Keep your Private Info Safe Online With Delete Me: JoinDeleteMe.com/TwoBitDavinci
@brokeandtired
Жыл бұрын
Already been tried. It was a disaster that killed a bunch of Coral reef. Lets not do quick bodges based on bad theory and bad science.
@b_uppy
Жыл бұрын
We need more carbon in SOIL. We have lost much of our topsoil thru poor ag practices. The UN estimates that we have only 45-60 years left of adequate soil capacity needed to meet food needs. That carbon needs to go into efforts to rebuild soil. Carbon rich topsoil is the soil that grows the most plant varieties, and especially the ones we use primarily for crops. Carbon rich soils simultaneously allows both water retention and drainage, sustaining plants at the sweet spot for growth. Side benefits of carbon rich soils include less flooding, less need for irrigation, deeper roots, better nutrition, etc. Better soil practices improve nutrition for and from plants. Better drought and heat resistance, it tends to avoid compaction. It means avoiding harms from synthetic chemical inputs, more food variety (as building soil means using more site appropriate crops, which means less mainstream types), etc.
@Torterra_ghahhyhiHd
Жыл бұрын
he should eco_systems_engineering in a separated similar fish tanks and make if that platoon can be nutritious and eat able. so also bio genetic species engineering.
@reverands571
Жыл бұрын
Look at anchored Kelp forests, sometime.
@reverands571
Жыл бұрын
Look at anchored Kelp forests, sometime.
@thadiusbarnelsnatch3665
Жыл бұрын
I think studying it is worth it you don’t have to commit to a full mobilization of the technology. Small controlled experiments in various ecology’s could give us an actual understanding of what the real effects might be and even a map of how this could be utilized in the real world.
@borisnicholson6508
Жыл бұрын
Ask the salmon
@djinn666
Жыл бұрын
Agreed. It's a good idea to keep studying the tech until we can be sure it's better than the alternative. We are inadvertently geoengineering the planet with our CO2 emissions. This won't be any worse. The problem is, our society operates on liability. If even one person dies from a harmful algae bloom, the person experimenting would be responsible and could end up in jail. Meanwhile, if global warming caused a hurricane that kills tens of thousands of people, everything's fine according to the law. Forget criminalizing Rust's actions, to make this actually happen, there needs to be immunity.
@donaldcarey114
Жыл бұрын
If a corrupt politician cannot use it for profit it won't happen. FACT
@karllong
7 ай бұрын
This happens naturally via sahara dust and volcanoes, it is an observable & measurable phenomenon and should not be characterised as some novel thing that's never happened before. There have also been dozens of small controlled experiments but scientists invariably come to the conclusion that more research is needed.
@darthsirrius
Жыл бұрын
The Hallmark of a good experiment is that it can be reproduced, do it again, and again if they need to. If he has the data that shows it's good, as long as that's peer-reviewed, there's no reason they shouldn't run this again. Air carbon capture will be crazy expensive, and we'll still still probably need to do it, but if this is an all-out positive, we should at least run the experiment again.
@altrag
Жыл бұрын
> is that it can be reproduced Reproducing an experiment requires two factors though: The experiment working (of course), but also the willingness of someone to actually attempt the reproduction. When it comes to irreversible changes to large portions of the planet, its very difficult to get the latter so the former rarely has a chance. We don't have a backup planet if the experiment happens to fail catastrophically. Of course, that also immediately becomes a talking point for those who don't want to address the problem at all. Unfortunately every year we do nothing using known technology is a year closer to being forced to do something drastic and unknown. The real solution is to stop borrowing from our grandchildren and just eat the economic costs of decarbonizing. The worst part is that they're not even long-term costs - the vast majority of the economic impact would stabilize in a couple of decades. Hell if the ozone hole/CFC outcomes are any indication, and the acid rain outcomes before that, the long-term prospects of doing things "right" is even greater economic activity. But nobody (at least nobody with the power to make the needed changes) is interested in paying a dollar in prevention today when they could just leave it for their grandkids pay $100 in recovery a few decades from now. And all the things that can't be recovered like biodiversity? Oh well they'll be dead by then, right. Someone else' problem.
@tuberroot1112
Жыл бұрын
More than half of what gets published as peer reviewed papers turns out to be incorrect within two years. There is such a massive bias in any thing which concerns climate that there is even less chance of peer review being and effective check on accuracy.
@theclanguagedeveloper5309
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, scale it up to the lake experiment and collect massive amount of data to evaluate it's impact. If it worked out, the green folks need to stfu and let it through, because it's going to be the best we got to combat global warming.
@NebosvodGonzalez
Жыл бұрын
Bro do you not get that carbon capture is just a lie it's going to be crazy expensive but needs to be done. What about telling Dupont to dump less Teflon into our rivers how about we start with that no but that's just forget about that and go chase some fairy tale bullshit.
@kalaiolele8796
Жыл бұрын
"again, and again" , that's right. More trials, experiments, and data. It could be justifiable to continue gathering more data to see if it could help. I doubt it could solve our problem entirely, but it could help.
@DarwinianUniversal
Жыл бұрын
The solution is obvious. Limited closely managed trials
@jaymercha3859
Жыл бұрын
after this summer ...i'm not sure we have time to do trials. i heard summer 2023 will be looked back as the cool summer on the evening news.
@MrBenstero
Жыл бұрын
There have been trials already. I read about this past year.
@DarwinianUniversal
Жыл бұрын
@@MrBenstero yes and the trials should be ongoing. And ramped up and or backed off as needed
@thehimself4056
Жыл бұрын
Exactly
@jerrywatson1958
Жыл бұрын
I agree multiple trials over 5 years.
@theCodyReeder
Жыл бұрын
Rust, higher oxides of iron are not bio available. All credible proposals are for iron II salts, NOT RUST. Other than that minor detail, yes let's do itt!
