Iron Fert NEG Supplement
Off-Case
Algae DA
Iron fertilization creates toxin producing algae
McDermott 10
Mat McDermott, Mat edits the Business and Energy sections of TreeHugger, as well as writing about resource
consumption, animal welfare issues, and the response of religious communities to our current environmental problems.
He also has a Master’s degree from New York University's Center for Global Affairs where he studied environment and
energy policy. “Ocean Iron Fertilization Could Stimulate Toxic Algae Blooms in Open Ocean,” November 8, 2010,
http://www.treehugger.com/natural-sciences/ocean-iron-fertilization-could-stimulate-toxic-algae-blooms-in-open-ocean.html>//BGNV
There's no doubt that geoengineering brings out passionate emotions both pro and con, as recent debate on
TreeHugger about the sort of-moratorium on some researchcoming out of the Convention on Biological
Diversity amply illustrates. Backing up the caution side (which I admit I'm firmly a part of) is a new piece
of research coming from UC Santa Cruz, and published in Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, which shows that a toxin-producing algae normally thought limited to coastal waters (and
perhaps partial inspiration for The Birds) can be stimulated to grow rapidly in the open ocean when iron
from natural or artificial sources is present. Science Codex sums up the nut of it: Blooms of diatoms in the
genus Pseudo-nitschia, which produce a neurotoxin called domoic acid, are a regular occurrence in coastal
waters. During large blooms, the algal toxin enters the food chain, forcing the closure of some fisheries
(such as shellfish and sardines) and poisoning marine mammals and birds that feed on contaminated fish.
But until now, blooms of these algae in the open ocean have attracted little attention from researchers.
Study lead author, Mary Silver says that normally pseudo-nitschia don't have much effect, but "these
species are incredibly responsive to iron, often becoming dominant in algal blooms that result from iron
fertilization. Any iron input might cause a bloom of the cells that make the toxin." Silver adds that natural
deposits of iron in the open ocean (from volcanic eruptions, dust storms, etc) have occurred for millions of
years, but are sporadic occurrences. "To do iron enrichment on a large scale could be dangerous," Silver
notes, "because, if it causes blooms of pseudo-nitschia, the toxin will get into the food chain, as it does in
the coastal zone." How did Silver and colleagues reach this conclusion (and warning)? By examining
pseudo-nitschia cells found in samples collected from the Gulf of Alaska in 2007, which ended up showing
the presence of domoic acid. This prompted a reexamination of old samples from ocean iron fertilization
experiments from 1995 and 2002--which, despite the age of the samples and the assumption that is would
have broken down, still contained the toxin. Kenneth Coale, report co-author and director of Moss Landing
Marine Laboratories, says that these results mean, "we should redouble our efforts to reduce carbon
emissions," as this work "definitely reveals a wrinkle in plans [to use ocean iron fertilization to reduce
atmospheric carbon dioxide levels]."
Toxin producing algae, or HABS, cause mass mortalities, economic losses & environmental damage
Al-Muftah 08
Abdulrahman Al-Muftah, Dr. Al-Muftah is part of the Department of Chemistry and Earth Sciences from the University Of Qatar,
“Harmful Algae Species of Qatari Water,” March 2008,
file:///C:/Users/Noah/Downloads/QBNewsletter_Vol2_Issue3_Mar2008.pdf>//BG-NV
Occurrence of harmful algae bloom (HAB) has been known form a long time. During recent years, HABs
have become increasingly problem in the coastal waters around the world. It is killing invertebrates, wild
stocks and cultural fish. This occurring due to either toxicity, physical irritation of gill tissues or causing
oxygen deficiency. The most common disease which caused by some types of dinoflagellates is the
paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP). The accumulation of algae toxins in fish and shellfish can poisoning
humans as well as wild life. In the last three decades, ROPME sea area has experienced a massive marine
mortality caused by natural phenomenon or even by man-made anthropogenic inputs such as industrial and
domestic wastes (Kuwait , Iran 1991 ,2001, Saudi Arabia 2003, Qatar 2007 ). Algae blooms have been
associated with some of the frequent episodes seafood contamination, sometime with very serious
consequences for human health and economical loss( Kuwait, Iran 1999,2000,2001,Oman
1999,2000,2002,Saudi Arabia 2003 and Qatar 2008). Most incidents took place between August and
October, which considered transition period between summer and winter. These repeated mass mortalities
have always caused great economic losses in the fisheries industry, threaten the Mari-culture industry and
anxiety among sea food consumers in the effected region and caused adverse effects and vast
environmental damages. A preliminary survey of potentially toxic phytoplankton species was carried out in
Qatari waters (Figure 1). The number of HAB species in Qatari estimated and compared with world flora
.The species composition, distribution and ecology of the HABs community was examined.
HABS causes Extinction
Geological Society of America 09
Geological Society of America, is a nonprofit organization devoted to the advancement of the geological science, “Killer
Algae: Key Player In Mass Extinctions,” October 20, 2009,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091019134716.htm//BG-NV
Super volcanoes and cosmic impacts get all the terrible glory for causing mass extinctions, but a new
theory suggests lowly algae may be the killer behind the world's great species annihilations. Today, just
about anywhere there is water, there can be toxic algae. The microscopic plants usually exist in small
concentrations, but a sudden warming in the water or an injection of dust or sediment from land can trigger
a bloom that kills thousands of fish, poisons shellfish, or even humans. James Castle and John Rodgers of
Clemson University think the same thing happened during the five largest mass extinctions in Earth's
history. Each time a large die off occurred, they found a spike in the number of fossil algae mats called
stromatolites strewn around the planet. Castle will be presenting the research on October 19 at the annual
meeting of the Geological Society of America in Portland, Oregon. "If you go through theories of mass
extinctions, there are always some unanswered questions," Castle said. "For example, an impact – how
does that cause species to go extinct? Is it climate change, dust in the atmosphere? It's probably not going
to kill off all these species on its own." But as the nutrient-rich fallout from the disaster lands in the water,
it becomes food for algae. They explode in population, releasing chemicals that can act as anything from
skin irritants to potent neurotoxins. Plants on land can pick up the compounds in their roots, and pass them
on to herbivorous animals. If the theory is right, it answers a lot of questions about how species died off in
the ancient world. It also raises concerns for how today's algae may damage the ecosystem in a warmer
world. "Algae growth is favored by warmer temperatures," Castle said. "You get accelerated metabolism
and reproduction of these organisms, and the effect appears to be enhanced for species of toxin-producing
cyanobacteria." He added that toxic algae in the United States appear to be migrating slowly northward
through the country's ponds and lakes, and along the coast as temperatures creep upward. Their expanding
range portends a host of problems for fish and wildlife, but also for humans, as algae increasingly invade
reservoirs and other sources of drinking water.
Link EXT
Iron-Fert Causes Algal Blooms
Parsons and Whitney 12 (Timothy R Parsons, employed by University of British Columbia, Frank A
Whitney, Registered Agent and Member of INLAND UNLIMITED, September 2012, “Fisheries
Oceanography”, http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/06/critics-of-iron-fertilization-said.html)
The effect of a widely distributed phytoplankton bloom triggered by volcanic ash from Alaska (Hamme et al.,
2010. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37) on juvenile Fraser River sockeye is discussed in terms of the timing of ocean migration and trophic
structure of the Gulf of Alaska. Our hypothesis is that the occurrence of a massive diatom bloom in the Gulf
greatly enhanced energy ascendancy in the ocean at a time of year when adolescent sockeye migrated from the coast in
2008. We contend this increase in food availability was an important factor for the survival and growth of
juvenile sockeye which led to one of the strongest sockeye returns on record in 2010 of 34 million, compared with perhaps the
weakest return on record of 1.7 million the previous year. "There are three volcanic events in the last 100 years, and we
had record sockeye salmon runs in those three volcanic dust events," Russ George says. "That's pretty good data."
Iron Fertilization causes Algal Blooms
Vaidyanathan 13 (Gaythri Vaidyanathan, a staff reporter for E&E Publishing's Energywire, 6/17/13, Iron
Fertilization Develops a New Wrinkle, http://news.discovery.com/earth/oceans/iron-fertilization-developsa-new-wrinkle-130617.htm)
Last year, American entrepreneur Russ George dumped a hundred tons of iron sulfate into the Pacific
Ocean off Canada. A 3,861 square mile algal bloom formed.
That’s geo-engineering. An iron-rich ocean is fertile, and allows colonies of photosynthetic plankton to thrive. George was
hoping that the plankton would draw carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and lock it into the ocean as a
way to address climate change. It’s not the first time an iron fertilization experiment was carried out, but it was the first time it
was done with so little supervision. Independent experimentation is dangerous because we know very little about how iron gets used
up in the oceans.Now, a new study in Nature Communications suggests that the iron could be consumed by diatoms, which
are photosynthetic plankton that have beautifully symmetric skeletons made of silica. The critters feed on the iron
insatiably and add the element into their shells. And when the diatoms die, they sink into the ocean, taking
the iron with them.
