Dear Dr Vivien You said -
> Also, how could you ensure the "right" phytoplankton would bloom to ensure > the albedo effect. This is the core issue. Based on a combined reading of all papers on the subject I understand the following - Coccolithophores increase Albedo and DMS production and Diatoms sequester more carbon by falling to ocean bed. Coccolithophores have a calcium carbonate shell and Diatoms a silica shell. Since 2005 we are successfully growing Diatoms in open waters in large lakes, using our silica based micro nutrient. This works on the principle that since Diatoms require silica, they consume it and grow rapidly and dominate the water as long as it is fertilized with this product. This product also contains calcium, but only a very small quantity - the amount required for photosynthesis. Perhaps if we increase the calcium to the maximum extent possible, we can make Coccolithophores consume it and bloom rapidly and also sustain the bloom for a long period of time, through continuous fertilization. Thus we can achieve a more targeted phytoplankton bloom, by developing products / fertilizers that focus on each species / group of phytoplankton. best regards Bhaskar www.nualgi.com/new On Apr 18, 10:11 pm, Ken Caldeira <kcalde...@carnegie.stanford.edu> wrote: > I think Chris Viven has it right. > > But, if you are still interested in pursuing this, Toby Tyrrell has looked > into this a bit. > > http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk/soes/staff/tt/eh/optics.html > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Andrew Lockley > <andrew.lock...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > > > I have been advised to use GNU Octave for image processing. My guess is > > the the best way to do this would be to draw a rectangle over the bloom and > > compare it to a control rectangle elsewhere in the image. However, a pixel > > by pixel comparison would also be useful, as it would better display the > > range of albedo. Pixel comparisons would be prone to much greater error, as > > I might pick a lucky pixel out. > > > I have no experience of this kind of thing at all, so any tips or comments > > are welcome. At this stage I'm just looking to get some back of envelope > > calculations for the list, not get anything you could publish. > > > One particular concern I have is that the infra red (particularly the near > > infra red) will be very significant. Obviously, this won't show up on a > > photo. Does anyone have any ideas as to how to treat this? > > > A > > On Apr 18, 2012 1:20 PM, "Chris" <chris.viv...@cefas.co.uk> wrote: > > >> Andrew, > > >> If you search Google Images for 'ocean fertilisation' you will find a > >> number of satellite images of blooms from ocean fertilisation > >> experiments. Here are a couple of examples: > > >>http://disc.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/oceancolor/additional/science-focus/oce... > >>http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/oceangard/overview.php > > >> Also, if you search Google Images for 'Phytoplankton bloom' you will > >> find plenty of images and there is a particularly good one from the > >> western English Channel of a very bright coccolithophore bloom on this > >> page:http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk/soes/staff/tt/eh/satbloompics.html. > > >> However, don't get too carried away with the possibility of generating > >> phytoplankton blooms for their albedo effect. They would have all the > >> potential side-effects of ocean fertilisation and since phytoplankton > >> blooms are transient events, I find it difficult to see how you could > >> maintain a significant albedo effect over time. Also, how could you > >> ensure the "right" phytoplankton would bloom to ensure the albedo > >> effect. > > >> Chris. > > >> On Apr 17, 2:56 pm, Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > This image appears to show a clear albedo effect from blooms > > >> >http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phytoplankton_SoAtlantic_20060215. > >> .. > > >> > Does anyone have a set of high quality ocean iron fertilization images > >> > which can be formally evaluated for albedo? I think this would be a very > >> > interesting study. > > >> > Maybe we have missed a trick on OIF? Maybe It's actually an albedo SRM > >> > method cunningly disguised as CDR. > > >> > Interestingly this would make a powerful negative feedback which could > >> > explain the decent into glacials, as aeolian dust fluxes into the > >> southern > >> > ocean changed albedo, causing feedbacks which caused further cooling > >> and > >> > drying as well as carbon drawdown. This would then lead to more dust > >> flux, > >> > etc. > > >> > Hopefully someone can check whether the above is right or not. > > >> > A > >> > On Apr 15, 2012 5:22 PM, "Andrew Lockley" <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > > >> > > Scientific American article identifies AGW sea albedo effect. This > >> > > potentially suggests ocean fertilization and similar manipulations > >> could > >> > > target albedo, not CO2. Awesome possibilities. Geoengineers, start > >> your > >> > > computers. > > >> > > A > > >> > > *sciam* Ocean-Borne Microbes May Help Speed Warminghttp:// > >> t.co/NDQd2jm4 > > >> > > Ocean-Borne Microbes May Help Speed Warming > > >> > > The proliferation of cyanobacteria in oceans may accelerate warming > > >> > > By Lucas Laursen | April 15, 2012 | > > >> > > Trichodesmium > > >> > > Image: Courtesy of Elizabeth C. Sargent/University of Southampton and > >> > > National Oceanography Center, Southampton > > >> > > On their own, cyanobacteria are tiny photosynthetic organisms > >> floating in > >> > > the sea. But when they join forces, linking together into chains and > >> then > >> > > mats by the millions, they can become a threat. Before long, the > >> bacteria > >> > > change the color of the sea’s surface and even soften the wind-tossed > >> chop. > >> > > One study of cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae, although > >> they > >> > > are not algae, predicted that rising sea temperatures could help the > >> > > already widespread creatures expand their territory by more than 10 > >> > > percent. Now researchers are asking whether mats of cyanobacteria > >> might > >> > > themselves affect local sea temperatures, thus creating a powerful > >> feedback > >> > > loop. > > >> > > Cyanobacteria are ubiquitous. They spew enough oxygen into the > >> atmosphere > >> > > to dictate the current mix of gases we breathe. They also compete—with > >> > > great success—for nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. When > >> > > cyanobacteria bloom, it is often at the cost of neighboring species > >> such as > >> > > fish or other phytoplankton. So if cyanobacteria are shaping the > >> > > temperature of their growing patch of the ocean to favor themselves > >> over > >> > > cold-water critters, researchers want to know how they are doing it > >> and > >> > > what to expect next, says climate scientist Sebastian Sonntag of the > >> > > University of Hamburg in Germany. > > >> > > Sonntag and his colleagues have adapted a computer model that > >> describes > >> > > the mixing of layers of seawater to take into account two kinds of > >> changes > >> > > produced by the cyanobacterium Trichodesmium: more light absorption > >> and > >> > > less choppy waves. The updated model predicted sea-surface warming of > >> up to > >> > > two degrees Celsius because of light absorption. The wave dampening > >> > > appeared to affect local temperatures by about one degree C. > > >> > > This may be the first such study of algal blooms in the ocean,says > >> aquatic > >> > > microbiologist Jef Huisman of the University of Amsterdam, who has > >> studied > >> > > light absorption by cyanobacteria in lakes. Both Sonntag and Huisman > >> say > >> > > they would like to ask oceanographers to measure seawater temperature > >> where > >> > > cyanobacteria grow and in nearby empty areas to test the new model’s > >> > > predictions and to improve future versions. > > >> > > This article was published in print as "Blue Bacteria in Bloom."- > >> Hide quoted text - > > >> > - Show quoted text - > > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "geoengineering" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > > >> -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "geoengineering" group. > > To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