@tuberroot1112
Жыл бұрын
That minor detail is just the key to realising that our host does not have the slightest idea what he is talking about. We do NOT understand how the highly complex, non linear, chaotic system we call climate works and should NOT be thinking was are capable to fiddling with it. This is real sorcerer's apprentice stuff, which if far more likely to lead to catastrophic results than any amount of CO2 we release into the air.
@johndawson6057
Жыл бұрын
That actually is a major point.
@Jake12220
Жыл бұрын
@@tuberroot1112 it's actually just helping restore the previous ecosystem. The nutrient cycle that used to exist in many areas was disrupted by the whaling industry. Whales unintentionally helped to farm the ocean with massive schools helping to spread nutrients over wide distances. The old whaling ships used to report schools of whales feeding as far as the eye could see from horizon to horizon. As for a lot of the possible negatives, a lot are total nonsense. Things like blue green algae outbreaks are easily avoided as we know the specific conditions that lead to them, nutrients are only one element.
@AndyLowe
Жыл бұрын
@@tuberroot1112 It seems logical that either we understand it well enough to accurately predict global temperatures and resulting consequences decades in advance which means we understand it well enough to moderate those effects, or we don't understand it well enough to accurately predict global temperatures and secondary effects decades in advance which means we don't know if climate change is good, bad, or even exists.
@marlan5470
Жыл бұрын
@@tuberroot1112 Phytoplankton grows fine on its own. Sounds like another big pharma idea to get a government sponsored product approved. If this passes, it's because bribes were made.
@alansmith2307
Жыл бұрын
I spent a couple of years working with Russ on another project. I think he's a great guy and a good scientist , knowledgable and diligent in the lab and in his approach to data analysis and storage, Somebody should give him another chance of repeating the experiment.
@user-dl9lr8mq4l
Ай бұрын
Why not place some waste rock from iron mining in streams and rivers to slow their flows and help settle mud out to, while adding the iron.. other possible locations are on the shores of the oceans and in major ocean streams. I know i know, when there is WAY to much waste rock from many types of mines, they can make VERY nasty acidic run off, but those are literally small mountains of rocks and they have relatively little water moving through them.. In a river the emissions could be diluted millions to billions of times over... Should be safe and practically free compared to making and hand delivering iron chemicals every year..
@jensstubbestergaard6794
Жыл бұрын
For those that want to see where the biomass blooms are most prevalent there are maps of the oceans including the biomass. Most of the central parts of the oceans are almost desert like due to under fertilization.
@user-dl9lr8mq4l
Ай бұрын
Yeah finding out most of the ocean is biologically void was mind blowing
@dannywinget
Жыл бұрын
Always A+ presentation and this approach is very interesting
@Talon771
Жыл бұрын
Large scale? No. Dozens/hundreds/thousands small scale? Yes.
@johnransom1146
Жыл бұрын
Couldn’t you study the areas around rusting ship wrecks? They are already there so nothing added. How does this help with other issues like ocean acidification or warming ocean temperatures and coral bleaching?
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
Volcanic islands have been used, and effect is small and nutrients that would get used downstream sink with the carbon, reducing phytoplankton growth elsewhere (those downstream areas also happen to be globally significant fisheries that a lot of people and animals rely on)
@bernicemarie7243
Жыл бұрын
And the smushed cars they use for beach erosion control and faux coral reaf bases.
@michaelbaxter8249
Жыл бұрын
I believe it requires that it be very finally graduated to be effective.
@petespete4118
Жыл бұрын
If it creates and supports life, maybe it's not such a bad idea.
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
@@petespete4118 It creates life in one place by using up nutrients that life would otherwise have used somewhere downstream (the nitrate moves with the carbon) so is more zero-sum that generally presented.
@MegaSnail1
Жыл бұрын
I love your open ended questions after sharing the data. My opinion as a biologist is to experiment with this technique on the giant pacific garbage patch which appears to be harboring some interesting aquatic life. The patch is more remote from delicate coastal ecosystems and could offer a site that may provide fewer variables to help tease out the actual effects of the iron.
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
Most of the ocean is nitrate limited, including all the ocean gyres so adding iron wouldn't have any significant effect in garbage patches. North and Equatorial Pacific and the Southern Ocean are the iron limited (High Nutrient Low Chlorophyll) regions and these experiments have been done (artificial addition to the ocean and bottle incubations and also using volcanic islands as natural sources to study). Results are fairly well understood. One of several issues is that you use up nitrate that would have been used downstream, eg Benguela and Humboldt upwelling systems, which are really important fisheries and ecosystems.
@MegaSnail1
Жыл бұрын
Thanks so much for your detailed response. Clearly my background in Botany gives me a poor understanding of Ocean systems. My main concern is primarily to do no harm. Perhaps folks like you can guide this type of experiment given your deeper understanding of Ocean systems. Thanks again.
@W1ldSm1le
Жыл бұрын
@@HJV24 aren't nitrate levels significantly higher than what would be considered normal because of agricultural runoff anyways?
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
@@W1ldSm1le Not in remote areas where iron is limiting, but in many coastal seas they are, with impacts on oxygen levels and biodiversity
@daviddahl8186
Жыл бұрын
How well this works may also depend on water temperature. This may be better in cold water where algae have more difficulty growing. I definitely believe more small scale studies would helo.
@gregbailey45
Жыл бұрын
G'day.
@johnhiggs325
11 ай бұрын
My thoughts exactly. I would add the average sea states matter. Placid waters increase the chance of anoxia.
@curtisroberts9137
Жыл бұрын
This seems like a great method and should be studied more. I think if we test in properly scaled experiments we reduce risk and gain information to determine if larger scale use would be positive. Also, as far as the overall environment goes, the carbon credit scam is probably the worst thing to happen. The entire idea is folley, but it makes a lot of people rich so it will continue.
@carlsapartments8931
Жыл бұрын
And the world is not at all beyond creating false/skewed information to discredit someone they can't control to marginalize them!
