Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007) • Hacker News Board

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#31

Post by wahern » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 6:47 PM UTC

X6S1x6Okd1st wrote: post #26

wahern wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Fate of Food: What We'll Eat in a Bigger, Hotter, Smarter World. One of my favorite quotes in this vein is "We are eating bait and moving on to jellyfish and plankton", referring to overfishing and climate change changing Americans' seafood diet. From http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jul/30/local/la-me-ocean30j... . Of course, many cultures have always eaten and enjoyed jellyfish, but that's beside the point. T…

> Of course, many cultures have always eaten and enjoyed jellyfish From my brief search it looks like most edible jellyfish is sold heavily salted. Like higher than average beef jerky salty. You'd need to change preservation techniques to really use jellyfish a lot of your daily protein intake. Jellyfish: > Protein 6.67 g > Sodium, Na 2081 mg https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/396504/n... > Beef jerk…

At least in Chinese cuisines, alot of seafood and other foodstuffs are still preserved with salt. But you normally soak it first, like with salt cod in European cuisines.

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#32

Post by LatteLazy » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 6:47 PM UTC

api wrote: post #30

LatteLazy wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few counter points: * rate of World co2 emissions continue to rise. * we don't just need rate to stop rising, we need rate to fall to pretty much zero. * and if we could magically get rates to stop rising, and fall to zero, tomorrow, we'd still have about 2 degrees of warming from all the emissions already up there. People have completely missed the point: the rate of growth of rate of emissions might have improved…

There is no chance of stopping this. The challenge is massive even if there were political will, and there is no political will. We need to plan for climate change as a near certainty and start preparing now.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Move to land on a hill. Travel north. Buy up some tundra that will be futile farm land in 50 years.

We should also pause for a minute and not the silent beauty of this consensus. No major leader, no scientist, no religious figure ever said Fuck it, let's not bother. But that's what our species have decided...

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#33

Post by OneGuy123 » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 6:51 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #21

OneGuy123 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Potentially destroying the ocean vs spending money to reduce carbon emissions is a no brainer, and it's the job of these scientists to say that out loudly rather than to push for these extreme solution which can produce a blackswan disaster of epic proportions that even money won't be able to save. The arrogance of scientists to "try out my method instead" is at fault since if these scientists were to actually want t…

Scientists have been pushing on politicians to lower emissions at least since the early nineties. There is no discernible dent in the rise of CO2 levels. There is not even a big dent in the rise of emissions: Not even the second derivative is pointing in the right direction.

Yes, let us now dump iron in oceans instead, because what can go wrong?

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#34

Post by boring_twenties » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 7:25 PM UTC

LatteLazy wrote: post #32

api wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no chance of stopping this. The challenge is massive even if there were political will, and there is no political will. We need to plan for climate change as a near certainty and start preparing now.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Move to land on a hill. Travel north. Buy up some tundra that will be futile farm land in 50 years. We should also pause for a minute and not the silent beauty of this consensus. No major leader, no scientist, no religious figure ever said Fuck it, let's not bother. But that's what our species have decided...

Is "it's a hoax, invented by the Chinese" (that's a direct quote) somehow substantively different from "fuck it, let's not bother?"

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#35

Post by omginternets » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 8:04 PM UTC

SubiculumCode wrote: post #17

omginternets wrote: post #3

Every time I read something like this, my hubris alarm goes off. We couldn't even get trans-fats right, so I don't see how we're going to cover all the contingencies for something like this.

The original hubris was thinking we could put all these greenhouse gasses in the air and do climate change and f k the consequences.

False dichotomy, my friend.

I agree with your statement, too.

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#36

Post by omginternets » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 8:12 PM UTC

frazbin wrote: post #11

omginternets wrote: post #3

Every time I read something like this, my hubris alarm goes off. We couldn't even get trans-fats right, so I don't see how we're going to cover all the contingencies for something like this.

'Terraforming' earth has never been easy but it has long been necessary to feed humans. Bulk addition of soluble/leachable nutrients (naturally depleted by rainfall, fractionation by gravity, and chemical transformation) is the primary novel intervention in modern agriculture. We've learned that biological systems can be made to cycle much faster by turning the crank in this way. The rewards are great-- used in land,…

Yes, this is all true, and yet it’s the unknowns that will get us. There was a time where burning coal seemed like a good idea.

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#37

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 8:37 PM UTC

boring_twenties wrote: post #34

LatteLazy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Move to land on a hill. Travel north. Buy up some tundra that will be futile farm land in 50 years. We should also pause for a minute and not the silent beauty of this consensus. No major leader, no scientist, no religious figure ever said Fuck it, let's not bother. But that's what our species have decided...

Is "it's a hoax, invented by the Chinese" (that's a direct quote) somehow substantively different from "fuck it, let's not bother?"

[deleted]

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#38

Post by 24gttghh » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

staplers wrote: post #28

mdorazio wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth noting also is that major crops grown there, like corn and soybeans, are primarily used as animal feed [1][2]. A decent chunk of corn is also used for ethanol additives to gasoline. The best thing we can do for the environment by far is reduce consumption of beef and dairy products. [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/corn-and-other-feedgra... [2] https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/coexist…

The best thing we can do for the environment by far is reduce consumption of beef and dairy products. This is very false. Source: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...

Maybe not the best overall, but definitely the cheapest and easiest thing a consumer can do, right now, today, is eat less red meat.

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#39

Post by 24gttghh » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 9:00 PM UTC

mdorazio wrote: post #13

24gttghh wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was about to say most of the plains are used for growing corn and not grazing land but I was wrong, partly. Its mostly cropland in the Northern/Central plains, but mostly grazing/pasture land otherwise. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/major-land-uses/maps-...

Worth noting also is that major crops grown there, like corn and soybeans, are primarily used as animal feed [1][2]. A decent chunk of corn is also used for ethanol additives to gasoline. The best thing we can do for the environment by far is reduce consumption of beef and dairy products. [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/corn-and-other-feedgra... [2] https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/coexist…

Yes I should have pointed that out too. Thank you.

Re: Fertilizing the Ocean with Iron (2007)

#40

Post by frazbin » Thu, Sep 03, 2020, 9:05 PM UTC

omginternets wrote: post #36

frazbin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Terraforming' earth has never been easy but it has long been necessary to feed humans. Bulk addition of soluble/leachable nutrients (naturally depleted by rainfall, fractionation by gravity, and chemical transformation) is the primary novel intervention in modern agriculture. We've learned that biological systems can be made to cycle much faster by turning the crank in this way. The rewards are great-- used in land,…

Yes, this is all true, and yet it’s the unknowns that will get us. There was a time where burning coal seemed like a good idea.

Whether the unknowns will get us is.. unknown. We are going to learn about whole-planet ecology in the next century whether we intervene or not. Pretending that we know less than we really do is kind of a trademark regressive-right tactic, so you'll forgive me when I say it's quite disengenuous and harmful to compare coal combustion to iron fertilization.

The negative externalities of coal combustion have been known in broad strokes at both the macro and micro levels for centuries. The benefits of fertilization have been known for much longer.