[permaculture] Frankensphere?
Marimike6 at cs.com
Marimike6 at cs.com
Wed Jan 21 12:24:25 EST 2009
PRESS/SOCIAL MEDIA RELEASE
Rogue German Ship Fertilizing Southern Ocean in Dangerous
Climate Geo-Engineering Experiment
- Precedent set that private researchers can experiment on
Earth's shared biosphere without oversight. Protests highlight
oceans are not carbon dumps, a biosphere cannot be engineered.
January 20, 2009
By Earth's Newsdesk, a project of Ecological Internet
http://www.ecoearth.info/newsdesk/
CONTACT: Dr. Glen Barry, glenbarry at ecologicalinternet.org
(Seattle, WA) -- RV Polarstern, a German research ship from
the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, is
to dump twenty tons of iron sulphate over 300 square
kilometres of the Scotia Sea, off Chile's coast, near the
Antarctic Peninsula. The chemical cargo -- normally used to
treat lawns and sewage -- is likely to provoke a massive algal
bloom big enough to be seen from outer space.
German and Indian scientists are hoping the experiment will
show that such manmade algae blooms can provide a quick fix to
climate change by absorbing carbon into the sea. In fact, it
is a desperate attempt to put off hard climate change policies
by using technology to further create a human dominated
"Frankensphere". Along with other geo-engineering proposals
such as space mirrors and aerosol release, seeking to engineer
the biosphere holds great risks of unintended consequences
such as further climate destabilization and global ecological
damage.
The experiment breaches the global moratorium on ocean
fertilization activities recently agreed under the U.N.
Convention on Biological Diversity and defies agreements
against dumping of wastes in the sea. Ocean fertilization
treats oceans as carbon dumps, and will severely deplete
already troubled marine ecosystems.
"This is one of the first of many coming attempts to begin
'geo-engineering' the biosphere as a desperate measure to
address climate change," notes Dr. Glen Barry, Ecological
Internet's President. "Geo-engineering won't work -- the
atmosphere is simply too complex -- and trying will almost
certainly make things worse. It diverts from sufficient
emissions reductions, conservation and efficiency, and
renewable energy solutions to stop climate change and restore
global ecological systems."
Along with other geo-engineering proposals such as space
mirrors and aerosol release, seeking to engineer the biosphere
holds great risks of unintended consequences such as further
climate destabilization and global ecological damage.
Global protest has already led to a review of the experiment.
And in recent days 1,200 people from 63 countries have sent
hundreds of thousands of protest emails from Ecological
Internet's Earth Action Network to the German government[1].
They have demanded the experiment be cancelled, and Germany
agrees to a permanent ban on large-scale geo-engineering
experiments and implementation, until all other options are
exhausted, and global geo-engineering protocols are in place.
[1] TAKE ACTION:
http://www.climateark.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=ocean_geo-engineering
###ENDS###
Ecological Internet provides the world's largest and most used
climate and environment portals at http://www.climateark.org/
and http://www.ecoearth.info/ . Dr. Glen Barry is a leading
global spokesperson on behalf of environmental sustainability
policy. He frequently conducts interviews on the latest
climate, forest and water policy developments and can be
reached at: glenbarry at ecologicalinternet.org.
DISCUSS RELEASE:
http://www.climateark.org/blog/2009/01/rogue-german-ship-fertilizing.asp
To subscribe visit:
http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/subscribe/
*********
[posted to Permaculture list]
Everyone's entitled to their opinion.. and all I'm doing here is adding my
own. But to call all such approaches a "quick fix", and to say bioengineering
"is a desperate attempt to put off hard climate change policies by using
technology to further create a human dominated 'Frankensphere'"? Really?
I don't think anyone is saying we can just stop every other avenue of relief
right now, and sit back in our RVs while scientists rejigger the environment.