@jedi10101
Жыл бұрын
this. that's how science should be, not endless theorizing & back & forth academic debate. given the successful tests, the lack of interest to do further study is very suspicious. it seems the solution to the carbon problem is being monopolized for political, financial, & economic gain.
@curtisroberts9137
Жыл бұрын
@@jedi10101 Exactly. If the problem is solved who will donate to all the politicians and scientists studies?
@MyContext
Жыл бұрын
The moment a small scale experiment is shown to work, then it seems reasonable to scale it up just a bit to see if there is a down side to be shown, then repeat the scale up until there is a tipping point. It may be the case that it can be done in particular areas due to the ecology of the area while doing it in other areas is a net doomsday moment. It may be the case that there is an "magic amount" relative to an area. I don't see how not checking helps advance any understanding.
@Ekka007
Жыл бұрын
The small scale experiment wasn't shown to work, remember the goal was sequestration not unnatural aggregation of fish into an area to be harvested which is actually a worse depletion ratio of a natural resource.
@chriseidam7319
Жыл бұрын
@@Ekka007, You don't know if it drove populations of fish to the rust or if more hatchlings survived their youth because of an abundance of food available. Plankton/diatom population levels are down around the world. This restores plankton/diatoms levels, right? Thus increasing the food supply in ocean ecosystems, right?
@chriseidam7319
Жыл бұрын
@@Ekka007 Sure, but if food is more abundant, doesn't it promote larger fish populations? Doesn't it promote each generation to live another year?
@eclipsos8187
Жыл бұрын
@chriseidam7319 I would agree the year during the iron dump would have an abundance of food and likely be more healthy. The following year would then produce a large amount of ofspring with still an excess of food allowing for more of the fish to survive causing an exploding population that would be delayed. Depending on how much food was left during that year and fishing was not done in mass it may have been possible to see and even larger amount the following year afterward.
@Ekka007
Жыл бұрын
@@chriseidam7319 @eclipsos8187 There are assumptions like:- 1. Did the fish get to spawn or were they harvested beforehand? 2. Is the effect of a single iron dosing going to continue indefinitely? What is the longevity of the dosing? 3. Are fish stocks elsewhere being depleted due to migration to this location? 4. Are other apex predators going to aggregate in that location to gorge upon the bounty? 5. What is the long term effect? At the end of the day there is insufficient data to say if the outcome was either positive or negative or what happened year after year at that location. It wasn't that long ago Climate Change was blamed for mass salmon deaths in the Pacific North West. Later science found a chemical in rubber tires called 6PPD-quinone was responsible. The point is, no real analysis has occured for the long term. It was wasted opportunity for science not to have participated.
@markstevens7838
Жыл бұрын
I think the idea deserves further small trial research. Its doubtful it would create dead zones if it was limited to deep ocean areas. Btw. the Haida people from British Columbia (my home) are pronounced “Hi da” - just thought you should know😊
@marcd2743
Жыл бұрын
Nobody cares.
@markstevens7838
Жыл бұрын
Many people care, obviously not you.
@GIGADEV690
Жыл бұрын
@@marcd2743 I care.
@zefellowbud5970
Жыл бұрын
@@marcd2743 Weird way to write nobody other you doesn’t care.
@hopegrable
Жыл бұрын
Awesome video!!! I just love topics like this that get people talking. We can't fix anything if we don't talk about it. I think the toxic algae blooms we've seen in places like Florida, that are a direct result of waste from the sugar cane industry, cattle ranches, dairy farms, and citris groves, have scared people so much they aren't willing to consider how this science can be applied in a beneficial way. I think the best approach with something like this is to do very strategic and controlled rust applications in areas that would most benefit from it, and have teams ready to closely monitor the results. There are plenty of areas around the globe that are in need of regreening on land and at sea. We need to consider all options and apply them based on facts and scientific predictions rather than not do anything because we're afraid.
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
That was all done, in the late 90s and 2000s - this isn't new (and, from those studies, isn't going to save the world either)
@Noisy_Cricket
Жыл бұрын
Seems like this should be tried on the small scale in entirely seperate areas of the world, and rigorously tested for what its impacts are. If it works, scale it up and do larger dumps in a rotating manner in various locations across the world.
@ICDeadPeeps
Жыл бұрын
They already did and it was covered on the FreeThink KZitem Channel. I believe the video was titled "The highly controversial plan to stop climate change | Russ George for Heretics"
@JoshuaRosaaen
Жыл бұрын
Maybe some more small scale tests are a better overall solution here where we make very small changes with intention to discover what changes in the experiment and why. Once we have an understanding of why...we should be able to recreate expected outcomes at will in other small scale tests. Only then can we consider scaling as a factor...and even then...it might be a better idea to just do smaller things closer together and see if they connect somehow. Looking to create a synergistic effect in the direction we want to invoke change overall.
@rogermccaslin5963
Жыл бұрын
Since it's been more than ten years since Russ did his "experiment" and the data was collected without any conclusions drawn, my guess is the data doesn't show what he wanted it to show. Also, the near record catch of salmon sounds good but were there any studies that would point to the rust injection as the root cause? Could other factors have played a part? Weather conditions, water levels in the salmon streams, other pollutants and/or nutrients or lack thereof, etc. I don't know much about salmon production other than they go up stream to spawn and then make their way to the ocean for a while before they head upstream again. Is the cycle one year? Do they spend more than a year at sea before returning to the rivers and streams to spawn? What was the age of the fish they caught? Was more time dedicated to the harvest, either by longer hours, more days or were more fishermen present during that particular harvest than previous or afterward? Lots of unanswered questions in my mind. I'm in South Florida and I've seen firsthand the consequences of geo-engineering and pollution. We have toxic blue-green algae blooms. The Everglades is a shadow of it's former self. The Florida Keys reefs are dying. I'd be leery of anyone who doesn't have solid data on the things they are trying to do, especially those anyones who are in it for money.
@LogistiQbunnik
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, pretty sure the cycle with salmon is longer than a year. Although more food available might have helped, it would have to show probably several generations of salmon thrive to give a strong correlation between the iron seeding and the fish population.