Iron fertilization creates toxic blooms and Ice ages
Posel 12 (Susanne Posel, 10/2/12, globally syndicated independent journalist and owner of Occupy
Corporatism an independent new agency, Iron Fertilization: The Scheme That Is Killing the Oceans,
Marine Life and Humans, http://www.occupycorporatism.com/home/iron-fertilization-the-scheme-that-iskilling-the-oceans-marine-life-and-humans/ ) j/s
Another hazard created by iron fertilization is that the method used to sequester the CO2 in phytoplankton
may produce domoic acid, a potent neurotoxin that can weaken fish, birds, sea mammals and potentially
humans who eat the contaminated seafood. Coastal areas are at the greatest threat to iron overdose due to
the large amounts of local seafood consumed, as well as ingesting the neurotoxin. Charles Trick of the
University of Western Ontario and lead researcher explains: “If we added the normal amount of iron that
one would add for these fertilization experiments, the level of toxins in each of the cells goes higher. It
allows (Pseudonitzschia) to grow faster. And as they grow, they stop the other species from growing. They
become dominant. The surprising part was not just that it made toxin,” Trick said, “but that it made lots of
toxin, and it stopped the other species from getting the nutrients.” Mak Saito of the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution, said: “If we’re going to actively change the planet’s chemistry or biology to
actively reverse global warming, what are the unintended consequences? Here he’s already documented
one of the concerns. What are the ones we don’t even know about?” 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.
Water Scarcity Module
HABs cause water insecurity
IOC 14 (Intergovernmental Oceanic Commission, 9/4/14, IOC is a agency of UNESCO and specializes in
research centered around the oceans, Addressing the impacts of Harmful Algal Blooms on water security,
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/ioc-oceans/single-viewoceans/news/addressing_the_impacts_of_harmful_algal_blooms_on_water_security/ ) j/s
The shortage of freshwater resources and the need for additional water supplies is already critical in many
arid regions of the world; future projections of climate change impacts add further stress to water security.
These regions often have limited underground water resources, some that are becoming more brackish as
extraction of water from the aquifers continues. Currently, there are over 14,000 desalination plants in more
than 150 countries – exemplifying the growing reliance on this technology. About 50% of this capacity
exists in the West Asia Gulf region, while North America has about 17%, Asia (apart from the Gulf) about
10%, and North Africa and Europe about 8% and 7%, respectively. In 2008, the installation capacity was
52.3 million m3/d, but the desalination market is expected to grow by 12% per year reaching a capacity of
94 million m3/d in 2015. Reverse osmosis is the most common method of desalination; water is pumped
through a membrane that restricts sodium and chlorine ions from passing. This technology is currently
facing challenges due to HABs (commonly known as red tides) that, with a high enough biomass, can clog
filters and compromise the integrity of reverse osmosis membranes. Furthermore, some HABs produce
potent neurotoxins threatening human health. In 2008-2009 an outbreak of the dinoflagellate Cochlodinium
in the Gulf-Arabian Sea region lasted eight months, which heavily restricting the region’s ability to
desalinate water for drinking and industrial use. This algal bloom posed a huge threat to the water security
and economy of the region. ”Reverse There is a need for further documentation and research regarding the
impacts of toxic blooms on desalination plants; only preliminary measurements of marine algal toxins
before and after desalination have been made at any large-scale desalination plant. HABs are often
unrecognized events, and plant operators are generally unaware of the threat that algal toxins pose. That
being said, there is a general scientific consensus that globally, the number of toxic blooms, the resulting
economic losses, the types of resources affected, and the number of toxins and toxic species reported have
all increased over the last few decades. IOC-UNESCO’s engagement in HABs and desalination is targeted
at developing test systems that may forecast those algal blooms that can lead to the closure or damage of
desalination plants. This includes utilising satellite remote sensing technology to detect algal blooms in
coastal areas, and coupling this data with numerical modelling of coastal hydrology to better forecast algal
bloom transport and landfall. UNESCO considers toxic blooms to be a threat to the economy and health of
arid nations and is committed to capacity building and international research cooperation for desalination
and HABs.
Water shortages cause middle east conflict
Starr 91 (Joyce R. Starr, 1991, Specialist in middle east and water security issues and founder of the
Global Water Summit Initiative, Water Wars, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1148639 ) j/s
The Middle East water crisis is a strategic orphan that no country or international body seems ready to
adopt. Despite irrefutable evi- dence that the region is approaching dangerous water shortages and
contamination, Western leaders have so far failed to treat the issue as a strategic priority. Yet when the
current Persian Gulf war ends, the water crisis could erupt. This intensifying security issue requires sustained policy actions as well as new bureaucratic and consultative structures. As early as the mid-1980s,
U.S. government intelligence services estimated that there were at least 10 places in the world where war
could break out over dwindling shared water-the majority in the Middle East. Jordan, Israel, Cyprus, Malta,
and the countries of the Ara- bian Peninsula are sliding into the perilous zone where all available fresh
surface and groundwa- ter supplies will be fully utilized. Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, and Tunisia face similar
prospects in 10 to 20 years. Morocco has made serious efforts in the water and sanitation sectors. Still, that
country faces the prospect of a declining water supply beyond the year 2000, when its population is
projected to grow to 31 million. Algeria, Israel, the West Bank, Gaza, Jor- dan, Tunisia, and Yemen are
already facing a "water barrier" requiring accelerated efforts, investments, regulations, and controls just to
keep apace of spiraling populations. Middle Eastern and North African countries combined will absorb 80
million people by the close of the 1990s, pitting the Davidian capacity of existing water and sanitation
services against the Goliath of demand. The human toll translates into tragic statis- tics. The United Nations
International Chil- JOYCE R. STARR, a specialist on the Middle East and water security issues, is founder
and chairman of the Global Water Summit Initiative, a nonprofit policy research and educational group. 17.
This content downloaded from 35.13.199.172 on Tue, 29 Jul 2014 17:33:21 PM All use subject to JSTOR
Terms and Conditions FOREIGN POLICY dren's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) reports, for example, that
40,000 children worldwide-a majority of them on the African continent-are dying daily from hunger or
disease caused by lack of water or contaminated water. At the turn of this century, almost 40 per cent of the
African population will be at risk of death or disease from water scarcity or contamination. Yet the Middle
East and North Africa are failing to confront overall water shortages. Wa- ter consumption for all uses is
still less than available water, although fresh water is increas- ingly scarce throughout the region. The challenges are to make water available at an accept- able cost in places where it is most needed and to
dramatically improve the management of existing water resources. According to the World Bank, the
Middle East has the highest median cost of water supply and sanitation in the world. Capital costs of water
reached a median of $300 per capita in 1985, about twice those on the American con- tinent and more than
five times those in South- east Asia. Given its burdensome population growth rates, the region cannot
afford to expand water supplies at current exorbitant prices.
Aquaculture CP
Text: The 50 states and relevant territories should substantially increase coastal development of
aquaculture farms.
Aquaculture could be a solution to an increasing demand for fish
Picow 11
Maurice Picow, Picow received a B.S. Degree in Business Administration is a job in the insurance agency business and now writes for
The Jerusalem Post as well as the Green Prophet. In his spare time, he also writes about global warming and clean technology, “UN
Says Aquaculture Could Solve Fish Collapse,” November 17, 2011, http://www.greenprophet.com/2011/11/un-says-aquaculturecould-solve-fish-collapse///BG-NV
Catching wild fish in the sea is now threatening to deplete many fish species from the world’s seas and
oceans, including illegal tuna fishing in the Mediterranean Sea. With world population figures now topping
7 billion, an increasing demand is being made for fresh fish as a source of protein. This demand has
resulted in an increase in fish farming, or aquaculture both in the oceans and seas themselves and in salt
and fresh water ponds on dry land. Aquaculture has grown significantly in North and South America,
Europe, and in the Far East; particularly in Asian countries such as Thailand and China. Countries such as
China grow carp; with China, Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia and India growing shrimps and prawns.
Norway and Chile are growing salmon in aquaculture projects as well. These projects were noted recently
in a news report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The report sent to Green Prophet
highlights the importance of aquaculture in supplementing the world’s growing demand for protein,
especially fish. The high protein content of fish, plus nutrition supplements such as Omega 3 fatty acids are
vital to health and help prevent conditions of malnutrition, increased brain function, and deterrents of heart
disease and cancers. Mediterranean and Middle Eastern countries like Turkey, Israel, and Egypt, especially
fresh water species like Tilapia, known as “musht” in Arabic, is helping countries like Egypt feed its
growing population. An FAO report entitled World Aquaculture Growth 2010 goes into detail regarding
various aquaculture projects being carried out by countries all over the world. The report adds that:
“Achieving the global aquaculture sector’s long-term goal of economic, social and environmental
sustainability depends primarily on continued commitments by governments to provide and support a good
governance framework for the sector.” Even areas where land availability is at a minimum, such as
population dense Gaza, are also engaged in aquaculture. In Gaza, a small aquaculture project is being
carried out by a Gaza marine engineer and sea captain, Sohail Ekhail who has been trying to provide his
fellow Palestinians with nourishing fish by operating a fish farm on the outskirts of Gaza City. While
growing fish in the sea may cause some damage to coral and other marine habitations, as occurred with a
fish farm in the Red Sea, off Israel’s coastal city of Eilat, the ultimate solution is growing fish in ponds
instead of in the sea. Or in your own tanks inside apartment buildings, like one Israeli entrepeneur has
proposed. With this in mind, the future of aquaculture looks bright, and will help to feed and nourish an
increasing world population.
