Ocean seeding a dead duck as carbon solution
Plankton won’t save the world
Cloud storage: Lower cost and increase uptime
Seeding the ocean with iron to encourage plankton blooms works – kind of – but as a carbon sequestration approach, it’s hugely expensive, inefficient and probably ineffective, according to a Sydney University researcher.
The geo-engineering idea hit the headlines earlier this year when American Russ George dumped 200,000 pounds (more than 90,000 kg) of iron sulphate in the northern Pacific Ocean to spark a plankton bloom. The plankton consume carbon and, when they die, carry it to the bottom of the ocean, thereby sequestering the carbon for up to 100 years.
The problem is not in the theory, says Sydney University postgraduate researcher Daniel Harrison, here. It’s about efficiency. Harrison’s work, to be published in the International Journal of Global Warming, provides a sobering assessment of the cost of “plankton sequestration”.
He suggests that the mean price of using iron to drive plankton growth is $AU400 per tonne of carbon dioxide sequestered for 100 years or more. In Australia, a carbon permit currently trades at $AU23 per tonne.
Harris came to this conclusion by analysing the outcomes of published experiments. He told the Sydney Morning Herald the problem is that “the perfect conditions you would need are so rare that it would be a very limited contribution to the problem.”
Fertilising a square kilometre of the Southern Ocean would, he said, sequester only about 10 kg of carbon – far less than the fuel consumed by the boat on an out-and-back journey. ®
COMMENTS
Re: I wonder if there is a way to process atmospheric CO2 into graphite?
Bonding the carbon and oxygen atoms together produced the energy that's running the world. At least as much energy is needed to pull them back apart. There are solar powered devices that are not only capable of pulling the atoms apart, but can self-repair and self replicate. They're called plants.
Re: I wonder if there is a way to process atmospheric CO2 into graphite?
Well we need to stop throwing away perfectly good cars, or building 'disposable' hardware with locked boot-loaders. (Germany recently threw away millions of perfectly good cars in an intervention to support the car industry. Of course the new cars didn't need considerably less gasoline than the old ones.)
Just cutting back on completely unnecessary use of resources would probably bring more any of those "let's push the problem into the future so we won't have to deal with it right now.
Re: I wonder if there is a way to process atmospheric CO2 into graphite?
"Maybe we need something more than plants."
Maybe we need more plants.
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
Cloud storage: Lower cost and increase uptime
SaaS data loss: The problem you didn’t know you had
