Re: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer

2013-01-17 Thread John Nissen
 of the Perpetual Salt Fountain System may reduce the needed area
 substantially
 .
 I hope this helped.

 Michael





 On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:29:54 PM UTC-8, MarkCapron wrote:

  Peter,

 The calculations in Negative carbon via Ocean Afforestation are based
 on actual macroalgae growth rates with whatever CO2 transfer and nutrients
 are naturally available.  Either may be limiting.

 Your experience would appear to confirm our seaweed forests can be
 havens of high pH for critters in need of pre-industrial pH for shell
 formation.

 Mark E. Capron, PE
 Oxnard, California
 www.PODenergy.org



  Original Message 
 Subject: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer
 From: Peter Flynn peter...@ualberta.ca
 Date: Wed, January 09, 2013 6:36 pm
 To: geoengi...@googlegroups.com

  I am joining this discussion late, so I hope I am not covering ground
 already discussed.

 Some years back a graduate student and I looked at a conceptual scheme
 to grow algae and sink them into the deep ocean, using increased salinity
 from evaporation as the “pump”. We found that the rate limiting step was
 not sunlight or evaporation, but rather the transport of carbon dioxide
 from the atmosphere into the ocean. This was, as I recall, 10 times slower
 than the potential rate of growth of the algae.

 We came to understand why agitation and CO2 addition are included in
 some commercial algal farms.

 Peter Flynn

 Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.
 Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers
 Department of Mechanical Engineering
 University of Alberta
 peter...@ualberta.ca
 cell: 928 451 4455


 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
 Groups geoengineering group.
 To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
 geoengineerin...@googlegroups.**com.
 For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
 group/geoengineering?hl=enhttp://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
 .

  --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 geoengineering group.
 To view this discussion on the web visit
 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/HQZJQCJdd7gJ.

 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.



Re: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer

2013-01-17 Thread Andrew Lockley
/discussion

  *Mark Capron has proposed Ocean Afforestation within this forum going
 back to at least 09. And, much of that work is centered around diatom
 enhancement for general CCS and possible biomass harvesting for methane
 fuel production and more. C4 halophytes (1) could be an important
 enhancement to that initial ocean afforestation strategy.*

 I'm glad to see this issue come back up in this group. IMHO, Ocean
 Afforestation is our best long term hope to stabilize the climate and
 adjust the ocean pH. Initial math indicated that up to 6% of the earth
 needed to be put into production to off set current CO2 emissions. Wide
 spread use of the Perpetual Salt Fountain System may reduce the needed area
 substantially
 .
 I hope this helped.

 Michael





 On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:29:54 PM UTC-8, MarkCapron wrote:

  Peter,

 The calculations in Negative carbon via Ocean Afforestation are based
 on actual macroalgae growth rates with whatever CO2 transfer and nutrients
 are naturally available.  Either may be limiting.

 Your experience would appear to confirm our seaweed forests can be
 havens of high pH for critters in need of pre-industrial pH for shell
 formation.

 Mark E. Capron, PE
 Oxnard, California
 www.PODenergy.org



  Original Message 
 Subject: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer
 From: Peter Flynn peter...@ualberta.ca
 Date: Wed, January 09, 2013 6:36 pm
 To: geoengi...@googlegroups.com

  I am joining this discussion late, so I hope I am not covering ground
 already discussed.

 Some years back a graduate student and I looked at a conceptual scheme
 to grow algae and sink them into the deep ocean, using increased salinity
 from evaporation as the “pump”. We found that the rate limiting step was
 not sunlight or evaporation, but rather the transport of carbon dioxide
 from the atmosphere into the ocean. This was, as I recall, 10 times slower
 than the potential rate of growth of the algae.

 We came to understand why agitation and CO2 addition are included in
 some commercial algal farms.

 Peter Flynn

 Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.
 Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers
 Department of Mechanical Engineering
 University of Alberta
 peter...@ualberta.ca
 cell: 928 451 4455


 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
 Groups geoengineering group.
 To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com.
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
 geoengineerin...@googlegroups.**com.
 For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
 group/geoengineering?hl=enhttp://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
 .

  --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 geoengineering group.
 To view this discussion on the web visit
 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/HQZJQCJdd7gJ.

 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.



Re: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer

2013-01-16 Thread Chris
Michael,
 

While deep seawater in the ocean does indeed contain a great deal of 
nutrients, it also contains high levels of dissolved inorganic carbon 
derived from the degradation of sinking organic matter generated in surface 
waters. Thus, bringing deep seawater to the surface will lead to outgassing 
of CO2 to the atmosphere that would greatly reduce if not eliminate the 
climate benefits of the schemes as indicated in the papers below: 

Dutreuil, S., Bopp, L. and Tagliabue, A. (2009) Impact of enhanced vertical 
mixing on marine biogeochemistry: Lessons for geo-engineering and natural 
variability. Biogeosciences Vol. 6, 901-912. 