Tilapia aquaculture solves better than iron fertilization and is faster
Food & Beverage Reporter 13 Food & Beverage Reporter “Commercial aquaculture development: a suitable
solution to the world’s demands?” Monday, 30 September 2013, <http://tinyurl.com/lq3d26b>//BG-NV
The report states that only 26% of the world’s fisheries are underfished or moderately fished, while 24% are overexploited - 7% of
which are classified as depleted and 52% as fully exploited/fished to maximum biological productivity. With such dire numbers,
Michael Pascal, CEO of Aquaculture Production Technology (Israel), suggests how to develop a sustainable commercial aquaculture
industry in the Southern African Development Community (SADC). “Commercial aquaculture, when done properly has the
ability to produce better quality species, as well as higher volumes, to meet the predicted global demand
of an additional 40m tons of fish per year by 2020,” Pascal explains. He adds that successful fish husbandry should
enable the removal of toxic ammonia from culture media, avoid discharge of waste into the environment,
and comply with the best aquaculture practice as well as the consumer and governmental standards of
any country. According to the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries’ directorate for Policy for the Development of
Sustainable Aquaculture Sector in SA sustainable aquaculture includes environmental sustainability, traceability, product quality,
product safety, a HACCP programme, bio-security and social sustainability. Says Pascal: “We tend to forget that fish eat,
grow, breathe and excrete in their water media, and do not necessarily consume water. Tilapia and
catfish , in my opinion, are the two species that meet various technical and economic requirements, making
them the most sustainable. To produce 10,000t/year of tilapia requires 17,500t of feed and produces 4,000t of solid waste
output, 530t of nitrogen and 85t of phosphate. Sustainability According to Pascal, aquaculture systems are fundamentally
economically viable as they produce higher volumes than marine fisheries, don’t require much fresh
water or land, and help to alleviate the current overfishing crisis . And these systems are
environmentally sustainable as there is minimal discharge of organic wastes - and what is discharged can be treated and
recirculated. “Fish possess inherent economic and sustainability traits, and because aquaculture is an
enclosed system , they are protected and will neither escape or be stolen. Furthermore, the system ensures
a year-round supply of fish and should include renewable energy sources.”
Politics Links
Obama’s climate policy unpopular-Republicans are making a stink
Carroll 14 (James R. Carrol, 7/23/14, political correspondent for the Courier-Journal, McConnell meets
EPA chief on power plants, hits policy, http://www.courier-journal.com/story/politicsblog/2014/07/23/mitch-mcconnell-remains-critical-of-epa-power-plant-rules/13043459/ ) j/s
After their meeting, McConnell, R-Ky., remained a "no sale" on the Obama administration's efforts to
combat global warming. But McCarthy defended her policies Wednesday morning at a Senate hearing
where the impact of carbon dioxide emissions on climate was debated. McConnell last month asked
McCarthy to hold a hearing on the power plant rules somewhere in Eastern Kentucky. The commonwealth
is a major coal-producing state and is almost entirely dependent upon coal-burning plants. No such hearing
in the commonwealth is forthcoming, the senator said. McConnell has made what he calls President Barack
Obama's "war on coal" a central issue in his campaign for a sixth term in the Senate. "You know what you
are doing to my home state with your carbon emissions regulations," McConnell said in a statement after
meeting with McCarthy. "There are no nearby hearings and Kentuckians feel as though you have no
intentions of hearing from them. They tell me how angry they are, angry that you have made up your mind
without listening to their concerns."
Climate Policy unpopular-dems are backing off and EPA proves
Harrington 14 (Elizabeth Harrington, 4/29/14, staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon, EPA Delayed
Climate Change Regulation Until After Midterms, http://freebeacon.com/issues/epa-delayed-climatechange-regulation-until-after-midterms/ ) j/s
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) delayed issuing a final regulation limiting greenhouse gas
emissions for new power plants until after the midterm elections. The agency pushed back publishing the
rule for two months, allowing vulnerable Senate Democrats to avoid a vote on the measure six weeks
before voters go to the polls. President Obama directed the EPA to issue a proposal requiring new power
plants to reduce their carbon pollution by “no later than” Sep. 20, 2013. The EPA posted the proposal on its
website that day, but did not submit the rule to the Federal Register until Nov. 25, 2013. The rule was then
published in the Federal Register on Jan. 8. Once a rule is published in the Federal Register, agencies are
required to finalize it within one year. As a result, the EPA does not have to finish the regulation until Jan.
8, 2015, instead of this September, just weeks before the midterms. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R., Okla.) suggested
the delay was motivated by politics. “Based on this sequence of events, it appears that the delay in the
proposal’s publication may have been motivated by a desire to lessen the impact of the president’s harmful
environmental policies on this year’s mid-term elections,” he wrote in a letter to EPA Administrator Gina
McCarthy on Monday.
Climate is controversial-Republicans don’t want anything to do with it
Davenport 13 (Coral Davenport, 23/9/13, Reporter specializing in climate issue in politics for the New
York Times and former journalist at Congressional Quarterly Politico and the Daily Hampshire Gazette,
Republicans Pounce on Obama's Global-Warming Regulations for Political Fodder,
http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-pounce-obamas-global-warming-regulations-political-fodder054129181--politics.html ) j/s
President Obama sees his new global-warming regulations as a cornerstone of his legacy. Republicans
see them as fresh political ammunition. On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency unveiled the
first in a series of historic and controversial climate-change rules aimed at reining in carbon pollution from
coal-fired power plants, the nation's top source of greenhouse-gas emissions. Republican strategists say
they see Obama's climate rules as a huge political liability—and they are raring to use climate policy
broadly as a weapon against Democrats in the 2014 midterm elections. "I'm looking at data in competitive
House races that shows that this sucker will be a loser," said Brock McCleary, a pollster for the National
Republican Congressional Committee. "If in 2014, Obamacare will be the right jab, climate policy will be
the left." That dynamic would essentially revisit the top two lines of attack that House Republicans used to
win a landslide majority in 2010. In that campaign, the GOP went after House Democrats who voted for
Obama's health care law—which, of course, ultimately passed—and his effort at passing a climate-change
law, which ultimately failed in the Senate. This time around, having failed to move climate change through
Congress, Obama has flexed his executive authority, using EPA to push through climate policy that he
couldn't get through Congress. That feeds directly into the broader Republican line of attack against Obama
as a president who bypasses Congress and uses his executive authority to aggressively regulate the U.S.
economy—as well as the longstanding charge that the president, in his quest to cut global-warming
pollution, is waging a "war on coal."
Iron Fert Adv
No Solvency
Fertilization fails for long term change—Iceland proves
Mongabay 13 (Mongabay.com, 3/22/13, Mongabay is a non-profit Guardian-endorsed news organization
dedicated to environmental news, Eruption yields bad news for iron fertilization-based geoengineering
schemes, http://news.mongabay.com/2013/0322-iron-fertilization-fail.html)
Geoengineering schemes that aim to slow global warming by seeding oceans with iron to boost carbon
dioxide-absorbing phytoplankton may not lead to long-term sequestration of the important greenhouse gas,
finds a new study published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. The research looked at the impact
of the 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull volcano, which released large amounts of iron in the North Atlantic
near Iceland. Some researchers speculated that iron fertilization would lead to a large-scale plankton bloom
that would absorb massive amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere, helping fight climate change. The new
study however dealt another blow to those hopes. The researchers found that the iron fertilization effect
quickly died out due to the rapid depletion of nitrate from the upper layers of the ocean, depriving the
phytoplankton of nitrogen, a critical nutrient needed for growth. “The additional removal of carbon by the
ash-stimulated phytoplankton was therefore only 15 to 20 per cent higher than in other years making for a
significant, but short-lived change to the biogeochemistry of the Iceland Basin,” said study lead author Eric
Achterberg of the National Oceanography Centre in the U.K. The results are consistent with other research.
A 2009 study published in Nature found that carbon uptake after iron fertilization was 80 times lower than
suggested by earlier research. That study also involved the National Oceanography Centre. "You might get
a different response if you shock the system by dumping a lot of iron all at once," Raymond Pollard of the
National Oceanography Centre told Nature News at the time. "The effect will still be much smaller than
some geoengineers would wish." " Ocean iron fertilization is simply no longer to be taken as a viable
option for mitigation of the CO2 problem," Hein de Baar, an oceanographer at the Royal Netherlands
Institute for Sea Research in Texel, was quoted as saying by Nature News.
Fertilization is ineffective-Diatoms
Vaidyanathan 13 (Gayathri Vaidyanathan, 6/17/13, Gayathri Vaidyanathan is a Canadian Indian journalist
based in Washington, DC, and a staff reporter for E&E Publishing’s Energywire covering the
environmental impacts of the oil and gas industry, especially fracking. She is also a contributor on earth
and climate science to Discovery News, Iron Fertilization Develops a New Wrinkle,
http://news.discovery.com/earth/oceans/iron-fertilization-develops-a-new-wrinkle-130617.htm ) j/s
Independent experimentation is dangerous because we know very little about how iron gets used up in the
oceans. Now, a new study in Nature Communications suggests that the iron could be consumed by diatoms,
which are photosynthetic plankton that have beautifully symmetric skeletons made of silica. The critters
feed on the iron insatiably and add the element into their shells. And when the diatoms die, they sink into
the ocean, taking the iron with them. Life on the Ocean Floor Garbage Patch: Photos The loss of iron
through diatoms is a natural process in the oceans off Antarctica, the study finds. The loss happens at four
times the rate at which new iron gets added into the ocean by dust deposition or the melting of ice. The
implication of this study for iron fertilization experiments is this: the iron we add into the oceans will
probably be removed quickly by the diatoms, said Ellery Ingall, the author of the study and a professor in
Georgia Tech’s College of Sciences, speaking to DNews while vacationing in France. How quickly the the
diatoms remove the iron is unknown, but this could well be a new wrinkle in geo-engineering. Ingall and
his colleagues did their study along the coast of Western Antarctica, collecting samples of plankton and ice
from an ice breaker in 2008 and 2009. They treated the samples chemically, and then used intense X-ray
beams to study the critters. The X-rays were 400-nanometer spots that revealed amazing detail about the
elemental chemistry of the diatoms — the presence of iron in this case. Top Facts on Ocean Awesomeness
It is unclear why the diatoms incorporate iron in their shells. Ingall suggested it could be because the
element is freely available, which makes the diatoms hog it in order to place other types of plankton at a
disadvantage. “Just like someone walking through a buffet line who takes the last two pieces of cake, even
though they know they’ll only eat one, they’re hogging the food,” said Ingall in a statement. That would
mean little iron is available for other types of plankton more efficient at capturing carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere. The ecology of the ocean would shift, from a plankton bloom that is better at removing carbon
to a bloom dominated by diatoms that are best at removing iron. These are theories that need further
testing, and the lack of knowledge is exactly why George’s solo iron fertilization experiment in an
important salmon feeding ground earned him a swift rebuke from environmentalists.
