Hi All
We let farmers put fertilizer on their fields. Without this we would
not have enough food. Some fertilizer drains into the rivers and gets to
the sea where we know that too much causes nasty blooms and oxygen
reduction. Two wrongs do not make a right but what is the difference
between direct and indirect fertilization?
We know that very large amounts of iron are blown by winds for deserts
and provide essential nutrients to the marine food chain. It would be
useful to know if this can be controlled to advantage and how much would
be good.
Stephen Salter
Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design School of Engineering
University of Edinburgh Mayfield Road Edinburgh EH9 3JL Scotland
s.sal...@ed.ac.uk Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704 Cell 07795 203 195
WWW.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs
On 27/04/2013 06:16, David Lewis wrote:
Paul Watson wrote a "commentary" on Russ George entitled "*The Return
of a Dangerous Ecological Criminal*
<http://www.seashepherd.org/commentary-and-editorials/2012/10/29/the-return-of-a-dangerous-ecological-criminal-574>"
published by his Sea Shepherd Society online October 29 2012. This
Watson "commentary" seems to be all the Toronto Globe and Mail had as
a source for Paul Watson's views on Russ George and *geoengineering*
as described in their Nov 7 2012 article (I cited previously). Watson,
in his article, states his Sea Shepherd Society "did not make any
judgement on the scientific merits, if any, of this scheme [Russ
George's 2007 plan to use PLANKTOS to dump iron into waters west of
the Galapagos Islands]". Watson, apparently, was anxious that
"Ecuadorian, American and International law" *be upheld*. / (This is
what his article states/). The Globe and Mail reporter couldn't talk
to Watson directly because "Mr Watson hasn't been seen in public since
July when *he skipped bail in Germany*..."
As for ETC, their /Geopiracy: The Case against Geoengineering
<http://www.etcgroup.org/content/geopiracy-case-against-geoengineering> /webpage
is still up. ETC concludes, obviously, that "A moratorium on
real-world geoengineering experimentation is urgent", apparently
because we don't know what will happen if the /slightest thing/ is
done that ETC classifies as geoengineering. From their first
paragraph, ETC takes geoengineering to be a/technological/ strategy
"that could reduce or delay climate change, at least until social
forces make a practical agreement [to "mitigate climate chaos" by
reducing GHG emissions]"
Naturally,*no one wants that*. /Reasonable people, obviously, would
want to*increase or accelerate* climate change, before social forces
develop and make a practical agreement that might mitigate it.... ?
/
From Alice in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll: /"//I don't think they
play at all fairly,' Alice began, in rather a complaining tone, 'and
they all quarrel so dreadfully one can't hear oneself speak — and they
don't seem to have any rules in particular; at least, if there are,
nobody attends to them/".
On Friday, April 26, 2013 7:19:50 PM UTC-7, Ken Caldeira wrote:
Does it matter to ETC or Paul Watson whether the intent is to
increase fishery yields versus reduce the magnitude of climate
change?
Would the action be 'geoengineering' in the latter case but not
the former?
On Friday, April 26, 2013, David Lewis wrote:
Paul Watson is known for going as far as attempting to sink
ships in international waters that he feels are in violation
of his conservation principles.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
