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 : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Hawkmoon who wrote (1908)6/25/2007 8:07:32 PM
From: kumarRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 4152
 
OT : Of course, many fish are caught and eaten.. and folks like us emit some nasty methane. Apparently fish consolidate any methane production in their gut into solid waste. No one really knows, but few people have actually seen evidence of "fish flatulence"

I'm glad I dont eat fish or any seafood - not because of environmental concerns, but because I am allergic to them - they contain Iodine which I am allergic to....



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (1908)6/25/2007 8:56:17 PM
From: SamRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 4152
 
Hawk, you need to write the Wegener Institute. They have obviously thought about both the problem and the possibility of the Iron Hypothesis solution. And, BTW, responding to your earlier remark that there is "no money to made" from such a simple solution--actually, there is a lot of money to be made, not only for iron producers, but from fisheries (more plankton will lead in time to more fish as the bottom of the food chain is strengthened), and from carbon offsets (also making continuing use of fossil fuels more palatable). Not to mention the interests of the world in reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, and avoiding the possible catastrophes that could result from it.

Twelve oceanographic expeditions were carried out between 1993 and 2005 is the North Pacific, the Equatorial Pacific and the Southern Ocean to test the iron fertilization hypothesis. However, as pointed out by Hein de Baar, from the Netherlands Institut voor Onderzoek der Zee (NIOZ, Texel, The Netherlands), today after all those experiments we know that they are many losses and that this manipulation is not a real efficient way to capture and store CO2 into the deep ocean. Much more iron is needed that had originally been suggested for algae to bring down a certain amount of CO2 from the atmosphere.

The idea of seeding iron on the oceans to cool down the Earth on large scale may not be operationally possible. But some scientists think that locally this strategy could be feasible.(”More arguments have to be evaluated about artificial iron fertilizations of the ocean before final conclusions can be drawn”, says Prof. Ulrich Bathmann from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI, Bremerhaven, Germnany). Hence, research continues and further studies are required to be able help better understand the processes of the production and export of organic matter related to these iron fertilization experiments as well as their consequences on the food web.
....
Despite the great natural potential of the oceans to uptake atmospheric CO2, our current knowledge indicates that seeding iron on the oceans or dissolving more carbon dioxide into the depths do not seem conceivable solutions to solve our CO2 problem. However, given the current situation, taking no action may lead to even greater risks. We need to decrease our emissions of carbon dioxide and will probably have to adopt multiple strategies.

sciencedaily.com

The article was written just a few weeks ago, in case you didn't notice the date.



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (1908)7/30/2007 4:21:16 PM
From: SamRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 4152
 
Dead zones. Ran into this article today. FWIW.

Gulf of Mexico "Dead Zone" Is Size of New Jersey
John Roach
for National Geographic News

May 25, 2005
Each year a swath of the Gulf of Mexico becomes so devoid of shrimp, fish, and other marine life that it is known as the dead zone.

Scientists have identified agricultural fertilizers as a primary culprit behind the phenomenon. Researchers are now focusing on shrinking the zone.

Dave Whitall is a coastal ecologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment in Silver Spring, Maryland. He said the dead zone forms each April and lasts through the summer, adding that the zone "generally grows throughout the summer, reaching a peak in late July."

At its peak, the nearly lifeless water can span 5,000 to 8,000-plus square miles (13,000 to 21,000 square kilometers), an area almost the size of New Jersey.

The dead zone is the result of oxygen-depleted water. Fish, shrimp, and all other marine organisms that require oxygen to survive either flee the zone or die.

Whitall says the phenomenon is triggered by excess nutrients in the Mississippi and Atchafalaya River Basins. Streaming into the Gulf of Mexico along the Louisiana coast, the rivers drain about 40 percent of all U.S. land area and account for nearly 90 percent of the freshwater runoff into the Gulf.

Algal Blooms

The nutrients that flow into the Gulf of Mexico allow microscopic organisms called phytoplankton to bloom. When these algae die, they sink to the bottom of the ocean. There, they are decomposed by oxygen-consuming bacteria.

In the process, the bacteria consume most of the surrounding waterborne oxygen, leaving little oxygen for the other life-forms that depend on it.

While the excess nutrients that flow into the Gulf of Mexico come from a variety of sources, Whitall said, the main source is agricultural runoff, namely chemical fertilizers and animal manure.

"Nitrogen and phosphorus also come from human waste, via wastewater treatment plants and septic systems; domestic animal waste; and industrial sources," he said. Additional nutrient sources include power plants, cars, and agricultural and industrial ammonia emissions.

Dead zones are not unique to the Gulf of Mexico.

Gulf of Mexico "Dead Zone" Is Size of New Jersey
<< Back to Page 1 Page 2 of 2
Robert Diaz is a researcher with the College of William and Mary's Virginia Institute of Marine Science in Gloucester Point, Virginia. He and his colleagues have found evidence for more than a hundred dead zones worldwide. They range in size from 0.4 to 27,000-plus square miles (1 to 70,000-plus square kilometers).

In the U.S. these oxygen-depleted, or hypoxic, zones develop annually in western Long Island Sound off New York and Connecticut, the Chesapeake Bay off Maryland and Virginia, and the Neuse River in North Carolina.

Outside the U.S., dead zones are found in the North, Adriatic, Baltic and Black Seas and Japan's Seto Inland Sea.

Zone Reduction

Scientists first noted the annual formation of the Gulf of Mexico dead zone in the 1980s.

In 2001 a multilevel government task force led by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency set a goal of reducing the Gulf of Mexico dead zone to a five-year running average of less than 2,000 square miles (5,000 square kilometers).

Donald Scavia, a marine scientist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor who led the science team that advised the task force, said the figure "represents conditions that were likely to be typical in the early 1970s—and a significant reduction from the current conditions."

Whitall, the NOAA coastal ecologist, said, "To achieve this goal, a 30 percent reduction in nitrogen load from the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers is being implemented."

The effort focuses on refining agricultural practices in the watershed. Such tactics include timing of fertilizer applications better, plowing more efficiently, restoring natural wetlands, and improving manure management.

Computer modeling by Scavia and colleagues suggest that, to reduce the Gulf of Mexico dead zone to 1970s levels, a 40 to 45 percent reduction in nutrient runoff may be necessary.

"This does not negate the original agreement," Scavia said. "In fact, it supports it. This basin is a massive, slow-moving system. And moving toward practices that produce [a] 30 percent or 40 percent [reduction] is appropriate."

news.nationalgeographic.com