The 2022 IPCC Report mentions that for the period 2010-2019 the anthropogenic GHG emissions was 56 ± 6.0 GtCO2-eq per year on average. Then, if the biological pump sequesters 50 GtCO2/y, how is it that we are so screwed? how much anthropogenic GHG emissions can the carbon cycle support?
This is very important. These macro concepts of oceanic upwelling and downwelling are difficult to conceive of being able to be manipulated vs the cutting down of a tree. What happens if you increase the surface area of the ocean by spraying ocean air upwards into the atmosphere? Thinking windmill driven air compressors to power pneumatic water spray.
@@VikingGeography When one fertilizes with iron, a significant but short-lived algae bloom can be generated, but to cause a sustained bloom (Of diatoms) requires the addition of phosphorus and silica, as well as iron. Apart from sequestering carbon, ocean fertilization promotes the growth of food fish as per the quote which is pasted below. The iron fertilizayion experiment to which this quote refers was entirely natural. ""The two biggest [salmon] runs that have occurred are both associated with volcanoes," said Tim Parsons, a professor emeritus at the University of British Columbia and a research scientist at the Institute of Ocean Sciences in Canada. "In 1956, an eruption of a volcano in Kamchatka produced a run of 20 million salmon in 1958 in the Gulf of Alaska, and more recently, in 2008, a volcanic eruption on the Aleutians produced the run of 35 million salmon in 2010." Parsons said that the volcanoes "spew iron over the whole of the Pacific," triggering a zooplankton buffet for salmon." Since the need to grow rapidly in this new ocean environment is a priority for the very young salmon, their abundant survival was for once assured, resulting in the phenomenal returns," he said. "Alternative hypotheses on this whole process are difficult to find in any of the reports on sockeye salmon returns in 2010." Fertilizing the ocean? McNamee said that none of the experts had predicted the huge run of sockeye in 2010, but "we would say that it's our belief that the volcanic eruption and the volcanic bloom is the cause of that high return."
@@paulmanias8269 Pasted below is a quote from a science paper which was published in "Science Direct" , which is one of the prominent global science journals. Diatom algae form their shells from silicone dioxide rather than calcium carbonate or magnesium carbonate, so the Redfield ratio for those particular algae includes a number for silicone, which is absent from listings of the Redfield ratio for most other marine life. The Redfield ratio is only concerned with MACROnutruents, so, there is no component of the ratio for iron because only microscopic amounts of iron are required. As per the quote below, the ideal ratio between silicone and phosphorus for optimum diatom growth is one mole of phosphorus to sixteen moles of silicone. Diatoms associate themselves in a symbiotic relationship with cyanobacteria, which bacteria are capable of fixing nitrogen from the atmosphere, so to cause diatom algae blooms does not require the addition of nitrogen fertilizer (Which is extremely expensive). Sand, which contains iron, regularly blows across the Atlantic ocean from the Sahara desert to cause algae blooms in the Gulf of Mexico. "From laboratory culture studies, the average Si/N ratios for small and large diatom species is close to 1/1 (Brezinski, 1985). This would give an overall Redfield ratio for CNPSiO of 106/16/1/16/-276 for balanced diatom growth." "In the ocean, blue-green cyanobacteria are the most abundant type of bacteria to fix nitrogen. Collectively, these organisms are called diazotrophs, and account for close to 90% of natural nitrogen fixation."
Excellent, simple explanation. Thanks
Currently in year 2 of uni doing biology and this is better explained than by my lecturer... thank you so much
lecturerees and shit are ass bro
Very informative 👍🏾
saved my a level
The 2022 IPCC Report mentions that for the period 2010-2019 the anthropogenic GHG emissions was 56 ± 6.0 GtCO2-eq per year on average. Then, if the biological pump sequesters 50 GtCO2/y, how is it that we are so screwed? how much anthropogenic GHG emissions can the carbon cycle support?
This is very important. These macro concepts of oceanic upwelling and downwelling are difficult to conceive of being able to be manipulated vs the cutting down of a tree. What happens if you increase the surface area of the ocean by spraying ocean air upwards into the atmosphere? Thinking windmill driven air compressors to power pneumatic water spray.
thank you
You're welcome
There are almost certainly methods to fertilize the oceans artificially to drastically accelerate the biological pump.
There certainly is. Here is an example en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization
@@VikingGeography When one fertilizes with iron, a significant but short-lived algae bloom can be generated, but to cause a sustained bloom (Of diatoms) requires the addition of phosphorus and silica, as well as iron.
Apart from sequestering carbon, ocean fertilization promotes the growth of food fish as per the quote which is pasted below. The iron fertilizayion experiment to which this quote refers was entirely natural.
""The two biggest [salmon] runs that have occurred are both associated with volcanoes," said Tim Parsons, a professor emeritus at the University of British Columbia and a research scientist at the Institute of Ocean Sciences in Canada. "In 1956, an eruption of a volcano in Kamchatka produced a run of 20 million salmon in 1958 in the Gulf of Alaska, and more recently, in 2008, a volcanic eruption on the Aleutians produced the run of 35 million salmon in 2010."
Parsons said that the volcanoes "spew iron over the whole of the Pacific," triggering a zooplankton buffet for salmon."
Since the need to grow rapidly in this new ocean environment is a priority for the very young salmon, their abundant survival was for once assured, resulting in the phenomenal returns," he said. "Alternative hypotheses on this whole process are difficult to find in any of the reports on sockeye salmon returns in 2010."
Fertilizing the ocean?
McNamee said that none of the experts had predicted the huge run of sockeye in 2010, but "we would say that it's our belief that the volcanic eruption and the volcanic bloom is the cause of that high return."
@@semirecklessHave you seen any ratios of phosphorus and silica to iron that is optimal?
@@paulmanias8269 Pasted below is a quote from a science paper which was published in "Science Direct" , which is one of the prominent global science journals. Diatom algae form their shells from silicone dioxide rather than calcium carbonate or magnesium carbonate, so the Redfield ratio for those particular algae includes a number for silicone, which is absent from listings of the Redfield ratio for most other marine life.
The Redfield ratio is only concerned with MACROnutruents, so, there is no component of the ratio for iron because only microscopic amounts of iron are required.
As per the quote below, the ideal ratio between silicone and phosphorus for optimum diatom growth is one mole of phosphorus to sixteen moles of silicone. Diatoms associate themselves in a symbiotic relationship with cyanobacteria, which bacteria are capable of fixing nitrogen from the atmosphere, so to cause diatom algae blooms does not require the addition of nitrogen fertilizer (Which is extremely expensive).
Sand, which contains iron, regularly blows across the Atlantic ocean from the Sahara desert to cause algae blooms in the Gulf of Mexico.
"From laboratory culture studies, the average Si/N ratios for small and large diatom species is close to 1/1 (Brezinski, 1985). This would give an overall Redfield ratio for CNPSiO of 106/16/1/16/-276 for balanced diatom growth."
"In the ocean, blue-green cyanobacteria are the most abundant type of bacteria to fix nitrogen. Collectively, these organisms are called diazotrophs, and account for close to 90% of natural nitrogen fixation."
BOOM first comment