|
Home About Summary Introduction Science Motivation Evidence Experiments Is it Legal? Is it Safe? Will it Work? FAQ Conclusion Links U316 project |
Motivation behind artificial Iron Fertilization of the Oceans
Limiting Global Warming by CO2 Reduction
The principle of Iron Fertilisation is based in the geological record, which has linked global cooling with increased iron in the oceans.
As the 21st-century industrialised planet Earth begins to see the effects of global warming, increased temperatures, raising sea-levels, and the increased ferocity and frequency of 'extreme weather events', many believe 'something must be done'. As the increasing levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases, in particular CO2, are (usually) credited with causing the problem, anything that brings about a decreasing in atmospheric CO2 is worth investigating further.
If the addition of iron to HNLC areas the oceans will ameliorate the problem, then it is an attractive proposition for geoengineers concerned with climate control.
Carbon Trading
However; many of the most enthusiastic protagonists are not those concerned with climate change per se, but are those concerned with profit.
The Kyoto Protocol proposes 'carbon trading'. This allows those who own 'carbon sinks', or who make savings from their own allowances, to sell their carbon 'credits'. Nations and industries who burn fossil fuels and are now facing emission-restrictions may find it cheaper to buy these credits, as a 'right to the pollute', rather than improving the efficiency of their power-generation.
Currently, Kyoto's carbon-trading scheme applies only to terrestrial sinks (e.g. reforestation); but the proponents of ocean iron fertilisation want it extended. They hope that any phytoplankton blooms they produce with ocean iron fertilisation will earn them carbon-credits that they can sell.
The idea of carbon trading from oceanic phytoplankton production is attractive to both the venturers who wish to make profit, and to the governments and industry who are reliant on the burning of fossil-fuels for their energy - and who do not want to do anything that might damage their economies.
Nations with coastal areas that include HNLC regions within their 200-miles exclusion zones may also be interested, as they could make carbon-credits if fertilisation occurred within their boundaries.
Calculations suggest this would be one of the cheapest forms of carbon-removal; so commercial and political interest is high.
Carbon-trading applies only to terrestrial sinks (e.g. reforestation); but ocean venturers want it extended to the marine arena. Then, plankton blooms resulting from artificial iron fertilisation might earn carbon-credits, a valuable commodity in the global market. Estimates suggest iron-fertilisation might cost as little as US$1-2 per tonne of carbon fixed, against US$50-200 for other proposed sinks ("What does it cost?"). This relative low cost offers a high profit motivation in a global market. Industrial nations could then buy 'rights to pollute' cheaply, while continuing to burn fossil fuels within emissions-treaty agreements. Commercial and political interest is thus high.Fishing and marine stocks
Because phytoplankton are at the base of the marine food chain, many hope that significant increases will feed the oceans. This might allow the dwindling populations of marine life, from krill to fish to whales, to recover. Man has over-fished and over-hunted the oceans. Plans to provide the survivors with plentiful food have led to suggestions of phytoplankton blooms aiding the replenishment of marine livestock.
(Any carbon thus used is not, of course, removed from the biosphere; so will have no effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide reduction).