Green Algae Bloom Process Could Stop Global Warming
A team of UK scientists have discovered a natural process that could delay, or even end, the threat of global warming.
The researchers, aboard the Royal Navy’s HMS Endurance, have found that melting icebergs off the coast of Antarctica are releasing millions of tiny particles of iron into the southern Ocean, helping to create huge ‘blooms’ of algae that absorb carbon emissions. The algae then sinks to the icy depths, effectively removing CO2 from the atmosphere for hundreds of years.
According to lead researcher, Prof. Rob Raiswell of Leeds University, “The Earth itself seems to want to save us.”
- » See also: Best Counterargument to Price on Carbon Hurting Jobs?
- » Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Scientists have known for some time that artificially created algal blooms could be used to absorb greenhouse gases, but the technique has been banned for fear of causing unforeseen side effects in fragile ecosystems. However, based on the UK team’s evidence that the process has been occurring naturally for millions of years, and on a wide scale, the UN has given the green light for a ground-breaking experiment later this month.
The team will seek to create a massive algae bloom by releasing several tons of iron sulphate into the sea off the coast of the British island of South Georgia. The patch will apparently be large enough to be visible from space.
If successful, the technique could be rolled out across vast swathes of the Great Southern Ocean. Scientists calculate that if the whole 20 million square miles was treated, it could remove up to three and a half Gigatons of C02, equivalent to one eighth of all global annual emissions from fossil fuels.
It would be a huge irony if melting icebergs, until now a powerful symbol of the damage caused by global warming, reveal a process that may enable scientists to take steps that might drastically reduce, and potentially even halt, the threat of environmental catasrophe.
Image Credit - nick_russill via flickr.com on a Creative Commons license
This is just a short-term solution in my view. The carbon will probably stay in the ocean, just more deeply. So over thousands of years it will still be around to potentially mix back into the atmosphere.
The ocean would also be more acidic with this scenario. Only a small portion of the carbon may get buried in the ocean bottom sediment.
steve, your right about the carbon not entirely sinking to the sea floor, rather it would cycle into the ocean ecosystem, but the key that you missed is the carbon will be organically bound (acid level is raised by inorganic carbon(CO2)), thus by turning CO2 into organic carbon the algae bloom will raise the pH, not lower it.
also, does “thousands of years”, as you say, actually sound “short-term” to you?
I thought we were supposed to call it “climate change” now, and pretend every storm was caused by SUVs.
Steve, I don’t believe that any significant amount of carbon will become part of the atmosphere once it resides in the algae on the bottom of the ocean. It doesn’t make sense. Burning the coal produced from the algal compost, however, will put those atoms back into the environment (in the form of CO2). And for acidity, the algae would work as a buffer, neutralizing the pH of the water.
20 million square miles to remove one eighth of global annual emissions from fossil fuels… is this a joke?? Spain measures 200,000 square miles, thus to cover the size of 100 Spains of ocean with algea, seems to me somewhat radical… USA is 3.79 million square miles, cover 5 times the size of the states of ocean… seems like a bad idea, hope its a joke or that the figures are wrong. Rivers die because algea created from pollution dont permit the dissolving of oxygen in water… mmmm
This sounds dangerous to me. Who knows what other side effects dropping large amounts of iron into the ocean could have or the effects of creating such a large algae bloom at once. Humans do not have a good track record when it comes to making judgments about what is and isn’t good for certain ecosystems, and we know the least about the deep sea.
I’m not saying that this option should not be explored, but people should not be in haste to accept it as a practical healthy solution until research has been exhaustively carried out. Producing a measurable result in the atmosphere is not the only thing that matters here. What’s much more important is that as humans we continue to strive to be eco-friendly in our industries and way of life. We must live in harmony with Earth by understanding and operating within it’s natural tolerances.
Ah, the old “don’t worry if we do nothing the planet will fix itself”
Algal blooms cause massive problems in underwater ecosystems, and in reality are one of the biggest problems that rivers/lakes/coasts face today. Guess what also produces algal blooms, waste runoff from manufacturing plants and fertilizers. These algal explode(or bloom) into massive numbers and absorb all essential resources while blocking sunlight. They choke the life out of the waters they exist in.
God i hate these pseudo-scientists who publish their bullshit in bad articles.
The impending eruption of the Yosemite Super Volcano will also stifle global warming by tossing up roughly 240 cubic miles worth of rock and dust, possibly cooling the earth enough to trigger an ice age.
Hundreds, or thousands as you put it, of years is not a “short-term” solution. There isn’t really a danger that this will be accepted as the only solution.
Our fossil fuels will be depleted long before the eaten carbon emissions resurface. Even if global warming were irrefutably disproved tomorrow we would still move toward more environmentally friendly sources of energy. Electric cars fueled by solar, wind, water etc, are simply more sustainable, promote better national security and provide a future for massive energy companies when the oil, inevitably, runs dry.
I think the point is that the algae has the ability to break down the emmisions. So it won’t run around in our atmoshphere and ocean.
Quit being such an annoying pessimist.