I am interested in this comment on lake geoengineering because it is consistent with a concern that I have been expressing. Namely, that the scope of information management involved in future GE enterprises is very large. here is a whole additional domain, not commonly considered "geoengineering", of activities that are conscious ecosystem interventions that may need to be tracked, monitored, managed, and, especially, integrated with other GE activities.
--- Fred Zimmerman Geoengineering IT! Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information technology GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Spears, Bryan M. <sp...@ceh.ac.uk> wrote: > Dear Bhaskar, > > Thank you for your interest in our paper. We would be happy to discuss our > research in this area further with you if this would be useful. > > Very best wishes, > > Bryan > > > Dr. Bryan Spears > Freshwater Ecologist > CEH - Edinburgh > Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK > EH26 0QB > Direct dial: 0131 445 8536 > http://www.ceh.ac.uk/staffwebpages/DrBryanSpears.html > http://www.ceh.ac.uk/sci_programmes/UK-Lakes-Restoration.html > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: M V Bhaskar [mailto:bhaskarmv...@gmail.com] > >Sent: 30 April 2013 11:51 > >To: geoengineering@googlegroups.com > >Cc: nua...@gmail.com; Spears, Bryan M.; geoengineerin...@gmail.com > >Subject: Re: Apparently we've been doing global scale lake > >geoengineering (P-capping) for decades > > > >Fred > > > >We have a much simpler, ecofriendly and logical process. > >We grow Diatom Algae in the lakes, these consume the P and Diatoms are > >consumed by fish, so it exits the lake as fish. > > > >The problem with excess nutrients in lakes is due to the wrong type of > >algae and weeds growing in them due to the influx of nutrients. If the > >right type of algae i.e., Diatoms grow there would be no eutrophication. > > > >regards > > > >Bhaskar > > > >On Tuesday, 30 April 2013 05:52:14 UTC+5:30, Fred Zimmerman wrote: > > > > http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es401363w > ><http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es401363w> > > > > > > Geo-Engineering in Lakes—A Call for Consensus > > > > Bryan M. Spears *†, Bernard Dudley †, Kasper Reitzel ‡, and Emil > >Rydin § > > > > † Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Edinburgh, Penicuik, > >Midlothian, Scotland, UK EH26 0QB > > ‡ Institute of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej > >55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark > > § Erken Laboratory, Department of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala > >University, Norrtälje, Sweden > > Environ. Sci. Technol., Article ASAP > > DOI: 10.1021/es401363w > > Publication Date (Web): April 24, 2013 > > Copyright © 2013 American Chemical Society > > *E-mail: sp...@ceh.ac.uk <javascript:> . > > As climate change researchers hotly debate the values and risks > >associated with atmospheric geo-engineering,(1) aquatic ecologists are > >all too aware of a stark contrast between the two camps. Unlike > >proposals for atmospheric manipulations, geo-engineering in lakes and > >reservoirs using phosphorus(P)-removing materials has been implemented > >at a global scale as a eutrophication management tool for decades > >(Figure 1), in the absence of scientific consensus on its use.(2) The > >technique, known as “P-capping”, can be used to control legacy P stores > >in bed sediments that have built up over decades of anthropogenic > >pollution. If left untreated, these legacy P stores can prolong water > >quality improvements for decades following catchment management.(3) As > >well as accelerating recovery of nutrient-impacted waterbodies, geo- > >engineering is often considered in isolation of catchment nutrient > >management measures due to its low relative cost and ability to produce > >rapid short term improvements in water quality.(4, 5) However, many > >knowledge gaps exist with respect to the technique’s efficacy, and the > >scientific evidence is not yet available with which wide scale > >application can be supported. We argue that a comprehensive analysis of > >data and increased coherence across future geo-engineering research > >programs is necessary to deliver advances in theoretical and practical > >knowledge needed to improve the efficacy of the approach. > > > > --- > > Fred Zimmerman > > > > Geoengineering IT! > > Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information > >technology > > GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 > ><http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080> > > > This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is > subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this > email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt > from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in > an electronic records management system. > -- 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.
