidification Mitigation. :A minimum of seven main technical issues concerning this type of biological aerosol medium can be anticipated. 1. *Will this form of aerosol stay suspended for a reasonable time?* The size of micro
Re: [geo] Re: Tropospheric Injection of Diatoms
Thanks for this. I do hope the IPCC will take this on board as well, realizing that geoengineering also encompasses such ways to tackle methane. Cheers! Sam Carana On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:07 AM, M V Bhaskar bhaskarmv...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Micheal Thanks. Your proposal is quite interesting. A clarification - We are not advocating use of micro Diatoms, we are advocating use of Nano Silica based micro nutrients in waterways, these cause naturally present Diatoms to bloom. Since atmosphere would not contain Diatoms, Pico Diatoms can perhaps be used along with our nano powder. The biggest advantage is that whatever falls onto oceans unconsumed in the atmosphere, will bloom in the oceans, so nothing is wasted. This would be a sort of SRM + Ocean Fertilization scheme. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Diatomaceous Earth may be the best solution. There are mountains of these all over the world. http://www.squidoo.com/fossilflour Scroll down for some very good photos. regards Bhaskar On Jun 22, 3:11 am, Michael Hayes voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, This is a conceptual sketch on the use of a biological aerosol. It is a very raw concept, yet I found it an interesting thought. *Tropospheric Injection of Micro Diatoms * *A Combined SRM/CCS Proposal with Long Term Implications for* *Enhanced Hydrate Burial and General Ocean Acidification Mitigation* *A Brief Conceptual Sketch Offered to the Google Geoengineering Group* Diatoms are ubiquitous to the waters of this planet and they all have self regulating biological features which makes them ideal for GE use on a regional or global scale. It is estimated that there are approximately 2 million species, yet only a fraction have been studied. This proposal does not call out for any particular species. I leave that determination to others. In general, they play an important role on many different levels. Diatoms offer O2 production, CO2 capture and sequestration along with long term hydrate burial. The potential for diatoms to produce biofuel is well known but that issue is outside of this proposal. Through my discussions with M.V. Bhaskar, I have become aware that micro diatoms can be prepared in a dry form as a means to seed bodies of water to produce artificial diatom blooms for enhanced O2 saturation. This conceptual sketch proposes that this type of material be considered for atmospheric aerosol injection as a form of combined SRM/CCS/Enhanced Hydrate Burial and Ocean Acidification Mitigation. :A minimum of seven main technical issues concerning this type of biological aerosol medium can be anticipated. 1. *Will this form of aerosol stay suspended for a reasonable time?* The size of micro diatoms are such that proper dispersal could produce an aerosol which would stay suspended for a significantly reasonable periods of time. The engineering of the dispersal method is similar to previous aerosol concepts. The suspension time will depend on many factors ranging from altitude of injection, latitude of injection (atmospheric cell characteristics) and general tropospheric weather conditions. The rate (if any) of atmospheric moisture absorption needs further understanding. If it is found that this medium does absorb atmospheric moisture, this could represent a means to reduce that primary green house gas, as well as, possibly providing a means for cloud nucleation/brightening. 2. *Will the diatom aerosol reflect SR?* Typically, this diatom preparation is brown. I believe it may be possible that the diatom material can be engineered to be reflective. This might be done through laminating the dried preparation with biologically neutral reflective material (white powdered sugar?). Finding the right laminating material which does not substantially degrade suspension time, seed viability or produce accumulated environmental adverse effects will need investigating along with the associated high volume production needs. 3. *Will the diatom material remain viable through the aerosol phase into the aquatic environment?* Tropospheric injection avoids the higher altitude environmental stress issues. Such as, high UV, low ambient pressure and extreme low temperatures, which may effect seed viability. However, the possibility of laminating the material to address the high altitude concerns may also be possible in the future and will need further investigation. The added complications, relative to seed survival, of stratospheric injection indicates that tropospheric injection should be the initial deployment consideration. Stratospheric injection may be avoided if coordinated and tailored regional tropospheric efforts can be developed. 4. *Will