@lunatik9696
Жыл бұрын
We really have to be careful with conclusions from initial data. Multiple repeated experiments should determine the data for analysis.
@charlesspringer4709
Жыл бұрын
@@LogistiQbunnik Pink salmon are a 2 year fish and the increase was way beyond any typical variation.
@nowandrew4442
Жыл бұрын
Not to mention, long-term ecological influences will play out over far greater periods than a single breeding season. Even the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs did so over thousands of years.. it didn't vaporise them on the spot.
@ICDeadPeeps
Жыл бұрын
Or people who are championing mechanical CO2 machines which uses excess energy (ironically) funded by Bill Gates & co. are threatened by this research and doing everything they can to do shut it down.
@northwind7409
Жыл бұрын
Salmon have a four year cycle. Having high returns two years after somebody dumps something into the ocean doesn't explain a successful spawning run two years before the dumping.
@user-dl9lr8mq4l
Ай бұрын
Food, health, etc
@desertfoxaz97
Жыл бұрын
I have been a huge fan of this since I first read about it in the 90s. They could do it in the Pacific dead zone. Also another technology is if you had floats with tubes going down a few 1000 feet as the waves Bob up and down it could bring up the cold water to the surface. This has been shown to increase activity at the surface and increase the amount of fish as well.
@dasanoneia4730
Жыл бұрын
its crazy while they are sitting on their hands pondering this man took action and got results we been waiting on these people to do something for decades wtf and noe were on the edge of crisis and all i hear was what people are planning to do and it frustrating i dont blame him
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
There had been several experiments beforehand (artificial additions and around natural sources of iron) and then the rules were changed, as effects were too small to make it worth perturbing the system downstream (using up nitrate before it's needed for major fisheries)
@hikesystem7721
Жыл бұрын
The guy is a crackpot. It's not the answer. We're all yearning for solutions, but this is not it.
@aortai
Жыл бұрын
Do you realize that this can quickly go horribly wrong right?
@eclipsos8187
Жыл бұрын
@aortai you realize we send humans on explosive rockets into space right literally an overtightened bolt cou,d cause a failure and it worked everything with no negative side effects. I'm not saying it's impossible but let's stop and think for a minute if it does go wrong it's not like the whole ocean. Is going to die we've had japan and China have nuclear waste travel thought the entire ocean and we are ok
@Vaeldarg
Жыл бұрын
"this man took action and got results", but "this man" isn't a scientist and his "results" were inconclusive. It was just another businessman (wanting to sell carbon credits) being another example of "knowing just enough to get in trouble". He didn't know enough to know why this kind of science tends to take so long, before being tested/applied at-scale.
@briannacooper2628
Жыл бұрын
While I am a strong advocate for ocean fertilization and I am glad to see you publish this information, I have a few well intended corrections. The Haida (correctly pronounced Hi-Duh) are a proud indigenous people, not merely a ‘village of poor fishermen.’ They have an ancient enduring cultural connection to the salmon runs and take their responsibility for the oceans and the next generation seriously. Money was of course involved but restoration of a way life was a strong motivator for ocean fertilization. I would love to see this video in the future take a more respectful tone towards an indigenous people who have lived, fished, and stewarded the northwest coast since time since time in memorial.
@aclearlight
Жыл бұрын
Great content as always! Large scale, profit-driven, brute force wildcat operations should be forbidden, obviously, but modest-scale, carefully-monitored research, heck yes! I am sick of ppl who go all holier-than-thou on everything geo-engineering and everything nuclear. Simplistic, rigid thinking is not going to up our odds of survival. Thank you for handling this in such a fair manner.
@tonydeveyra4611
11 ай бұрын
I was fixated on this concept for years and am still convinced that it would be fantastic. That said, in the process of digging more into this, I learned how whale poop has a similar effect in causing plankton to grow and how sperm whales specifically bring nutrients from the depths up to the nutrient poor shallow waters. It's just another insight into how our actions from whaling two hundred years ago have broken down ecological systems in the ocean. Has me wondering if there's anything we could proactively do (like breeding programs or anything like that) to speed whale repopulation so they can keep doing this important ecological work.
@morninboy
Жыл бұрын
Strange coincidence as I was just thinking about this earlier this morning. I also recalled there was an amazing uptick in the salmon returns after the iron fertilization. Now that we have had a ten year hiatus It may be time to resume the experiment and start collecting data. Our situation is desperate
@ethankriegel5957
Жыл бұрын
It needs more small scale testing. Different locations may respond differently at different amounts of rust exposure.
@noahway13
Жыл бұрын
I'm glad you went in depth and did a deep dive into this topic and tried to get things ironed out.
@ZyxwvuTJ
Жыл бұрын
🥁😆
@SidarthDasari
Жыл бұрын
He didn't really. Iron oxide isn't even bio available. All the experiments used an iron sulfate compound which is of a different oxidation state. Its not as easy as throwing rust in the ocean
@carlsapartments8931
Жыл бұрын
I hate ironing
@taiwanjohn
Жыл бұрын
This should _absolutely_ be studied with further trials, but I would hold off on large-scale deployment until we've gathered enough data to be confident in the outcome. But for sure, there ought to be pilot projects all over the world, in different climates and ocean conditions, to find out what works best in each area.
@Scubongo
Жыл бұрын
Excellent video on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) with iron fertilization. I think you've covered all the pros and cons here. Good job! I was a big fan of this CDR technique before, but now I think that alkaline enhancement with minerals - or even electricity - is the way forward. It would be good if you made a video about that. Especially glacial dust and/or olivine looks promising.
@wadewoehrmann2835
Жыл бұрын
Well worth starting on a small scale to see how it goes. It must be studied no reason to be torn let's give it a try and give it the study it deserves.