Not enough iron in the world to sustain fertilization, and anything short of 1,000 years fails
Oskin 14 (Becky Oskin, 3/21/14, Becky Oskin is a freelance science and medical writer, Iron Fertilization
Might Be Ineffective Against Global Warming Fossil Study Shows,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/21/iron-fertilization-global-warming-fossils_n_5006300.html ) j/s
But the results deal a blow to some geoengineering schemes that claim that people may be able use iron
fertilization to slow global warming. The planet's natural experiment shows it would take at least a
thousand years to lower carbon dioxide levels by 40 parts per million — the amount of the drop during the
ice age. Meanwhile, carbon dioxide is now increasing by 2 parts per million yearly, so in about 20 years
human emissions could add another 40 parts per million of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Levels
currently hover around 400 parts per million. "Even if we could reproduce what works in the natural world,
it's not going to solve the carbon dioxide problem," said Alfredo Martínez-García, a climate scientist at
ETH Zurich in Switzerland and author of the study, published today (March 20) in the journal Science. Iron
and ice The idea of fertilizing the ocean with iron to combat rising carbon-dioxide levels has intrigued
scientists for more than 20 years, since the late researcher John Martin observed that the ice-age drop in
carbon dioxide (noted in ice cores) synced with a surge in iron-rich dust. The link between more iron in the
ocean and less carbon dioxide in the air lies in the tiny ocean-dwelling plants called phytoplankton. For
them, iron is an essential nutrient. In some regions, such as the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica, the
water lacks iron but has plenty of the other nutrients that phytoplankton need to grow. Sprinkling a little
iron dust in that region could boost plankton numbers considerably, the theory goes. When climate changes
during the ice age boosted the amount of iron-rich dust blowing into the Southern Ocean, the phytoplankton
there grew and spread, gobbling up more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in the process, Martin said.
The model, called the iron fertilization hypothesis, has been borne out by modern tests. Seeding small areas
of the oceans does, indeed, cause big phytoplankton growth spurts. [7 Schemes to Geoengineer the Planet]
iron fertilizationLocation of the sediment core analyzed in the study (ODP Site 1090), shown against the
concentration of nitrate in surface waters. In the new study, Martínez-García and his co-authors examined
seafloor sediments from the Subantarctic Zone of the Southern Ocean, southwest of Africa. When the last
ice age peaked between 26,500 and 19,000 years ago, dust blowing off of Patagonia and the southern part
of South America settled there, the drill core shows. To gauge the changes in seawater composition at the
time, the researchers examined the fossilized shells of microscopic marine animals called foraminifera,
which eat plankton and preserve the local ocean chemistry in their shells. During the ice age, nitrogen
levels dropped when iron-rich dust increased at the drill core site, Martínez-García discovered. "It is
particularly gratifying to see such persuasive evidence for the iron hypothesis now appear in the sediment
record," said Kenneth Coale, director of the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories in Moss Landing, Calif.,
who was not involved in the study. In previous research, Coale and colleagues looked at the effect of iron
enrichment in these waters for over 40 days. The new study shows "the effects of iron enrichment for over
40,000 years, providing a historical validation of the iron hypothesis," Coale said. Too big to succeed? The
dust level in the drill core suggests that about four to fives times more sediment fell across the Southern
Ocean between South America and Africa during the ice age than the amount that falls there today,
Martínez-García said. "The magnitude of the area we are talking about is equivalent to three times the areas
of the entire United States, and is maintained for several thousand years," he told Live Science. "This helps
put into perspective what we can do in terms of the modern ocean." The new study supported the argument
that the amount of iron needed for geoengineering is untenable in the long term, said Gabriel Filippelli, a
biogeochemist at Indiana University-Purdue University in Indianapolis. "It is difficult to imagine even a
decade-long international effort of iron fertilization, sustained by continual ship runs dumping iron in a
weather-hostile and isolated region of the world, let alone an effort that lasts a millennium," Filippelli said.
Fertilization isn’t cost effective
U. of Sydney 12 (University of Sydney, 12/12/12, Australian public university in Sydney. it is Australia's
first university and is regarded as one of its most prestigious, ranked as the world's 27th most reputable,
Ocean Fertilization is Too Costly for Carbon Capture,
www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2012/12/ocean-fertilization-too-costly-carbon-capture ) j/s
Iron fertilization is more expensive than carbon capture and storage (CCS) and is much more expensive
than the Australian carbon price, which is currently charged at $23 per ton of carbon dioxide, says
Harrison. In his paper, Harrison argues that the cost of iron fertilization will vary with the oceanographic
conditions at the time and location of fertilization, but in almost all situations it is an expensive operation.
As well as being expensive, the amount of carbon stored for more than a century is so small that it is
uncertain whether measurable storage will occur at all. "This means that while under certain conditions the
cost may be moderate, under less ideal conditions, iron fertilization may actually create more greenhouse
gas than is sequestered," says Harrison. The study used average results from iron fertilization experiments
conducted in the Southern Ocean and concluded that the mean price will be over $400 per ton of carbon
dioxide sequestered from the atmosphere for 100 years or more.
Iron Fert Adv
Iron Fert Can’t Solve Warming
Oskin 14 (Becky Oskin, freelance science and medical writer in northern California, 3/21/14, “Iron
Fertilization Might Be Ineffective Against Global Warming, Fossil Study Shows,”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/21/iron-fertilization-global-warming-fossils_n_5006300.html)
During Earth's last ice age, iron dust dumped into the ocean fertilized the garden of the sea, feeding a
plankton bloom that soaked up carbon dioxide from the air , a new study confirms.¶ But the results deal a blow to
some geoengineering schemes that claim that people may be able use iron fertilization to slow global
warming. The planet's natural experiment shows it would take at least a thousand years to lower carbon dioxide
levels by 40 parts per million — the amount of the drop during the ice age.¶ Meanwhile, carbon dioxide is
now increasing by 2 parts per million yearly, so in about 20 years human emissions could add another 40 parts per million
of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Levels currently hover around 400 parts per million. ¶ "Even if we could reproduce what
works in the natural world, it's not going to solve the carbon dioxide problem," said Alfredo Martínez-García, a
climate scientist at ETH Zurich in Switzerland and author of the study, published today (March 20) in the journal Science.
Turn: Iron-Fert Releases GHGs
Jacquot 08 (Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Author on Treehugger.com, 1/9/08, “What Would Be the Side Effects
of Iron Fertilization?” http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/what-would-be-the-side-effects-ofiron-fertilization.html)
For one thing, scientists are worried by the changes in species composition the added iron could effect ; past
studies have demonstrated that the addition of iron sparked higher levels of interspecific competition, inevitably
benefiting some species over the others. While there is the chance that more frequent phytoplankton blooms could provide a
larger, constant food supply - particularly for dwindling fish stocks - scientists point out that iron addition could just as easily
support less beneficial processes in the oceans, increasing harmful algal blooms and dead zones. There is also
the concern that the changes in water chemistry caused by iron fertilization could lead to higher emissions of
both nitrous oxide, two highly potent GHGs produced when organic matter decomposes in deep waters. Some have tried to
downplay these concerns by proposing alternate solutions - fertilizing low-nutrient regions instead of high-nutrient ones to offset
nutrient depletion, for example - or by arguing that not all side-effects need be undesired. Because many phytoplankton release
dimethylsulfide (DMS) into the atmosphere, they believe bigger blooms could create a larger aerosol effect, helping to block incoming
sunlight and cooling the planet.
Iron Fert is Bad for the Environment
Dean 09 (Jennie Dean, MEM Candidate 2009, Duke University, 2009, “Iron Fertilization: A Scientific
Review with International Policy Recommendations,”
http://environs.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/32/2/dean.pdf)
Third, the addition of iron could shift the type of plankton and other species that survive, favoring fast
growing species.55 This shift could adversely effect the natural balance of the ecosystem. For example, some
experiments have shown populations of toxic plankton dominating the blooms.56 If fertilization projects proceed at the scale that
some desire, this short-term change could become a long-term one, potentially causing the local extinction of
certain species. This shift in species could also adversely influence the positive- feedback, DMS system discussed previously.57
Instead of supporting a population of phytoplankton that produces DMS, populations could produce greenhouse gases
such as methane and nitrous oxide.5 Since these gases have a greater global warming potential than carbon
dioxide, the benefits of iron fertilization would be lost and the global warming situation could actually be
worsened.
Iron-Fert Wrecks Ecosystems
EcoFriend 11 (Promoting Eco Friendly Lifestyle to Save Environment, 10/20/11, “The good, the bad and
the ugly about ocean iron fertilization,” http://www.ecofriend.com/good-bad-ugly-ocean-ironfertilization.html.”)
The marine ecosystem can be disturbed by iron seeding, as iron will induce a generous growth in all kinds
of phytoplankton, also ones belonging to genus Pseudonitzschia that produces toxic levels of domoic acid .
This acid causes death in various aquatic animals due to which, an unbalance in the ecology of oceans occurs.