*http://www.biogeosciences.net/6/901/2009/bg-6-901-2009.pdf*http://www.biogeosciences.net/6/901/2009/bg-6-901-2009.pdf
 

Oschlies, A., Pahlow, M., Yool, A. and Matear, R. J. (2010) *Climate 
engineering by artificial ocean upwelling - channelling the sorcerer's 
apprentice* Geophysical Research Letters, 37, L04701. 

*http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL041961/abstract*http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL041961/abstract

Yool, A., Shepherd, J. G., Bryden, H. L. and Oschlies, A. (2009), Low 
efficiency of nutrient translocation for enhancing oceanic uptake of carbon 
dioxide, Journal of Geophysical research - Oceans 114, C08009, 

*http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008JC004792/abstract*http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008JC004792/abstract

Note also that bringing up deep seawater for other purposes such as Ocean 
Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) and Deep Water Source Cooling/Seawater Air 
Conditioning has the same problem

Chris.

On Tuesday, 15 January 2013 22:21:14 UTC, Michael Hayes wrote:

 Also Peter,
  
 The 'Perpetual Salt Fountain' is a great addition to any large scale algae 
 operation.
  
 http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/JO/pdf/6003/60030563.pdf
  
 *Deep seawater in the ocean contains a great deal of nutrients. Stommel 
 et al. have
 proposed the notion of a “perpetual salt fountain” (Stommel et al., 1956). 
 They noted
 the possibility of a permanent upwelling of deep seawater with no 
 additional external
 energy source. If we can cause deep seawater to upwell extensively, we can 
 achieve an
 ocean farm. We have succeeded in measuring the upwelling velocity by an 
 experiment
 in the Mariana Trench area using a special measurement system. A 0.3 m 
 diameter,
 280 m long soft pipe made of PVC sheet was used in the experiment. The 
 measured
 data, a verification experiment, and numerical simulation results, gave an 
 estimate
 of upwelling velocity of 212 m/day.*
  
  I've realized that the basic configuration of the tube can be converted 
 into a large through put 'trash' pump, with minor mods, and powered by wave 
 energy conversion. Deployed on a large scale, this system 
 would significantly increase the microbial loop rate of production and thus 
 produce a carbon sink multiplier for any macro algae farm system (not to 
 mention an increase in marine life at all levels). Deep water C4 plant 
 farms (gyres are lest problematic for production placement) can be scaled 
 up to 'geoengineering' relevance with possible self funding commercial 
 activities. Littoral deployments are possible but the artificial up welling 
 would need a corresponding artifical down welling to prevent dead zones 
 down current from the up welling. 
  
 Here is a link to a few thoughts Mark and I exchanged some time ago. 
  
 https://groups.google.com/d/topic/geoengineering/wyLXSagkvsw/discussion
  
  *Mark Capron has proposed Ocean Afforestation within this forum going 
 back to at least 09. And, much of that work is centered around diatom 
 enhancement for general CCS and possible biomass harvesting for methane 
 fuel production and more. C4 halophytes (1) could be an important 
 enhancement to that initial ocean afforestation strategy.*
  
 I'm glad to see this issue come back up in this group. IMHO, Ocean 
 Afforestation is our best long term hope to stabilize the climate and 
 adjust the ocean pH. Initial math indicated that up to 6% of the earth 
 needed to be put into production to off set current CO2 emissions. Wide 
 spread use of the Perpetual Salt Fountain System may reduce the needed area 
 substantially
 .
 I hope this helped.
  
 Michael
  
  
  
  

 On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:29:54 PM UTC-8, MarkCapron wrote:

  Peter,
  
 The calculations in Negative carbon via Ocean Afforestation are based 
 on actual macroalgae growth rates with whatever CO2 transfer and nutrients 
 are naturally available.  Either may be limiting.
  
 Your experience would appear to confirm our seaweed forests can be havens 
 of high pH for critters in need of pre-industrial pH for shell formation.

 Mark E. Capron, PE
 Oxnard, California
 www.PODenergy.org
  
  

  Original Message 
 Subject: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer
 From: Peter Flynn peter...@ualberta.ca
 Date: Wed, January 09, 2013 6:36 pm

Re: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer

2013-01-15 Thread Michael Hayes
Also Peter,
 
The 'Perpetual Salt Fountain' is a great addition to any large scale algae 
operation.
 
http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/JO/pdf/6003/60030563.pdf
 
*Deep seawater in the ocean contains a great deal of nutrients. Stommel et 
al. have
proposed the notion of a “perpetual salt fountain” (Stommel et al., 1956). 
They noted
the possibility of a permanent upwelling of deep seawater with no 
additional external
energy source. If we can cause deep seawater to upwell extensively, we can 
achieve an
ocean farm. We have succeeded in measuring the upwelling velocity by an 
experiment
in the Mariana Trench area using a special measurement system. A 0.3 m 
diameter,
280 m long soft pipe made of PVC sheet was used in the experiment. The 
measured
data, a verification experiment, and numerical simulation results, gave an 
estimate
of upwelling velocity of 212 m/day.*
 
 I've realized that the basic configuration of the tube can be converted 
into a large through put 'trash' pump, with minor mods, and powered by wave 
energy conversion. Deployed on a large scale, this system 
would significantly increase the microbial loop rate of production and thus 
produce a carbon sink multiplier for any macro algae farm system (not to 
mention an increase in marine life at all levels). Deep water C4 plant 
farms (gyres are lest problematic for production placement) can be scaled 
up to 'geoengineering' relevance with possible self funding commercial 
activities. Littoral deployments are possible but the artificial up welling 
would need a corresponding artifical down welling to prevent dead zones 
down current from the up welling. 
 
