If the 50 percent figure for algal bloom biomass sinking to the deep ocean is correct then this represents a whole new ball game in terms of iron fertilization as a geo-engineering technique.
Maybe such deliberate enhancement of carbon storage in the oceans has more legs than we thought but, as the authors acknowledge, it’s still far too early to run with it.
Back in 2010, the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), which is part of UNESCO,published a study that approved of ocean fertilization as a “preventative” measure of sequestering CO2 in the deep oceans.
Dr. Michael Lutz, lead author of the study, said:
This discovery is very surprising. If, during natural plankton blooms, less carbon actually sinks to deep water than during the rest of the year, then it suggests that the Biological Pump leaks. More material is recycled in shallow water and less sinks to depth, which makes sense if you consider how this ecosystem has evolved in a way to minimize loss. Ocean fertilization schemes, which resemble an artificial summer, may not remove as much carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as has been suggested because they ignore the natural processes revealed by this research.
Geoengineering techniques have “unintended” consequences and mostly negative effects on our environment.
Victor Smetacek, professor at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Germany, who has led research teams supporting ocean fertilization asserts:
The time has come to differentiate: some geoengineering techniques are more dangerous than others. Doing nothing is probably the worst option.
The Royal Society, a globalist think-tank, released a study in 2009 that surmised that cutting man-made CO2 emissions is the first priority over safely dealing with our changing environment. Geoengineering, although a drastic measure, is justified because different attempts to mitigate carbon in our atmosphere will solve all of our problems.
John Shepard, professor and head scientist of the study on geoengineering claims:
It is important that we continue to research these technologies but governance of this research is vital to protect the oceans, wider environment and public interests.
In 2004, a team of scientists released 7 tons of iron sulfates into the ocean near Antarctica. This caused plankton to bloom exponentially. After monitoring the project for a month, the researchers concluded that with the bloom of plankton they could assume that large amounts of CO2 had sunk to the depths of the ocean.
The scientists turned the Antarctic region into a giant “test tube”.
Victor Smetacek, of the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany, said: “I am hoping that these results will show how useful these experiments are.”
Smetacek says ocean fertilization should be controlled by the United Nations. He also believes that private corporations should not be allowed to conduct experiments unless mandated by the UN. Under current treaties for carbon credit tax schemes, this mode of sequestering CO2 should be combined with solar geoengineering efforts.
Bill Gates has been funding David Keith’s Carbon Engineering corporation while funneling millions of dollars into solar geoengineering experiments. Making money on the actual scheme, as well as the manufacturing, Gates claims this inexpensive method of slowing down global warming effects. Keith disregards his peers who assert that this action will alter Earth’s natural weather patterns, while environmental groups decry that geoengineering nullifies their efforts to purport their campaigns to convince the public that man-made climate change is directly causational to human emissions of CO2.
In their study, the researchers claimed that this experiment proved the ocean fertilization could be effectively used to sequester CO2 in the ocean and be used on a regular basis as a viable geoengineering technique. They now plan to use ocean fertilization to bury 1 gigaton of CO2 annually as greenhouse gas emissions rise. These alarmists use the fear of a climate “tipping point”. As these scientists continue to use the ocean waters in the Arctic as experimentation grounds, they disregard the problems they could be causing.
Professor Rosemary Rayfuse, expert in International Law and the Law of the Sea at the University of New South Wales, Australia, asserted that ocean fertilization is not approved under carbon credit regulatory schemes and sale of its offsets on unregulated markets results in fraud.
The “dumping” of CO2 into the oceans amounts to polluting the waters. Rayfuse, citing the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) stated that:
There is no point trying to ameliorate the effects of climate change by destroying the oceans — the very cradle of life on earth. Simply doing more and bigger of that which has already been demonstrated to be ineffective and potentially more harmful than good is counter-intuitive at best.
John Cullen, an oceanographer with Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada, has analyzed the data on ocean fertilization and published his findings. He concludes that these experiments are dangerous on large scales that globalists are insisting take place. We will be polluting our oceans and this will have drastic consequences on ocean life and the delicate balance of our biosphere.
In essence, if ocean fertilization is pursued, they scheme would cause an Ice Age because of the effect of extreme cooling on our planet.
This week it became clear just what the consequences of ocean sequestering and other forms of geoengineering would be.
According to NASA satellites, an iceberg the size of Manhattan broke from the Greenland glacier. Alarmists are claiming that this proves man-made global warming is real; however, since the globalist scientific community has been polluting the oceans in the Arctic, it is quite possible that they have created the problem they claimed was happening.
Scientists are looking to take advantage of the oceans to justify natural cycles and contributions to the Earth’s climate, while simultaneously finding new ways to exploit this resource for their globalist agendas. Under the guise of using plankton for CO2 sequestering, data is being entered into computer models to see how this new integration can be used to maximize carbon credit profits.
Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page.