Secondly, the iron fertilization will lead to lower the oxygen levels in the deep seas . When the algae will sink
deep in the sea the micro-organism will consume the oxygen of the ocean to raven the algae. The oxygen will also be
consumed by deep sea animals and therefore the level of oxygen will be deteriorated with large blooms of
plankton.
Iron Fert is Net Bad for the Environment
EcoFriend 11 (Promoting Eco Friendly Lifestyle to Save Environment, 10/20/11, “The good, the bad and
the ugly about ocean iron fertilization,” http://www.ecofriend.com/good-bad-ugly-ocean-ironfertilization.html.”
With the process of iron seeding, the plankton growth will be stimulated, which may also mean that algae
growth in deep oceans will be enhanced. But, the requirement of phytoplankton bloom is more on the shore than deep
inside. The earlier experiments in reference to the iron fertilization hypothesis pointed out that this method
may not be an efficient method to trap and store CO2. Colossal ocean area would be required to carry out the process
that may be not so practicable. The iron seeding can also stimulate the growth of some algae species that give rise
to red tides and other toxic acids in the oceans, disturbing the marine ecosystems.
Iron-Fert Causes Ice Ages
George 14 (Russ George, an American businessman and entrepreneur best known for founding the San
Francisco based firm Planktos Inc, 3/22/14, SCIENCE CONFIRMS: DUST + PLANKTON = ICE AGES,
http://russgeorge.net/2014/03/22/new-study-confirms-extra-iron-oceans-produced-last-ice-age/)
His studies had convinced him that prior to Ice Ages dusty times produced vast plankton blooms. The
blooms converted CO2 into ocean life, and that reduced the CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. In those
ancient times there was so little “extra” CO2 in the atmosphere that it formed not a “greenhouse blanket” as
we say it does today, ancient CO2 made for the flimsiest of warm covering for the planet, more like a
mosquito net than duvet. When those Pre-Pleistocene winds blew they brushed that thin coverlet away from
Mother Earth and she fell into a deathly cold chill we now call the ice age.
The findings, published in Science, 21 March 2014, confirm Martin’s longstanding theory that wind-borne
dust carried iron to this region of the Antarctic. This iron bearing dust drove plankton growth and
eventually led to the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The great work of the authors also
disprove the skeptics arm chair “political science hypothesis” that some unknown nitrogen related
phenomenon was driving those blooms.
Iron fert causes warming.
Sullivan 14 (Meg Sullivan, UCLA's media rep for the social sciences & humanities, 1/6/14, “Geo
Engineering No Substitute For Emission Reduction,” http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/newsstories/article/geo-engineering-no-substitute-for-emission-reduction-claims-study.html)
Forget about positioning giant mirrors in space to reduce the amount of sunlight being trapped in the earth's
atmosphere or seeding clouds to reduce the amount of light entering earth's atmosphere. Those approaches
to climate engineering aren't likely to be effective or practical in slowing global warming . A new report by
professors from University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and five other universities concludes that there's no way around it: We
have to cut down the amount of carbon being released into the atmosphere. The interdisciplinary team looked at a
range of possible approaches to dissipating greenhouse gases and reducing warming. "We found that climate engineering
doesn't offer a perfect option," said Daniela Cusack, the study's lead author and an assistant professor of
geography in the UCLA College. "The perfect option is reducing emissions. We have to cut down the
amount of emissions we're putting into the atmosphere if, in the future, we want to have anything like the
Earth we have now." Still, the study concluded, some approaches to climate engineering are more promising than others, and
they should be used to augment efforts to reduce the 9 gigatons of carbon dioxide being released each year by human activity. (A
gigaton is 1 billion tons.) The first scholarly attempt to rank a wide range of approaches to minimizing climate change in terms of their
feasibility, cost-effectiveness, risk, public acceptance, governability and ethics, the study appears in the latest issue of the peerreviewed scholarly journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. The authors hope the information will help the public and
decision-makers invest in the approaches with the largest payoffs and the fewest disadvantages. At stake, the study emphasizes, are the
futures of food production, our climate and water security. Cusack, an authority on forest and soil ecology, teamed up with experts in
oceanography, political science, sociology, economics and ethics. Working under the auspices of the National Science Foundation and
NASA, the team spent two years evaluating more than 100 studies that addressed the various implications of climate engineering and
their anticipated effects on greenhouse gases. Ultimately, the group focused its investigation on the five strategies
that appear to hold the most promise: reducing emissions, sequestering carbon through biological means on
land and in the ocean, storing carbon dioxide in a liquefied form in underground geological formations and
wells, increasing the Earth's cloud cover and solar reflection. Of those approaches, none came close to
reducing emissions as much as conservation, increased energy efficiency and low-carbon fuels would.
Technology that is already available could reduce the amount of carbon being added to the atmosphere by
some 7 gigatons per year, the team found. "We have the technology, and we know how to do it," Cusack
said. "It's just that there doesn't seem to be political support for reducing emissions." Of the five options the
group evaluated, sequestering carbon through biological means — or converting atmospheric carbon into solid sources of carbon like
plants — holds the most promise. One source, curbing the destruction of forests and promoting growth of new forests, could tie up as
much as 1.3 gigatons of carbon in plant material annually, the team calculated. Deforestation now is responsible for adding 1 gigaton
of carbon each year to the atmosphere. Improving soil management is another biological means of carbon sequestration that holds
considerable promise because soils can trap plant materials that have already converted atmospheric carbon dioxide into a solid form
as well as any carbon dioxide that the solids give off as they decompose. Since the dawn of agriculture, tilling land has led to the loss
of about half (55 to 78 gigatons) of the carbon ever sequestered in soil, the team reports. But such simple steps as leaving slash — the
plant waste left over after crop production — on fields after harvests, so it could be incorporated into the soil, could reintroduce
between 0.4 and 1.1 gigatons of carbon annually to soil, the study says. The approach would also improve soil's ability to retain
nutrients and water, making it beneficial for additional reasons. "Improved soil management is not very controversial," Cusack said.
"It's just a matter of supporting farmers to do it." The study also advocates a less familiar form of biological sequestration: the burial
of biochar. The process, which uses high temperatures and high pressure to turn plants into charcoal, releases little carbon dioxide into
the atmosphere. Under normal conditions, decaying plant life inevitably decomposes, a process that releases carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere. But charred plant material takes significantly longer — sometimes centuries — to decompose. So the approach can work
to keep carbon that has become bound up in plant life from decaying and respiring as carbon dioxide. And like working slash into the
soil, adding biochar to soil can improve its fertility and water retention. "Charcoal has been used as an agricultural amendment for
centuries, but scientists are only now starting to appreciate its potential for tying up greenhouse gases," Cusack said. But not all
biological sequestration would be so beneficial. The researchers evaluated the idea of adding iron to oceans in order
to stimulate the growth of algae, which sequesters carbon. The approach ranked as the study's least viable
strategy, in part because less than a quarter of the algae could be expected to eventually sink to the bottom
of the ocean, which would be the only way that carbon would be sequestered for a long period of time. The
study predicted that the rest would be expected to be consumed by other sea life that respire carbon dioxide,
which would end up back in the atmosphere. Additionally, increasing the algae blooms would likely wreak
havoc by decreasing the oxygen available for other marine life. The study's second most promising climate
engineering strategy, after carbon sequestration, was carbon capture and storage, particularly when the technique is used near where
fuels are being refined. CCS turns carbon dioxide into a liquid form of carbon, which oil and coal extraction companies then pump
into underground geological formations and wells and cap; millions of tons of carbon are already being stored this way each year. And
the approach has the potential to store more than 1 gigaton permanently each year — and up to 546 gigatons of carbon over time —
the study says. However, a liquid carbon leak could be fatal to humans and other animals, and the risk – while minimal – may stand in
the way of public acceptance. "With CCS we're taking advantage of an approach that already exists, and big companies pay for the
work out of their own pockets," Cusack said. "The hurdle is public perception. No one wants to live next to a huge underground pool
of carbon dioxide that might suffocate them and their children – no matter how small the risk." Reducing the amount of sunlight that
is heating up the atmosphere through measures such as artificially increasing the earth's cloud cover or putting reflectors in outer space
ranked as the study's second least viable approach. While cloud seeding is cheap and potentially as effective as improving forestry
practices, the approach and its potential impacts are not well enough understood for widespread use, the team concluded. "Cloud
seeding sounds simple," Cusack said. "But we really don't understand what would happen to the climate if we started making more
clouds." Cusack's collaborators were Jonn Axsen, assistant professor of resource and environmental management at Simon Fraser
University in British Columbia, Canada; Lauren Hartzell-Nichols, a lecturer in the department of philosophy, the program on values in
society and the program on environment at the University of Washington; Katherine Mackey, a postdoctoral researcher at Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution and the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass.; Rachael Shwom, assistant professor in human
ecology at Rutgers University; and Sam White, assistant professor of environmental history at Ohio State University. Mitigating
further anthropogenic changes to the global climate will require reducing greenhouse-gas emissions (“abatement”), or else removing
carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and/or diminishing solar input (“climate engineering”). Here, we develop and apply criteria to
measure technical, economic, ecological, institutional, and ethical dimensions of, and public acceptance for, climate engineering
strategies; provide a relative rating for each dimension; and offer a new interdisciplinary framework for comparing abatement and
climate engineering options. While abatement remains the most desirable policy, certain climate engineering strategies, including
forest and soil management for carbon sequestration, merit broad-scale application. Other proposed strategies, such as biochar
production and geological carbon capture and storage, are rated somewhat lower, but deserve further research and development. Iron
fertilization of the oceans and solar radiation management, although cost-effective, received the lowest
ratings on most criteria. We conclude that although abatement should remain the central climate-change response, some lowrisk, cost-effective climate engineering approaches should be applied as complements. The framework presented here aims to guide
and prioritize further research and analysis, leading to improvements in climate engineering strategies.