@Mars-ev7qg
Жыл бұрын
A great follow-up to this would be a video about the project by Stanford University to make biofuel from kelp plants grown on mid ocean floating artificial habits. The project claimed to have achieved several significant breakthroughs, including successfully producing viable jet fuel from kelp oil and having a scalable process. However, a recent academic scandal at Stanford University has called all research papers they have published into question. Let's get to the bottom of this. Has Stanford University discovered the key to carbon neutral aviation, or is this just a bunch of hot air? It does seem like kelp oil should be a viable alternative to petroleum. After all the oil we use every day came from ancient photosynthetic organisms that lived in the ocean millions of years ago.
@M3e36-99
Жыл бұрын
Cut from the same cloth as Elizabeth Holmes.
@Kalamain
Жыл бұрын
One of the things that wasn't mentioned here is that a form of this has been going on for decades. Countries all around the world, mainly in those with coral reefs (South Pacific), have been scuttling and sinking metal (war)ships, after cleaning them out. This has proven to be an absolute BOON for local coral regeneration and the explosion of life around them. Not only that but these wrecks have also become excellent tourist spots for people scuba diving. These wrecks slowly rust and get absorbed and eaten by the local ecology. So the basic idea is sound and proven to work. The big problem here is that with the scuttling of ships the process is slow and nature is allowed to increase slowly in step with the availability of the nutrients as the metal is broken down. If you seed the oceans with rust like that you risk SO MANY super-localised blooms that will potentially cause knock-on effects you were not expecting.
@rstritmatter
Жыл бұрын
Really interesting video. Thanks. I think the experiment needs to be repeated and that not repeating it is mere cowardice. We don't have enough data to know beneficial -- or how dangerous -- this concept is. However, the results of this first experiment seem quite promising.
@papakokopelli
Жыл бұрын
Iron sulfate (not iron oxide) is the necessary ingredient and is cheap and innocuous. This technique is certainly worth trying. As several people have already said, well-controlled experiments will allow us to dispel many of the doubts, one way or the other. Btw, this technique cannot be applied on a truly geo-engineering scale, because it only works in iron-deficient areas. The dangers have been hysterically overblown without bothering to measure the effects. And whether it curbs global warming completely, or just helps a bit is not the only positive outcome. As you mentioned, the effect of charging up the marine food chain is important too. Oh, and the guy's name is Russ George, not George Russ. I hadn't heard that one about selling an imaginary forest to the Vatican. I'd love to see a link to that story😂😂😂
@Phillip_Reese
Жыл бұрын
There are dead zones in the oceans that rotate on their own (some are the areas where the ocean's garbage ends up - no law forbids it), so there is no danger of interfering with coastal areas. This is where experiments should start.
@AlexAnder-fs4py
Жыл бұрын
Have you heard about the experiment where they threw minerals in the ocean ? It caused a record breaking Fishing season, but then the Gov came and took it all down and it was never talked about again. Check Canadian fishing results in a year by year basis
@carlsapartments8931
Жыл бұрын
Apparently you didn't actually watch this video
@cdwoodward1975
Жыл бұрын
sounds to good to be true... worth trying out and a small scale to see where we go with it. I mean how bad can it be? How many millions of tons of waste and oil have leaked into our oceans? What is a few tons of rust? Modern shipwrecks out of steel seem to harbour life and is good to rejuvenate coral reefs. I think it could work....
@johntheherbalistg8756
Жыл бұрын
The "extra" carbon in the atmosphere came from the topsoil we've depleted. Topsoil is made of dead plant/animal matter and the organisms that feed on it. Bad farming practices have depleted that, and allowed the carbon to evaporate. Techniques of restoring that are known. That's what we should be doing
@ddhdk5414
Жыл бұрын
Follow the money. Who benefits the most and who stands to lose the most from a cheap and easy solution?
@DanielSilva-jj2lz
Жыл бұрын
if the man's idea were approved, the Kyoto treaty would become useless, as each country would have an iron quota to put in the sea instead of giving money to some organization that does nothing. the useless people who keep complaining without doing anything ended up with the project of the only guy who really tried to do something, as this would show the uselessness of the others.
@dube7729
Жыл бұрын
I say that's enough. We need to push on and bring the ocean back to what it used to be before we all destroyed it! This is amazing news. I did not ever think that we had anything like this in the works but once again humans have eclipse and overcome!
@mr.normalguy69
Жыл бұрын
One man's trash is another man's treasure, as they say.
@bonniepoole1095
Жыл бұрын
It sounds like the type of biology produced by the 'bloom' is the confounding factor. A red tide bloom would have a negative effect but a diatom bloom would be beneficial. Is this correct? Can the scientists seed a water body with beneficial species and then fertilize the water with Iron thus promoting only the beneficial organisms? Multiple small scale operations could control the outcomes if things go wrong.
@eclipsos8187
Жыл бұрын
Honestly I wouldn't see why you couldn't. Theoretically you just separate an entire part of the ocean which you could make plankton farms with iron and the most delicious and nutritious food for fishies before releasing them into the wild in batches. It would be ridiculously more expensive and it's easier to just take so e readings of the water for what plankton is present within say 10 miles and then if it's good plankton and no bad ones dump immediately. Problem solved
@thewb8329
Жыл бұрын
May solve one problem and cause another. There is always a chance of unintended consequences.
@moonrock41
Жыл бұрын
This is why studies must be done before it's used. It's how we can assess what the unintended consequences may be.
@EasilyAmused42
Жыл бұрын
Could the Sargasso bloom be the ocean trying to cool itself? We humans name it "bad", we need to understand it, not just condemn it for the only reason than we don't like it.
@eddiecampbell3514
Жыл бұрын
I heard that if you can grow a bunch of mushrooms on a hill of dirt and then pour used motor oil on it, the mushrooms would absorb it as food. It was weird when I heard it but there's a video going around on it too. Let me know what you think about that one lol😊
@michaelkaster5058
Жыл бұрын
I doubt it is as food, mushrooms are a sponge when it comes to fluids, they most likely don't 'eat' the oil as food, but absorb the oil through the thousands of of tendrils that are below the soil , you couldn't go to a contaminated place and grow mushrooms, but if oil is spilled where it was all mushrooms it would soak it up.