Here is a link to a few thoughts Mark and I exchanged some time ago. 
 
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/geoengineering/wyLXSagkvsw/discussion
 
 *Mark Capron has proposed Ocean Afforestation within this forum going 
back to at least 09. And, much of that work is centered around diatom 
enhancement for general CCS and possible biomass harvesting for methane 
fuel production and more. C4 halophytes (1) could be an important 
enhancement to that initial ocean afforestation strategy.*
 
I'm glad to see this issue come back up in this group. IMHO, Ocean 
Afforestation is our best long term hope to stabilize the climate and 
adjust the ocean pH. Initial math indicated that up to 6% of the earth 
needed to be put into production to off set current CO2 emissions. Wide 
spread use of the Perpetual Salt Fountain System may reduce the needed area 
substantially
.
I hope this helped.
 
Michael
 
 
 
 

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:29:54 PM UTC-8, MarkCapron wrote:

  Peter,
  
 The calculations in Negative carbon via Ocean Afforestation are based on 
 actual macroalgae growth rates with whatever CO2 transfer and nutrients are 
 naturally available.  Either may be limiting.
  
 Your experience would appear to confirm our seaweed forests can be havens 
 of high pH for critters in need of pre-industrial pH for shell formation.

 Mark E. Capron, PE
 Oxnard, California
 www.PODenergy.org
  
  

  Original Message 
 Subject: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer
 From: Peter Flynn peter...@ualberta.ca javascript:
 Date: Wed, January 09, 2013 6:36 pm
 To: geoengi...@googlegroups.com javascript:

  I am joining this discussion late, so I hope I am not covering ground 
 already discussed.
  
 Some years back a graduate student and I looked at a conceptual scheme to 
 grow algae and sink them into the deep ocean, using increased salinity from 
 evaporation as the “pump”. We found that the rate limiting step was not 
 sunlight or evaporation, but rather the transport of carbon dioxide from 
 the atmosphere into the ocean. This was, as I recall, 10 times slower than 
 the potential rate of growth of the algae.
  
 We came to understand why agitation and CO2 addition are included in some 
 commercial algal farms.
  
 Peter Flynn
  
 Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.
 Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers
 Department of Mechanical Engineering
 University of Alberta
 peter...@ualberta.ca javascript:
 cell: 928 451 4455
  
  
 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 geoengineering group.
 To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.comjavascript:
 .
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
 geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com javascript:.
 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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/jYZavP37IswJ.
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.



RE: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer

2013-01-10 Thread markcapron
Peter,

The calculations in "Negative carbon via Ocean Afforestation" are based on actual macroalgae growth rates with whatever CO2 transfer and nutrients are naturally available. Either may be limiting.

Your experience would appear to confirm our seaweed forests can be havens of high pH for critters in need of pre-industrial pH for shell formation.

Mark E. Capron, PEOxnard, Californiawww.PODenergy.org



 Original Message Subject: [geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transferFrom: Peter Flynn peter.fl...@ualberta.caDate: Wed, January 09, 2013 6:36 pmTo: geoengineering@googlegroups.com



I am joining this discussion late, so I hope I am not covering ground already discussed.

Some years back a graduate student and I looked at a conceptual scheme to grow algae and sink them into the deep ocean, using increased salinity from evaporation as the “pump”. We found that the rate limiting step was not sunlight or evaporation, but rather the transport of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the ocean. This was, as I recall, 10 times slower than the potential rate of growth of the algae.

We came to understand why agitation and CO2 addition are included in some commercial algal farms.

Peter Flynn

Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.
Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Alberta
peter.fl...@ualberta.ca
cell: 928 451 4455


-- 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.




[geo] Ocean based algal growth: rate of CO2 transfer

2013-01-09 Thread Peter Flynn
I am joining this discussion late, so I hope I am not covering ground
already discussed.



Some years back a graduate student and I looked at a conceptual scheme to
grow algae and sink them into the deep ocean, using increased salinity from
evaporation as the “pump”. We found that the rate limiting step was not
sunlight or evaporation, but rather the transport of carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere into the ocean. This was, as I recall, 10 times slower than
the potential rate of growth of the algae.



We came to understand why agitation and CO2 addition are included in some
commercial algal farms.



Peter Flynn



Peter Flynn, P. Eng., Ph. D.

Emeritus Professor and Poole Chair in Management for Engineers

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of Alberta

peter.fl...@ualberta.ca

cell: 928 451 4455

-- 
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.