Comments on: Scientists Given Go-Ahead for Ocean Fertilization Scheme http://cleantechnica.com/2009/01/28/scientists-given-go-ahead-for-ocean-fertilization-scheme/ Clean Tech News & Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. & More. Fri, 25 May 2012 22:41:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Uncle B http://cleantechnica.com/2009/01/28/scientists-given-go-ahead-for-ocean-fertilization-scheme/#comment-5759 Uncle B Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:34:27 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=2017#comment-5759 Burning coal and oil to get the iron dust, then spread it on the sea seems a cycle with little gain? Messing even more with the natural balance seems out of place and counter-intuitive? Going electric from renewable sources, Solar, Wave, Wind, Tidal, Hydro, and geothermal to Electric power and NiMh or Lithium rechargeable batteries for cars makes better sense - I for one would prefer Nuclear shipping in place of the large two stroke bunker - c engines that pollute the world now-a-days? The Americans and the Russians have reactor powered ships, Why not the commercial lines? The ocenas of the world are very large, the amount of iron needed to make significant differences in the atmosphere must be huge? Before polluting Ocenas with impure Iron, shouldn't the benefit be outlined and the process judged accordingly? This scheme follows the bio-fuels follies - it is a matter of relative sizes, not well measured by the altruists that support the schemes. Burning coal and oil to get the iron dust, then spread it on the sea seems a cycle with little gain? Messing even more with the natural balance seems out of place and counter-intuitive? Going electric from renewable sources, Solar, Wave, Wind, Tidal, Hydro, and geothermal to Electric power and NiMh or Lithium rechargeable batteries for cars makes better sense – I for one would prefer Nuclear shipping in place of the large two stroke bunker – c engines that pollute the world now-a-days? The Americans and the Russians have reactor powered ships, Why not the commercial lines? The ocenas of the world are very large, the amount of iron needed to make significant differences in the atmosphere must be huge? Before polluting Ocenas with impure Iron, shouldn’t the benefit be outlined and the process judged accordingly? This scheme follows the bio-fuels follies – it is a matter of relative sizes, not well measured by the altruists that support the schemes.

]]> By: Uncle B http://cleantechnica.com/2009/01/28/scientists-given-go-ahead-for-ocean-fertilization-scheme/#comment-22076 Uncle B Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:34:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=2017#comment-22076 Burning coal and oil to get the iron dust, then spread it on the sea seems a cycle with little gain? Messing even more with the natural balance seems out of place and counter-intuitive? Going electric from renewable sources, Solar, Wave, Wind, Tidal, Hydro, and geothermal to Electric power and NiMh or Lithium rechargeable batteries for cars makes better sense - I for one would prefer Nuclear shipping in place of the large two stroke bunker - c engines that pollute the world now-a-days? The Americans and the Russians have reactor powered ships, Why not the commercial lines? The ocenas of the world are very large, the amount of iron needed to make significant differences in the atmosphere must be huge? Before polluting Ocenas with impure Iron, shouldn't the benefit be outlined and the process judged accordingly? This scheme follows the bio-fuels follies - it is a matter of relative sizes, not well measured by the altruists that support the schemes. Burning coal and oil to get the iron dust, then spread it on the sea seems a cycle with little gain? Messing even more with the natural balance seems out of place and counter-intuitive? Going electric from renewable sources, Solar, Wave, Wind, Tidal, Hydro, and geothermal to Electric power and NiMh or Lithium rechargeable batteries for cars makes better sense – I for one would prefer Nuclear shipping in place of the large two stroke bunker – c engines that pollute the world now-a-days? The Americans and the Russians have reactor powered ships, Why not the commercial lines? The ocenas of the world are very large, the amount of iron needed to make significant differences in the atmosphere must be huge? Before polluting Ocenas with impure Iron, shouldn’t the benefit be outlined and the process judged accordingly? This scheme follows the bio-fuels follies – it is a matter of relative sizes, not well measured by the altruists that support the schemes.

]]> By: Matt Musson http://cleantechnica.com/2009/01/28/scientists-given-go-ahead-for-ocean-fertilization-scheme/#comment-5758 Matt Musson Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:35:33 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=2017#comment-5758 Nature already does this. Dust from Africa blows into the ocean to provide iron. When an iceberg breaks away from the shelf and melts, thousands of years of African iron dust gets recycled into sea water. This causes an algae bloom, sucks up CO2 and makes things get colder. Nature already does this. Dust from Africa blows into the ocean to provide iron.

When an iceberg breaks away from the shelf and melts, thousands of years of African iron dust gets recycled into sea water. This causes an algae bloom, sucks up CO2 and makes things get colder.

]]> By: Matt Musson http://cleantechnica.com/2009/01/28/scientists-given-go-ahead-for-ocean-fertilization-scheme/#comment-22075 Matt Musson Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:35:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=2017#comment-22075 Nature already does this. Dust from Africa blows into the ocean to provide iron. When an iceberg breaks away from the shelf and melts, thousands of years of African iron dust gets recycled into sea water. This causes an algae bloom, sucks up CO2 and makes things get colder. Nature already does this. Dust from Africa blows into the ocean to provide iron.

When an iceberg breaks away from the shelf and melts, thousands of years of African iron dust gets recycled into sea water. This causes an algae bloom, sucks up CO2 and makes things get colder.

]]>