@robertschlemmer5039
Жыл бұрын
And do what with the contaminated mushrooms?
@W1ldSm1le
Жыл бұрын
@@michaelkaster5058 actually some species of mushrooms have been observed eating oil. It's a hydrocarbon, some species of mushrooms aren't particularly picky.
@W1ldSm1le
Жыл бұрын
@@robertschlemmer5039they aren't contaminated. They metabolize it not just absorb it.
@johnstubbe3113
Жыл бұрын
I heard about this 10 years ago it's part of the reason sunken ships have so much life around them . We have lots of data from these ships rusting away . Bigger tests are in order. Who would be threatened by this working out!
@michaelbaxter8249
Жыл бұрын
I heard about all of this year’s ago I think in a popular science article. We are in a position now where we really have no choice but to do additional small/scale testing of this technology.
@debbiehenri345
Жыл бұрын
I think we need to do a test in tanks first, a sort of sealed experiment (with a section of water and a sealed atmosphere above. Once the iron is fully rusted, then it would be time for a small scale test on the real thing. It might be worth trying on a dying coral reef, since it's on the way out anyway. Nothing left to lose. But on a global scale? I'm not so sure.
@huzbum
Жыл бұрын
@@debbiehenri345 I don't think anyone would accept the results in a sealed environment. It's hard just to get the sealed environment to have a successful ecosystem, so how would you assert that it accurately represents the real world?
@eclipsos8187
Жыл бұрын
Agreed sealed environments will not work. With the tests conducted "illegally" we can see effects afterward were positive. Or at the very least not negative assuming no correlation between the dump and exploding fish population
@GerbenWulff
Жыл бұрын
I think it is important that we study this and do more well monitored experiments. I am personally very much interested in using olivine to absorb carbon from the ocean. Research into using rust is important for that as olivine contains significant amounts of iron and as such, we have the same effect. Using olivine to absorb carbon also has the risk of creating algal blooms as a result of iron dissolution. So, we need to know the effects of adding iron before we can use that technology as well. We need to know the risks and where it is better to use high or low iron content olivine or other minerals to absorb carbon. Another interesting, related issue is coral bleaching. Coral bleaching is related to disruption of the symbiotic relationship between algae and corals. Perhaps if we feed the algae (without creating an algal bloom), we can fight coral bleaching.
@kathb1683
Жыл бұрын
I read about a company one time wanting to do this. A scientist stated that once the iron absorbs it will sink and muck the bottom of the ocean
@jthunter8529
Жыл бұрын
You wouldn't be using nearly that much material plus rust dissolves in water
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
@@jthunter8529 No, rust doesn't dissolve in water. If it did the phytoplankton wouldn't be iron limited in the first place. There is a risk that a very strong phytoplankton bloom could sink to the bottom and use up all the oxygen in the area, which wouldn't be ideal.
@HJV24
Жыл бұрын
@Calkimchi low oxygen zones are scary and interesting. Big fish need more oxygen, so the edges can be safe zones for small fish where sharks can't get them, but further in and everything dies. CO2 releases from lakes that flow down valleys suffocating people is perhaps closest human analogy (Lake Nyos, Cameroon)
@jthunter8529
Жыл бұрын
@@HJV24 The solubility of rust (iron oxide) in water is generally low, ranging from approximately 0.002 g/L to 0.3 g/L. This value can vary depending on factors such as the specific type of rust and the temperature of the water. But it does still dissolve
@rodsprague369
Жыл бұрын
Careful, definitive experimentation would need to be done. It would also be best to find areas and dosages, taking into account water flow, that would themselves not be prone to toxic or anoxic blooms. Every release would need to be monitored to determine the effectiveness and unintended consequences so as to keep things safe. The releases would need to be done over as much of the world as practically possible to keep the dosages and unintended consequences low. Also, the iron might be best encapsulated in floating timed release biodegradable capsules that would not be problematic if ingested by filter feeding organisms so the iron is less likely to diffuse too deeply to be used by phytoplankton or mixed with chelating agents that prevent the iron from reacting with sea water and being rendered insoluble, if such chemical reactions are an issue.
@tomo1168
Жыл бұрын
As always, humanity needs first a big catasthrope to finally do something. This case will be the same. That german guy did a small scale experiment and it worked. It was 2004. 19 years ago. Maybe they should be doing a middle scale experiment and if it is also working a large scale? Nooo, just wait. We have time...until we don't.
@john-or9cf
Жыл бұрын
CO2 is plant food - what makes us think we are so prescient we know exactly how much CO2 in the atmosphere is bad? Especially when (1) the climate models are just that - incomplete computer models, and (2) water vapor is a more potent greenhouse gas. Anybody else notice how the Canadian fires/smoke have dropped summer temperatures in the northeast USA - and probably in Canada as well? We are well below our averages in Ohio. We are courting disaster if we attempt anything like this.
@NeoShameMan
Жыл бұрын
The same imperfect computer model are usef to test aerodynamics of plane, yet plane fly, just because a model is imperfect mean it's wrong enough to be useless, ballparks are closer to the solution that arse pull guess.
@DecadeAgoGaming
Жыл бұрын
We know the more Co2 there is in the atmosphere the warmer the planet will become and we're adding Co2 into the atmosphere at a rate never seen in the geologic record (including during mass extinction events) is this too hard for people to understand?
@john-or9cf
Жыл бұрын
@@DecadeAgoGaming And you trust the data to that extent? Never before seen in the geological record? You are gullible…it was warmer 2000 years ago during the Roman era. And Greenland was ‘green” because it was totally covered in ice? Right…. The climate models are woefully deficient in key areas - especially the effects of cloud cover.
@BrentHasty
Жыл бұрын
I think we can make all the seaweed and algae we can harvest and pelletizeb for use in fertilizer, feed, and fuel. A wood pellet stove heats a house real nice on just about any compressed biomass.
