Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017) • Hacker News Board

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#121

Post by atourgates » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

Gustomaximus wrote: post #17

King-Aaron wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've been farming seaweed in places like Japan since the 1600's/1700's and is a $2 billion industry. They also farm it all through south-east asia :)

Being done in Australia: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-16/king-island-kelpers-ke... Looking at opening more in Australia: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-30/not-just-for-sushi-the...

It's happening in the US as well, though currently on a smaller scale: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-seaweed-farming-and-...

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#122

Post by DanBC » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

mbostleman wrote: post #120

enraged_camel wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is very wrong. It’s not about having land to live on and being able to continue to breathe on it. Of course we would be able to do that. The issue is all the parts of the ecosystem we have come to rely on. Animals, plants, insects... the entire global economy and our ways of live are tightly intertwined with everything else and even small disruptions can have enormous repercussions, especially on more vulner…

This description is full of hyperbolic generalities. The available land example may or may not be comprehensive, but at least it's specific. I think the biggest problem that I have about everything climate change / global warming is that we are making laws to force (don't forget that force means pointing guns at people regardless of the warm and fuzzy intentions used to sell it) entire populations and their economies…

> (don't forget that force means pointing guns at people

I'd love to know where this comes from, because it's clearly fucking bollocks but is trotted out in many threads.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#123

Post by mbostleman » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

nickkell wrote: post #66

s_dev wrote: post #24

Also relevant: Feeding dairy cows seaweed mitigates the amount of methane they pass. Irish famers are beginning to do this because seaweed is easy to come by in Ireland. https://phys.org/news/2018-05-seaweed-relieve-gassy-cows-dai...

Hackernews loves these articles that give some kind of hope for a magical solution to climate change. It's easier than the thought that it will require a huge concerted effort across the world and changing the habits of millions

"A thousand goals have there been hitherto, for a thousand peoples have there been. Only the fetter for the thousand necks is still lacking; there is lacking one goal. As yet humanity hath not a goal."

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#124

Post by hcurtiss » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:27 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #103

jules wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is exceedingly unlikely that raised temperatures or sea levels would end humanity. Even if all ice melts there would still be a lot of land, and humans can and do currently survive in hot climates. The habitable zone will just shrink a bit, but it will also expand in other places. Siberia + 5 degrees is still cold.

No, this is very wrong. It’s not about having land to live on and being able to continue to breathe on it. Of course we would be able to do that. The issue is all the parts of the ecosystem we have come to rely on. Animals, plants, insects... the entire global economy and our ways of live are tightly intertwined with everything else and even small disruptions can have enormous repercussions, especially on more vulner…

Maybe, but none of those things necessarily end humanity.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#125

Post by ebikelaw » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:27 PM UTC

21 wrote: post #40

bumholio wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The homeostasis might work in a limited range under which the biological world evolved in the recent past. Exceeding that range could quickly turn to a runaway geological event of rapid climate change, a state transition in a complex and unpredictable system. Take for example the great oxidation event happening 2.5 billion years ago. As oxygen excreting algae began to take over methane producing organisms, oxygen sta…

> I have less faith that this will happen soon, or that most species, humans included, can survive such a massive transition event. This stuff doesn't happen in a year. And we have a bunch of ways of ego-engineering, what's missing is an acute need and the economics/political incentives, which again, an acute need would provide.

This is the most true typo ever.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#126

Post by jschwartzi » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:33 PM UTC

mbostleman wrote: post #120

enraged_camel wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is very wrong. It’s not about having land to live on and being able to continue to breathe on it. Of course we would be able to do that. The issue is all the parts of the ecosystem we have come to rely on. Animals, plants, insects... the entire global economy and our ways of live are tightly intertwined with everything else and even small disruptions can have enormous repercussions, especially on more vulner…

This description is full of hyperbolic generalities. The available land example may or may not be comprehensive, but at least it's specific. I think the biggest problem that I have about everything climate change / global warming is that we are making laws to force (don't forget that force means pointing guns at people regardless of the warm and fuzzy intentions used to sell it) entire populations and their economies…

What if your neighbor was dumping liquid radioactive waste on your land, right outside your house? Greenhouse gases should be considered harmful pollution, and because they eliminate vast swathes of habitable land they should be treated similarly to other forms of toxic waste.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#127

Post by jschwartzi » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:34 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #122

mbostleman wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This description is full of hyperbolic generalities. The available land example may or may not be comprehensive, but at least it's specific. I think the biggest problem that I have about everything climate change / global warming is that we are making laws to force (don't forget that force means pointing guns at people regardless of the warm and fuzzy intentions used to sell it) entire populations and their economies…

> (don't forget that force means pointing guns at people I'd love to know where this comes from, because it's clearly fucking bollocks but is trotted out in many threads.

It comes from a very explicit reading of Ayn Rand, who frequently likens law and regulation to the explicit use of force. To be fair, it's true but the literal statement of the fact misses a lot of the nuance of living in a civil society.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#128

Post by red75prime » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:39 PM UTC

ariehkovler wrote: post #3

Really interesting. Makes me think of Daisyworld and the Gaia Hypothesis. Daisyworld is a model Earth covered in black and white daisies, that either absorb or reflect light. In the model, black daisies need less light because they absorb more, increasing the Earth's heat absorption. White daisies absorb less so need more light, but also reflect more light back, increasing the surface albedo of the planet and lowerin…

> Gaia theory suggests that the world is full of these stabilizing systems.

Or stable feedback loops exist longer (because they are stable) and that's all there is to it. Life managed to almost kill itself a couple of times during Huronian glaciation.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#129

Post by rch » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:43 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #45

stkni wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be a great win-win! But wouldn't the sequestered CO2 get released back into the environment and potentially the atmosphere?

Yes, if you want to "permanently" (i.e. a thousand years at least) sequester carbon from biomass sources you have to burn them to charcoal and bury that.

You can also pump CO2 into deep coal seams, displacing CH4 which is then burned in a closed capture system. The CO2 released from burning the CH4 is also sequestered resulting in a net gain since CO2 preferentially adsorbs to coal at a roughly 3:1 ratio to CH4. Economically viable coal seams are widespread globally, and exist within 50 km of most coal burning power plants in the United States.

Re: Seaweed could be scrubbing more carbon from the atmosphere than expected (2017)

#130

Post by dwc » Tue, Aug 07, 2018, 4:47 PM UTC

ariehkovler wrote: post #3

Really interesting. Makes me think of Daisyworld and the Gaia Hypothesis. Daisyworld is a model Earth covered in black and white daisies, that either absorb or reflect light. In the model, black daisies need less light because they absorb more, increasing the Earth's heat absorption. White daisies absorb less so need more light, but also reflect more light back, increasing the surface albedo of the planet and lowerin…

> One question I have is how sequestered the undersea carbon really is

Depends on how you interpret "sequestered". In the sense that it's locked away somewhere for a long time, like organic matter frozen into tundra, it's not very sequestered. But as long as there's lots of seaweed there'll be a lot of carbon taken up. Even though individual plants may die and release their carbon on a relatively short timeline, new growth will take up carbon.