Obviously everyone's individual efforts are going to be vital to curbing
emissions. And governmental, national approaches to emission reduction will be key
to any success. But let's be realistic. No matter what enlightened
individuals, communities and committed nations do, there will still be the push of an
additional four or five billion newly affluent consumers in the coming couple of
decades. And I don't think they'll be satisfied to be told they should just
pedal their bicycles and eat local produce. Not when they've sat by for
generations watching the world's privileged people drive to the store in Hummers and
eat winter produce from across the globe. It's just not a realistic vision of
the near future. An additional effort will, IMO, be needed.
Scientists exploring the field of geoengineering have been the very first
people to admit that the approach "holds great risks of unintended consequences
such as further climate destabilization and global ecological damage." Those
are the people we first heard that warning from. They are unlikely to disregard
their own warnings.
Previous experimental seeding with iron has yielded less than impressive
results. A planned experiment on the scale of twenty tons is highly unlikely to
destabilize our climate regime. It's a small, localized experiment dedicated to
the furtherance of our knowledge as to how natural systems work.. and how they
can be influenced.
Neither is it "dumping".. of either carbon (the material being dispersed is
iron sulfate) or "waste". "Dumping" and "waste" are scare words, used to alarm
us, and an indication that propaganda is to follow. Or, to be more kindly, we
can say "heavy handed opinion".
Dr Barry then goes on to say "Ocean fertilization treats oceans as carbon
dumps, and will severely deplete already troubled marine ecosystems."
Okay, again, not carbon and not dumps. Nor can he show us that such an
experiment will deplete marine ecosystems.
He appears to be deliberately confusing us around the fact that we DO
currently have a great and growing problem with "dead zones".. those offshore areas
around the world where excess carbon and nitrogen are entering the coastal
systems from huge agricultural zones (think the Mississippi) or population areas
(think many of the rivers of Europe and China), and precipitating algal blooms.
That is in fact a great danger.. and one that has famously been converting
complex ecosystems into degraded near deserts.. where the top predator is now
the jellyfish.
But to seed planktonic nurseries with bioavailable iron? That's the material
that actually forms the limit to growth of phytoplankton. And phytoplankton
forms the base of the ocean's food chain. These are the tiny plants that nourish
the rest of ocean life. It also acts as our principal living carbon sink..
being responsible for more CO2 fixation than all of the plants on the earth's
solid surface.
It's an avenue that people up in 2036 might wish they had in their
armamentarium of tricks, in the event that global climate change has not stopped, but
pushed up to and beyond the brink of apparent reversibility. By that time they
won't have the luxury of time to start exploring any backup plans. They'll want
to try something ready and on the shelf.
By contrast, the plan being espoused by Dr Barry, by Eco Earth, by Eco
Internet, by Climate Ark, by Forests.org, by Water Conserve, Ocean Conserve,
Rainforest Portal, New Earth Rising and countless other advocacy groups.. is to have
no backup plan. And to bank everything on the gamble that we can turn the tide
of change by everyone agreeing to economize in their daily life. This
eggs-in-one-basket approach isn't in total agreement with the human nature I've
witnessed. To me, if the human race has a chance to totally screw something up, we
can always count on them doing so.. with gusto. Especially if anyone asks that
they deprive themselves.
So I feel we should absolutely do everything we can possibly do to tighten
our belts, economize to the point where our lives fit into a smaller size and do
daily work in the effort to avert catastrophe.
And I think we should put forth great effort in proselytizing among the
heathen.. knowing, as we do, that most of them don't exactly think the way we do.
But I also think we should explore a few potential backup plans, in the event
that all our efforts aren't quite good enough.
Still, that's my opinion, based on reading across the expanse of opinion.
While Dr Barry is, well.. a doctor in the field. And one with very pronounced
opinions. Here follow his credentials:
http://forests.org/staff/glen.asp
Further opinions on this topic would be welcomed, if anyone has an interest.
And a preliminary google of further references, possibly "rv polarstern iron
convention biological diversity", would no doubt be informative. When we form a
conclusion based on hearing one side of a controversy we often come away with
a limited view.
Michael
More information about the permaculture
mailing list