@pmaragoudakis
Жыл бұрын
There is a guy in Mexico that turns it to bricks
@jensstubbestergaard6794
Жыл бұрын
The most massive rust ocean fertilization is going on naturally whenever storms over Sahara lift sand into the air. I live in Denmark and we get red rain occasionally. The fertilization of the rainforest i South America happens through the same process. So nature has tested it and does it on a regular basis. It must be feasible to measure the effect of the gigatonnes of rust brought to the oceans from Sahara.
@johnthomasriley2741
Жыл бұрын
There are several additional complications: (1) in shallow seas the surface storms disrupt the process, (2) in very deep oceans the carbon is forced back into solution by pressure before it hits bottom, and (3) we do not know the effect the now very warm oceans will have at all.
@Usuario-ST
10 ай бұрын
An important question is... what happens to the iron after that? Is it captured in phytoplankton and spread in the food chain? Does this approach then require a constant supply of iron? In the long run, thinking about something permanent and in balance, wouldn't it raise iron levels? At pH above 5, iron precipitates. Would it be buried at the bottom of the ocean?
@lonnywilcox445
Жыл бұрын
One theory of the cause of the last ice age is that dry conditions in South America and Africa caused extensive wind erosion of iron rich soils which then landed in the ocean fertilized them and resulted in massive increases of phytoplankton and a resulting crash of atmospheric CO2. That is a nice theory but it completely ignores the fact that CO2 and all the other "greenhouse gases" like methane are actually minor effects compared to atmospheric water vapor. The effect of lowering atmospheric water vapor would be far more extensive than bringing atmospheric CO2 down. But, all of it ignores the other facts like increased atmospheric CO2 has significantly increased the amount of biomass on Earth in the area of photosynthetic organisms. And messing with natural processes we don't understand is a really bad idea, especially considering that cold is far more damaging to people and other animals than heat is.
@vinylcabasse
Жыл бұрын
love the bonoboesque music playing during the first minute or so
@markTheWoodlands
Жыл бұрын
I love this channel because the topics are important, the research is solid and the narrative ties it all together clearly. My only criticism of this particular video relates to the amount of carbon we would need to extract via the ocean to achieve net zero. I believe that each PPM increase (of co2) in the atmosphere reflects just over 2 GIGATONS of carbon. We currently average an annual increase of 2.4 PPM of co2 concentration. Which means we are putting 5 GIGATONS of carbon into the atmosphere annual. The equivalent unit of measure is tons of Co2. Carbon has an atomic weight of 12, co2 has an atomic weight of 44. To get from one to the other we multiply by 44/12 = 3.67. This is just over 18 gigatons of co2 being added to the atmosphere each year.
@Whos-Who_69
Жыл бұрын
if Phytoplankton consumes all the CO2 , then how can our Trustworthy Good-Hearted Billionaires and their Good Close-Friend Politicians make money...???
@PalimpsestProd
Жыл бұрын
as a Canadian I can say that our government has a habit of just believing whatever Greenpeace et al say so... If our scientists studying our fisheries have an opinion that might be more salient.
@jefferywise1906
Жыл бұрын
I think of this as fertilizing a field without sowing a crop. What will grow? Will the things that flourish be beneficial or detrimental? The way to do this is to sow those phytoplankton species that are helpful when you fertilize an area. This alone is just a first part. Without a biome that is able to consume this bloom of algae a dead zone will develop as off shore Namibia where over fishing sardines led to seasonal algae blooms dying sinking and generating methane gas and hydrogen sulfide gas kill zone. You need the complete web of life and the bottom levels of that food chain are the most essential element. Get that right then the chain above will grow and flourish.
@saitotomonori
Жыл бұрын
Japanese steel mills have been experimenting about a decade with seeding kelp forests with iron rich steel slag. Results have ben very promising, with kelp densities increasing by up to a factor of 220 times.
@TorQueMoD
Жыл бұрын
Wow, this is really interesting. I'm torn like you. It seems like it worked on the small scale, so it's strange that scientists haven't done more data anylisys in the area they did the experiment.
@cryptickcryptick2241
Жыл бұрын
So that is easy to answer. Solutions can suffer from "Not Invented Here" mentality, and not fit in with overall goal, mindset, political thinking and group think. Some people don't believe in Global Warming and Climate Change, some do. Those that do typically want to use that belief in climate change, to cause certain changes in society. Those changes and solutions all tend to fit into certain subset of ideas. (We need mass transit, we need fewer people on the planet, we need higher gas prices, we need more government control, with them in control of course, and more.) Solutions to climate change that do not push that narrative, limit their power and importance. They have a hard time with that. This is not the first idea that has ever been floated. People see their reaction to ideas, and know which ideas they should be for and which they should be against. This builds on or erodes the credibility of their agenda. This would be a clear case where, if this worked, it would severely limit the political power of their group.
@moonrock41
Жыл бұрын
@@cryptickcryptick2241, this is an area of interest (solutions to climate change) where there is a greater potential for overriding the sorts of political friction that you mention, because the perceived need for global solutions is growing stronger with each passing year. I have predicted that our global response to the evolving crisis in this century will change world society tremendously, perhaps as much as the industrial revolution did. That is, it will if we can adequately cope with the necessary changes. If we can't we'll be heading into a severely degraded, dystopian future.
@jebdominick7178
Жыл бұрын
My first Two Bit da Vinci video. Impressive presentation! Great job Ricky. I'm now a subscriber.
@TwoBitDaVinci
Жыл бұрын
Awesome, thank you, hope you'll vote in future polls!
@tbix1963
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, ideas and videos. Had heard of this many years ago and that it was a big flop. Great to get an update and that it wasn’t a complete flop but more of a undetermined mixed result. It would be great if the test results were actually processed. From the other test you mentioned it sounds like it could have some potential. And even if the carbon may not have been sequestered you would think the salmon fisheries might want to dabble in a smaller or equal trial to see if their industry is helped. Other fisheries that have been overfished might also look into their own trials in other parts of the world. I believe much like in life moderation is the secret of success and trials with moderate risk could possibly have some good results. Thanks for bringing the results of this test out of the noise of the internet that extremists tend bury any possible positive results in. Wishing you and your family the best.
