Solution and Conclusion

While "ocean iron-fertilisation" aims to ameliorate climate change and global warming, it itself raises concerns.

My reading and research leads me to conclude that the proposal will not be implemented, based on three factors:

• There is insufficient scientific evidence to suggest it would work.
• There is sufficient scientific evidence to suggest it would cause ecological damage. This would be unacceptable to governments concerned with environmental issues, and/or popular opinion and pressure.
• While the process is legal, legislative changes are needed to make it (commercially) worthwhile. For this, the Kyoto treaty needs to encompass carbon-trading of phytoplanktonic primary production; a change I doubt will happen.

"2 out of 3 ain't good enough"

Active and fascinating research continues and many, including oceanographers with no financial interest, are advocates of ocean iron-fertilisation. Whilst I recognise the urgent need to limit man-made climate change, I also feel maritime law should cover proposals to geoengineer the oceans and must include "environmental impact statements". I personally feel that uncertainties outweigh possible benefits.

Attempts to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide must fulfil 3 criteria. They must be:

• Cheap
• Plentiful
• Inert

Iron-enrichment is cheap and iron is plentiful; but by design, the process is not inert.

The global-warming problem must be tackled by other methods - assuming it is to be tackled at all.

But...

Home Page Home.htm

Overview and Introduction Introduction.htm

Alternative Views and Protagonists Alternative.htm

Evidence - Natural Ocean Iron Fertilisation Evidence.htm

Evidence - Experimental Ocean Iron Fertilisation Experiments.htm

FAQ FAQ.htm

** Current page ** Solution.htm