Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric who wrote (51188)	5/13/2014 12:34:43 AM
From: Hawkmoon	2 Recommendations Recommended By Brumar89 FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

It was an illegal act in international waters in violation of international treaties. Blah, blah, blah.. show me where international treaties have declared Iron to be a pollutant... Even the EPA hasn't declared Iron to be a pollutant.. They have guildelines about how much should be permitted in drinking water.. but it's not a pollutant (yet).. epa.gov And since Iron readily sinks to the ocean depth, if not consumed by ocean flora, it is rendered harmless to the environment.. Therefore, under such a definition, it is NOT a pollutant. pollution, also called environmental pollution, the addition of any substance (solid, liquid, or gas) or any form of energy (such as heat, sound, or radioactivity) to the environment at a rate faster than it can be dispersed, diluted, decomposed, recycled, or stored in some harmless form. britannica.com So "dumping" Iron into the oceans is NOT an act of pollution.. Therefore, it is NOT illegal.. You're enviro-Nazis just want to declare it as such because you don't like the fact that the natural ecosystem is being augmented to better enable it to facilitate increased CO2 uptake due to increased photosynthesis.. Hawk