SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Environmentalist Thread
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Sam who wrote (16438)9/27/2007 2:33:33 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (1) of 36917
 
I don't doubt that dead zones in the ocean are one important factor.

20-30% reduction in phytoplankton in the Northern Pacific ocean over the past 20 years is pretty significant, wouldn't you say?

gsfc.nasa.gov

And let's say that it's a more conservative reduction on a global scale, say 6%:

mindfully.org

That's approximately 6% reduction in a 60,000 GT C02 sequestration cycle.

planktos.com

Wouldn't you agree that a 6% reduction in phytoplankton on a global basis would have a SIGNIFICANT impact in causing an increase in the levels of atmospheric CO2?

So wouldn't you agree that finding out why plankton are failing to thrive is probably more logical than just assigning all of the CO2 increases to man-made production?

And regardless of whether you agree with ocean fertilization or not, isn't it CRITICAL to figure out why there are dead zones in the oceans?

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News