Iron Fert is ineffective.
Gnanadesikan, Dunne, and, Marinov 05 (Anand Gnanadesikan, John Dunne, NOAA Geophysical Fluid
Dynamics Laboratory, Irina Marinov, Department of Earth, Atmosphere and Planetary Sciences,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2005, LIMITS OF IRON FERTILIZATION,
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/icdc7/proceedings/abstracts/gnanadesikanMC290.pdf)
Iron fertilization has been proposed as a cheap, controllable, and environmentally benign method for
removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. While this is in fact the case in simple, 3-box models of the carbon cycle,
more realistic models show that these claims fall short of reality. The fact that the efficiency of iron
fertilization depends on the long term fate of the added iron and on the carbon associated with it makes
tracking the effects of iron fertilization much more difficult and expensive than has been asserted.
Additionally, advection
of low nutrient water away from iron-rich areas can result in lowering production
remotely, with potentially serious consequences.
Focus on Solving Global Warming Ignores Other Problems
ETC Group 9 (Action Group of Erosion, Technology, and Concentration, 4/6/09,
http://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/publication/pdf_file/etcroyalsocietygeoapril0609.pdf
)
The profile and interest generated by geoengineering is the result of a well-deserved sense of urgency
around climate change. However, the climate crisis needs to be addressed in concert with other
emergencies -- such as global hunger, species extinction, ecosystem destruction, over-appropriation of
biomass and ocean acidification. These crises warrant careful attention in considering future harms and the efficacy of particular schemes to
counteract anthropogenic global warming. An exclusive focus on climate change as the one overriding consideration by
which a particular scheme succeeds or fails is short-sighted and one-sided. Indeed, it is governance decisions driven by
such a narrow vision that have propelled society to this point of desperation where geoengineering seems to many to be a viable option. From here
on we should seek out governance structures and processes that are much more inclusive, open and longterm in their vision.
Warming Turn
Iron fertilization creates worse GHGs and accelerates warming
Allsopp et al 7 (Michelle Allsopp David Santillo and Paul Johnston, 7/2007, all members of Greenpeace
Research Laboratories; the laboratories provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace
offices worldwide; a multi-discipline group including toxicology, organic and inorganic analytical
chemistry, biochemistry and terrestrial and marine ecology, A scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization
as a climate change mitigation strategy,
http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/iron_fertilisation_critique.pdf ) j/s
Geophysical Concerns A number of climate-active gases were found to be released during some of the
mesoscale iron enrichment studies. In a commercial iron fertilization scenario, the release of such gases
could have unpredictable impacts and could initiate positive feedback effects on atmospheric
chemistry and global climate . For example: • There is a risk that iron fertilization could result in
increased production of nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas far more powerful than carbon dioxide. It is
of great concern that one modelling study predicted that any benefits of carbon sequestration by
commercial iron fertilization could be outweighed by nitrous oxide production. In two mesoscale studies
which tested for the production of nitrous oxide, one found a small but significant increase in nitrous oxide
while the other did not detect the gas.• Dimethylsulphoniopropionate (DMSP) is produced by certain
classes of phytoplankton. It degrades to dimethylsulfide (DMS), a climate-active gas that contributes to
reducing the radiative flux to the Earth’s surface. DMS increased in some but not all mesoscale iron
enrichment studies. Its effect would be to reduce atmospheric temperature but the scale of any change
following commercial iron fertilization is hard to predict.
Bird Flu Turn
Iron Fert Causes Bird Flu
Wilson 13 (Grant Wilson, Deputy Director of GCRInstitute, 9/13, September 2013 Newsletter,
http://gcrinstitute.org/september-2013-newsletter/)
Seth Baum is out of the office now, so I am sending the newsletter in his absence. This month, I would like to talk a bit about
geoengineering. Geoengineering is the large-scale manipulation of the climate, particularly to alleviate the
effects of climate change (also called “climate engineering”). Geoengineering epitomizes how many distinct global catastrophic
risks have a dynamic relationship. For example, in one possible scenario, society decides to lower the planet’s temperature by
engaging in stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI)—a technology that essentially blankets the planet in an aerosol to limit the amount of
sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. But then a global catastrophe like nuclear war occurs, interfering with our ability to continue
SAI, which, in turn, results in rapid onset climate change as the temperature increases to normal levels (termed a “double
catastrophe”). In another scenario, we engage in widespread iron fertilization of the ocean, which spurs the growth
of phytoplankton that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis, thus helping to
mitigate climate change—a global catastrophic risk that poses massive threats to human and environmental health. Mitigating
climate change in turn affects other risks: for example, climate change seemingly increases the risk of a
pandemic, such as by affecting migration patterns so that new bird flu viruses emerge when new
combinations of birds intermingle. On the other hand, countries could rely too much on ocean fertilization and
forgo emission cuts they otherwise would have made. These sorts of considerations are exactly why GCRI emphasizes
the importance of looking at all global catastrophic risks rather than individual risks in isolation.
<insert bird flu impact>
Bio-D Turn
Iron Fert Hurts Biodiversity
Allsopp, Santillo, and Johnston 07 (Michelle Allsopp, research consultant based at the Greenpeace
Research Laboratories, David Santillo, senior scientist with Greenpeace, Paul Johnston, Dr. Paul Johnston
is principal scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at the University of Exeter, 09/07, “A
scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization as a climate change mitigation strategy,”
http://www.climos.com/imo/Other/Other_greenpeace_iron_fert_critiq_Sep2007.pdf)
It is evident from mesoscale iron enrichment studies that, after iron addition to HNLC waters, the
phytoplankton community commonly changes from one dominated by smaller phytoplanktonic species to
one dominated by diatoms. This is of great concern from an ecological viewpoint because phytoplankton
form the base of the marine food chain. Any changes in the phytoplankton community will have unknown
and poorly predictable, but potentially highly damaging, impacts on marine ecosystems.
Fertilization fails to solve for overfishing—nutrient depletion
Allsopp et al 7 (Michelle Allsopp David Santillo and Paul Johnston, 7/2007, all members of Greenpeace
Research Laboratories; the laboratories provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace
offices worldwide; a multi-discipline group including toxicology, organic and inorganic analytical
chemistry, biochemistry and terrestrial and marine ecology, A scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization
as a climate change mitigation strategy,
http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/iron_fertilisation_critique.pdf ) j/s
Iron fertilization, resulting in depletion of other nutrients, can reduce biological productivity in the long
term. For example, if fertilization is effective at causing drawdown of atmospheric carbon dioxide by
exporting particulate organic carbon (POC) to great depths, it also exports phosphate to great depths. This
means that less phosphate is available for tropical production and, over century timescales, the reduced
production and, hence, reduced carbon export could be significant. • The efficiency of carbon drawdown
from the atmosphere resulting from tropical iron fertilization can therefore be very low, commonly less
than 10% over 100 years. Furthermore, if remineralization occurs near the sea surface, drawdown
efficiencies can be as low as 2% of the POC initially exported when extrapolated over 100 years. •
Modelling also showed that large scale fertilization could potentially remove the nutrient supply from
biologically productive areas that support major fisheries. The net impact of macronutrient depletion on
export production coul d be negative. In considering the southeast Pacific, where a significant proportion of
the impacts were found in the modelling study, it was noted that this area accounts for almost 20% of
global fisheries landings. Assuming that fisheries landings are directly proportional to export flux, and
using a worst case scenario in the model, it was found that the cost to fisheries could be highly significant.
Fertilization causes large-scale biodiversity loss and devastates fisheries
Allsopp et al 7 (Michelle Allsopp David Santillo and Paul Johnston, 7/2007, all members of Greenpeace
Research Laboratories; the laboratories provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace
offices worldwide; a multi-discipline group including toxicology, organic and inorganic analytical
chemistry, biochemistry and terrestrial and marine ecology, A scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization
as a climate change mitigation strategy,
http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/iron_fertilisation_critique.pdf ) j/s
Proponents of ocean fertilization have claimed that iron fertilization would be environmentally benign, or
even that it could contribute to ‘ecosystem restoration’. This is not consistent with the blunt fact that iron
fertilization significantly changes the composition of the phytoplankton community (Chisholm et al. 2001).
In general terms, in the mesoscale ir on fertilization studies, the biomass of smaller phytoplankton initially
increased, but then stabilized as a result of grazing pressure whereas diatoms bloomed. As a consequence
of changes to the plankton community, correspondingly, marine food webs and biogeochemical cycles
would be altered in unintended and unpredictable ways. With significant changes in the plankton
community and subsequent unknown effects on other species of the marine food web, large-scale iron
fertilizati on cannot be viewed as environmentally benign, let alone beneficial. A study which serves to
illustrate that fundamental changes in plankton communities of this nature, however they are induced, may
hav e a detrimental impact on marine food webs is that of Freeland and Whitney (2000) in the Gulf of Al
aska. This study reported that phytoplankton and zooplankton in the surface waters have decreased
alongside temperature changes due to climate change and, concurrently, the numbers of salm on have
decreased, possibly due to starvation. As discussed in section 3.1.2 above, iron fertilizat ion results in
macronutrients (nitrate, phosphorous, silicate) being used up by phytoplankton (Barber and Hiscock 2006).
Herein lies, another probable and detrimental ecological impact on communities down-current from an
artificially iron-fertilized area. Reduced nutrient availability in ecosystems would re sult in reduced
productivity and the structure of the marine food web could also be changed as a resul t. In this regard, it is
of great concern that results of modelling by Gnanadesikan et al. (2003) implied that commercial iron
long-term
reduction in biological productivity over a much
wider ocean area, which could have a significant negative impact on fisheries.
fertilization could result in non-local impacts on marine biology, i.e.
Fertilization is absurdly expensive-laundry list of reasons, their EV is baseless
Allsopp et al 7 (Michelle Allsopp David Santillo and Paul Johnston, 7/2007, all members of Greenpeace
Research Laboratories; the laboratories provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace
offices worldwide; a multi-discipline group including toxicology, organic and inorganic analytical
chemistry, biochemistry and terrestrial and marine ecology, A scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization
as a climate change mitigation strategy,
http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/iron_fertilisation_critique.pdf ) j/s
Advocates of commercial-scale iron fertilization, often with the primary motive of generating money from
carbon credit trading, claim that large scal e iron fertilization could be a viable strategy to sequester carbon.
However, to utilize iron fertilizat ion as a carbon mitigation strategy would inevitably require the
verification of the amount of carbon ex ported. Tracking the carbon sequestered, as well as any negative
impacts such as de-oxygenation or ni trous oxide production, and so demonstrating a clear cause - and effect of large scale fertilization, would be likely to prove incredibly expensive due to the requirement for
detailed but large- scale, regional monitoring programs. Quite apart from very costly monito ring, other
primary costs arising from large-scale iron fertilization are also likely to be very substantial, including mi
ning cost, other material costs and transport costs. As discussed earlier (section 3.1.1), geoengineering
proposals for commercial iron fertilization have frequently claimed a low financial cost of $1-2 pe r
metric tonne of carbon sequestered (Markels and Barber 2000). However, these are not based on know
ledge from scientific mesoscale iron enrichment studies . Based on the IronExII and SOIREE
experiment s, Bakker (2004) estimated that continuous iron fertilization of waters south of 31 0 would
require 6 x 10 6 tons of iron/year (1 ton = 10 6 g). This equates to about 1% of the global crude steel output
of 700 x 10 6 tons iron/year. Iron mining to meet this requirement would strongly raise the economic
a nd energy cost of iron fertilization . Transportation of the iron would also add to anthropogenic
emissions of carbon dioxide from the use of fuel. To date, however, there have been no published attempts
tp arri ve at a full financial cost estimate of the process of iron fertilization, including the cost of the
monitoring programs which would be a necessity for any proposals of commercial iron fertilization.
Fertilization disrupts ecosystems-12 studies
Allsopp et al 7 (Michelle Allsopp David Santillo and Paul Johnston, 7/2007, all members of Greenpeace
Research Laboratories; the laboratories provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace
offices worldwide; a multi-discipline group including toxicology, organic and inorganic analytical
chemistry, biochemistry and terrestrial and marine ecology, A scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization
as a climate change mitigation strategy,
http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/iron_fertilisation_critique.pdf ) j/s
in total, 12 iron-enrichment studies have been carried out over the last decade in polar, subpolar, and tropical HNLC waters. De Baar
et al. (2005) reviewed the findings of the first eight of these studies. It is known that wind mixing strongly influences the amount of light phytoplankton receive for growth and in
the iron enrichment experiments, the depth of the wind mixed layer varied widely between studies. De Baar et al. (2005) found a significant relationship between the depth of the
wind mixed layer and phytoplankton biomass, as indicated by chlorophyll a, or, removal of dissolved inorganic carbon. From this it was concluded that light is the ultimate
determinant of the phytoplankton biomass response. Thus, the depth of the wind mixed layer in regulating light climate was identified as the major factor controlling
photosynthesis in HNLC regions of the ocean. This was not unexpected as light flux is a key controlling factor of photosynthesis in phytoplankton. In looking to identify one overarching limiting factor for each iron enrichment study carried out, it has been concluded that SOIREE and EisenEx in the Southern Ocean were predominantly light-limited,
SEEDS and SERIES were predominantly iron-limited while IronEx-2 and SOFeX-N and –S showed limitation intermediate between light penetration and iron. The rate of growth
of phytoplankton is also known to be governed by temperature and a comparison of results showed that this was apparent in the iron enrichment studies. De Baar et al. (2005) also
noted that the initially seeded iron patches tended to dilute due to combined wind mixing and shear stress such that initial patch size areas of 50-80 km 2 and 225 km 2 for SOFeX
could exceed 2000 km 2 by the end of the experiment. The extent of dilution varied between experiments, since some individual experiments were longer than others, allowing a
greater dilution to take place. With regard to the phytoplankton community structure, a review of results showed that, in all of the experiments, there was a striking increase in cell
). It appeared
that large and initially rare diatoms benefited from a release in grazing pressure, at least in the early stages
of the iron-enriched blooms, because their specialized grazers were not sufficiently numerous to control them
numbers of larger size classes of diatoms and, in general, the community shifted from mostly nanoplankton (<10 µm) to mostly microplankton (>10 µm
as their numbers increased rapidly due to the added iron. Barber and Hiscock (2006) made an in-depth analysis of different phytoplankton groups in IronExI and IronEx II and
detailed their findings on the dynamics and fate of phytoplankton following iron fertilization. Initially, small phytoplankton (picophytoplankton) dominated the phytoplankton
Following fertilization, most of the iron is first partitioned to the abundant
picophytoplankton community, which increase their photosynthetic efficiency and growth rate. However,
the picophytoplankton thereafter become subjected to efficient grazing from microzooplankton and their
numbers are checked. In contrast, the initially present low number of diatoms are able to take up the
available iron much faster than the picophytoplankton and they increase their growth rate and numbers, eventually accounting for most of the
iron taken up. They initially escape heavy grazing pressure from mesozooplankton and, therefore, are able to bloom, monopolizing the available iron. Thereafter, as the iron
becomes depleted, ecological theory predicts GRL-TN-07-2007 8 that picophytoplankton, with a lower requirement
for iron, would again displace diatoms from the community (Barber and Hiscock 2006) though this was not explicity followed
community and larger diatoms were rare.
experimentally. The mesoscale iron enrichment studies have shown that, as predicted, phytoplankton growth generally decreased the concentrations of nutrients and carbon dioxide
in the mixed layer and resulted in the production of particulate organic carbon (Bakker 2004). Monitoring of export of particulate organic carbon to deeper waters, however,
showed that export to deep waters was either very low or could not be detected (see appendix 1). In some of the experiments, changes in concentration of the gas dimethyl sulphide
(DMS), generated as a byproduct of growth in some algae, were also detected. DMS is a ‘climate-active’ gas that can contribute to reducing the radiative flux to the Earth’s
surface, primarily by promoting cloud formation. Variations in its generation highlights the fact that biogenic gases other than carbon dioxide but which nonetheless can exert
significant influence on the climate, must also be considered if the cumulative impact of iron enrichment on climate is to be evaluated fully (Turner et al. 2004, Boyd et al. 2007).
In a recent publication, Boyd et al. (2007) brought together findings of all 12 of the iron enrichment studies. It was noted that time-series observations of the enrichment
experiments have enabled study of the open-ocean blooms from initiation through to the evolution and decline phases. The studies have confirmed that iron enrichment enhances
The experiments have
enabled the study of the entire pelagic food web in response to iron enrichment (albeit over a relatively short time frame)
and have shown that upon iron enrichment, stocks of all phytoplankton groups initially increased but only
the diatoms bloomed by escaping grazing pressure. Thus these experiments caused observable changes in food web dynamics. At a meeting of
some of the scientists involved with iron enrichment studies (SOLAS Synthesis of Mesoscale Iron-Enrichment Studies) it was concluded that experiments had conclusively tested
primary production from polar to tropical waters and that iron supply has a fundamental role in photosynthesis (photosynthetic competence).
the ‘iron hypothesis’ and solved the puzzle of why productivity of some ocean waters is lower than it could be on the basis of levels of macronutrients present. This had led to a
better understanding of the biological functioning of HNLC waters, which can now be represented more accurately in mathematical model simulations (Harvey et al. 2006). The
meeting also looked at new questions raised by experimental work that must be addressed to help improve understanding of the role of iron supply in ocean productivity and its
effects on global climate.
Natural iron fertilization doesn’t prove their arguments-commercial fertilization is completely different
Allsopp et al 7 (Michelle Allsopp David Santillo and Paul Johnston, 7/2007, all members of Greenpeace
Research Laboratories; the laboratories provide scientific advice and analytical support to Greenpeace
offices worldwide; a multi-discipline group including toxicology, organic and inorganic analytical
chemistry, biochemistry and terrestrial and marine ecology, A scientific critique of oceanic iron fertilization
as a climate change mitigation strategy,
http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/iron_fertilisation_critique.pdf ) j/s
in support of their case, the proponents of commercial iron fertilization have also argued that iron
fertilization would be similar to natural iron deposition from atmospheric dust and from natural upwellings
of nutrients from the deep sea. In reality, however, commercial iron fertilization would not mimic nature
(Chisholm et al. 2007). With regard to mimicking atmospheric dust deposition, although artificial iron
addition in the mesoscale enrichment studies was analogous to natural episodic dust events, the total iron
supplied in the experiments is much larger than natural dust deposition (Boyd et al. 2007) and this would be
the case also in commercial iron fertilization operations. Furthermore, artificial addition of iron would
require the use of an artificial chelator (such as lignin acid sulphonate) in order to keep the iron in solution,
but this is chemically very different to natural atmospheric iron sources (Chisholm et al. 2001). The
proposition that commercial iron addition would mimic natural upwelling nutrients is also misguided.
Phytoplankton species that bloom in response to upwelling are adapted to a turbulent regime and a complex
mixture of upwelling nutrients that are part of the natural nutrient regeneration cycle of the oceans
(Chisholm et al. 2001).
SRM Adv
No risk of unilateral SRM deployment-coop now.
SRMGI N.D (Solar Radiation Management Governance Institute, No Date, it’s the people in the card,
“What is SRMGI?”, http://www.srmgi.org/ ) j/s
Advancing the international governance of solar geoengineering The Solar Radiation Management
Governance Initiative (SRMGI) is an international NGO-driven project that seeks to promote the good
governance of solar radiation management (SRM), one form of geoengineering. SRMGI is neither in
favour of, nor against, SRM geoengineering and research, since it is impossible to tell at this stage whether
the technology will be helpful or harmful. SRM is a controversial issue that has potentially serious global
implications, and SRMGI believes that multi-stakeholder discussions, alongside international network
building, will strengthen humanity’s ability to handle the issue. SRMGI is engaging with a wide variety of
experts and organisations from across the globe to expand discussions of SRM. It has a particular focus on
bringing in perspectives from the developing world and emerging economies, as early discussions of SRM
have so far been dominated by experts from developed countries. In partnership with local NGOs, SRMGI
has organised workshops in Asia (India, China and Pakistan), and in Africa (Senegal, South Africa and
Ethiopia). As well as expanding the conversation geographically, it is also seeking input from a wide range
of disciplines including natural and social science, governance, law, environment, and development. What
is SRMGI? The SRM Research Governance Initiative (SRMGI) was convened by a partnership of the
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Royal Society, and TWAS, the world academy of sciences. The
project was launched in March 2010 in response to the 2009 Royal Society report Geoengineering the
climate. That report concluded that geoengineering is not an alternative to reducing greenhouse gas
emissions, but that it might be the only option to reduce rising global temperatures quickly. It emphasised
the importance of good governance, and the need for international partners to work together on this matter.
SRMGI activities to date have included: The establishment of an expert working group and large
network of stakeholder partner organisations The first SRMGI conference, held in March 2011 at the
Kavli Royal Society International Centre in the UK The publication of the SRMGI report in December
2011 Further meetings in Pakistan, India, China and Senegal, South Africa, and Ethiopia. Publication of
Governance of Research on Solar Geoengineering: African Perspectives in October 2013. Press Release.
Limited deployment solves SRM termination issues
Kosugi 12 (Takanobu Kosugi, 30/4/12, phd and professor at Ritsumeikan University College of Policy
Science, Fail-safe solar radiation management geoengineering,
http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/424/art%253A10.1007%252Fs11027-012-94142.pdf?auth66=1406819120_167bdfcc6ae68893d0736c56d92fca66&ext=.pdf ) j/s
Using the extended DICE model, we investigated the future trajectory of deploying the stratospheric
aerosol SRM option as well as the effect of CO 2 emissions reduction. We paid attention to the concern
regarding potential abrupt global warming induced by a failure to maintain the use of the SRM option after
commencement of its operation, a concern known as the termination problem. A fail-safe principle for
using the stratospheric aerosol SRM option was suggested, which states that requirements for avoiding
dangerous climate change must be satisfied without any exceptions, even when an SRM project is not
maintained after its launch. We presumed requirements such as the restriction that the rise in the global
mean surface temperature must be no more than 2 °C from the 1900 level, and we further took into account
a stricter condition that imposes an additional constraint limiting the decadal rate of temperature rise to 0.2
°C. The major conclusions regarding the recommended combinations of the SRM and CO 2 emissions
reduction obtained based on the fail-safe principle are as follows: (i) If we could completely exclude the
possibility of SRM termination after its implemen- tation from consideration, it would be economically less
expensive to focus efforts on mitigating global warming via the SRM implementation rather than via CO 2
emissions reduction to meet those requirements. (ii) If we admit that termination may occur at any time, we
must recommend a more restrained use of SRM and a drastic reduction of CO 2 emissions, even if adverse
environmental side effects by the SRM use are not explicitly taken into account. For example, assuming CS
0 3 °C, & if we are to satisfy both constraints regarding the temperature rise and its decadal rate even in the
case of SRM termination, the amount of SRM used must be restrained to within a little over 1 W/m 2 ,
while the industrial CO 2 emissions should immediately begin to decline and ultimately reach one-fifth of
the current emissions level by the end of this century; & in this situation, the SRM option has merely a
marginal value; the sum of total discounted costs of meeting the temperature constraints by combining the
SRM use and CO 2 emissions reduction up to the end of the 22nd century is only smaller by0.4 %
compared to the case in which the option is assumed to be completely unavailable.
Techno-fixes obscure structural problems and are used to control the public
Mörtenböck N.D (Peter Mörtenböck, studied psychology at the University of Vienna Studied architecture
at the Technical University of Vienna Research fellowship at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
(USA). Researcher of the European Forum in Vienna, Geo-engineering: Climates of Control,
http://www.worldofmatter.net/geo-engineering-climates-control#path=geo-engineering-climates-control )
we don’t endorse ableist language j/s
Control over resources has undoubtedly become the driving force of development planning and government
policies that regulate our relationship to the environment. While the threat of resource depletion may be an
important motivation for this orientation, it is also fuelled by deep-seated fears of environmental insecurity
prompted by changes in the scale and magnitude of environmental degradation. Against the background of,
on the one hand, slowly evolving problems such as air pollution, global warming and climate change, and,
on the other, dramatic, major accidents such as oil spills and industrial fires and explosions, ‘risk
management’ has become a buzzword that is frequently cited in connection with the development of
programmes for increased environmental control. When environmental disaster strikes, its root causes can
be many, but they are all ultimately linked to the changing nature of the relationship between politics and
economics. If economics can flourish outside politics by simply following its rogue nature, as some have
argued, then this is further enhanced by the economic turn of politics itself: A certain blindness on the part
of the market-state and its political agents persists towards disaster because all too often they actually
benefit from it. Both state and market are all too willing to gamble on catastrophe in order to gain extra
amounts of uncontrolled revenue or to advance specific goals involving radical social and economic
engineering by exploiting public disorientation. On the other hand, the more visible environmental disasters
become, the more they tend to trickle into popular consciousness and remain in memory as an open wound
waiting to be revisited and healed somewhere in the distant future. In this sense, environmental insecurities
are also provoked by what Zygmunt Bauman in his characterisation of modern existence has termed a “life
of continuous emergency”1 — the permanence of sudden disruptions that push life as it is being lived off
course, detracting from the unrestricted accumulation of value and thus generating anxiety. In this situation,
the scientific calculation of risks and the engineering of cost-effective solutions to mitigate the effects of
deteriorating ecosystems are increasingly being deployed as a balm to salve this scarred cultural and natural
landscape. So far, therapeutic interventions have focused on the manipulation of earth or climate systems,
such as weather control projects or even more radical terraforming strategies to counter global warming.
Experiments with cloud seeding and solar radiation management are well underway as part of policies
designed to commandeer and control the climate of the earth. Under its new national plan (2013-2020),
China has divided the country into different regions and command centres for strategic weather
modification. And in its own attempts to counteract ‘anthropogenic climate change’, the US has likewise
intensified its research into aerosol geo-engineering, providing multi-billion dollar budgets to fund the
experiments involved. Given the politico-economic advantages to be gained from such operations, weather
modification is likely to become an element of many national and international security policies in the near
future. Though military or any other ‘hostile’ use of environmental engineering was banned by a UN
convention tabled in 1977,2 support for weather modification technologies as a means of controlling the
world’s climate is currently on the rise. This support is being informed by environmental discourses that
centre on the human capacity to ‘improve’ environmental benefits. In the process, nature is being
redeveloped in accordance with the needs of rapidly growing populations, atmospheric self-regulation is
being ‘restored’, and large sways of wasteland are being ‘returned’ to nature. A particular cultural
perspective on nature is thus being imposed upon the re-engineered territories as well as on local
communities, one not dissimilar to the anthropocentric, self-centred attitude toward the environment
displayed by arcane methods of rainmaking practiced in the Western world during the early twentieth
century. While it may seem that there is still no need to consider alternative possibilities of how we want to
relate to nature, it is worth noting that such possibilities are not even made part of the political debate in the
first place. On the contrary, dissenting perspectives on the environment and their potential to generate
resistance are currently being increasingly integrated into government plans for environmental engineering
from the outset. On a recent trip to China, I found this shift in policy confirmed by the new political
leadership’s decision to introduce impact assessments for all state projects that might have adverse
environmental consequences, assessments whose key focus is on the likelihood of these projects prompting
protests or social unrest. In this approach to resource ecologies, resources are not conceived of as the object
of planning but as planning itself. They are turned into a mechanism geared to the manipulation of social
and political climates, the regulation of civic anxieties and the creation of order based on narratives of
technological mastery and environmental control. An alternative and more desirable approach to
environmental politics would be to introduce democratic processes that address the options we have for
relating to the environment and the resources emerging from these relationships. However, establishing
such an approach ultimately requires a profound cultural shift away from the idea that any environmental
problem can be solved by skilful engineering, whether of a technological or political nature.
Many islands and countries in arid regions, where freshwater resources are limited, are increasingly
dependent on desalination to provide water to rapidly growing coastal populations and meet the social and
economic demands that underpin development in those areas. Evidence is now showing that harmful algal
blooms (HABs) pose a threat to the desalination industry and to water security of those areas. Studying
HABs in the vicinity of desalination plants is an emerging science as there is limited information on
potential problems that toxic blooms may pose. The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOCUNESCO) has been a driver in defining the international research agenda on HABs and their impacts, and
is now also addressing how to provide solutions applicable to desalination plants.