@keith8346
Жыл бұрын
The study also found that iron fertilization could increase fish production by up to 50% This by its self should be enough to try this more then just once.
@josephang9927
Жыл бұрын
We already manage forests to keep diversity. Preserving green zones is geoengineering. Keeping dying species on zoos to keep them alive too. We already geoengineered earth, I'm sure this method can help a lot.
@sparkysmalarkey
Жыл бұрын
The whole "it's easier to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission" thing really depends on your level of confidence and ability to manage the consequences if/when things go wrong. We usually fail to prevent long term consequences, for example life will have access to all that "stored" carbon . . . how long will it take for something to figure out how to take advantage of the resource. The oceans are unimaginably vast.
@doug1olson
Жыл бұрын
There is clearly a lot of harmful unintentional geoengineering going on already so studying helpful options is probably a good idea.
@jpg0927
Жыл бұрын
If there was ever a time to study every possible solution, it is now. At the very least, models will become more accurate with experimental trials.
@jusportel
Жыл бұрын
When Rust George was promoting this, it was pointed out that there was ALREADY a huge pink salmon run predicted, and that he would likely attempt to take credit for it. There was no discernible impact on OUR salmon run, but they tried to take credit for a large run on the Fraser some years later.
@bettyswallocks6411
Жыл бұрын
“… an idea that has been around for 30 years.” I recall reading about the concept (along with using trees as the drivers of pulleys driving generators) in the late 1970s. But I was a student then, so what did I know?
@ricknoyb1613
Жыл бұрын
Here's an idea. Build a syphon generator from Los Angeles's oceanic sewer discharge to the lowest elevation of Death Valley. At a three hundred foot head, the electric power generated should be reason enough to build the system. Seawater would spill into giant concrete evaporation ponds with added iron for short blooms. The high desert temperatures would evaporate thousand of tons of saltwater into water vapor where there'd be a good chance of altering (cooling) the southwest's weather system (more cloud cover, more precipitation). The ponds would be allowed to dry where salts could be used in plastics production and the biomass used as fertilizers, feed or even sequestered (abandoned mining sites?) One concern would be Devils Hole Pupfish and migratory birds. Then again, without megaprojects addressing the coming global catastrophy, all life will be in jeopardy
@kennethng8346
Жыл бұрын
The original theory of why this occurs was based on iron rich dust being blown from the Saraha into the Atlantic ocean, causing algae blooms. Here we have it naturally occuring to study. Small scale trials should also be done to see what kind of effects happen. I have no idea if it will be significant or not, but trials should be done on a small scale to see what happens. Maybe it is more effective in certain areas than others. Maybe it will backfire in other areas. We should try.
@_Epictetus_
Жыл бұрын
So this is what Chevy and Ford were up to this whole time!
@istoppedcaring6209
Жыл бұрын
correlation is not causation, during this time also dam removals have taken place, essentially where did the salmon actually come from, I would argue that what increased numbers of salmon was the renewed ability of salmon to reach spawngrounds, and renewed alluvial runoff from freed rivers.
@busysaru888
Жыл бұрын
Why are there "dead-zones" in the ocean? Industrial farming and using too much fertiliser rather than permaculture and better waste management on industrial farms. Berms and bioswales on contour across the land wherever possible and practical, including bioswales with curb-cuts on front lawns would go a long way to solving a host of issues in one go, while helping nature and cooling our cities. They also raise aquifer levels while cleaning the water ways, prevent flooding and flash floods, and prevent droughts and forest fires. And they would be an economic multiplier and great jobs program. They're already being done in Tucson, Jordan, India and many other places, but we need them across the US. Climate catastrophe will only get worse before it gets better.
@cwspirols
Жыл бұрын
We tried it and it had good outcomes. If we try it more and it fails in some way, we could stop doing it. Not trying it, or acting like something is harmful when it actually isn't is not unacceptable in my opinion.
@robertneighbors4091
Жыл бұрын
Iron fertilization is typically done with chelated iron, not oxidized iron (rust). Seawater is alkaline and oxidized rust iron is not particularly soluble in seawater
@acesecure9817
Жыл бұрын
Use rust fertilization in 'polluted' waters. Since its already a 'dead zone' fertilization would help clean it and remove the toxins in the same way. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The red tide would eat the toxins and sink. Thus cleaning a polluted zone. Then it would help heal it for aquaculturing.
@tcveatch
Жыл бұрын
The solution to a big unsolved technical problem like this is many small inexpensive research projects exploring every imaginable solution. Not being so sure you have the answer and investing too much in aiming to get it right the first time, because that is likeliest to fail.
@e.v.k.3632
Жыл бұрын
If it works and the Result is great, it should be used in larger Scale
@skb4all
Жыл бұрын
Glad someone is following the research after decades.
@P5ykoOHD
Жыл бұрын
We should be trying to increase the amount of kelp forests in the ocean instead ... just saying. Kelp can also be eaten, so can be a source of easy to farm food or used as fertilizer for our own land food. Three birds one stone.
@user-gq4vl9pm9n
Жыл бұрын
The problem with 'Rust' is that its heavier then water, so it quickly sinks to the bottom of the Ocean. What has to be done is the 'Rust' must be combined with a water soluble organic compound such as tannins, a waste product of paper production. But since not all plankton are being supported, you have questions such as will changing the plankton mix have detrimental impact on the local fishing industry, etc. Caution is advised here.
@peterjohnstaples
Жыл бұрын
Hard question-- What is the correct ratio of C02 for the atmosphere? The fauna 600- 800 ppm
@connecticutaggie
Жыл бұрын
I agree that we should invest in research but I also agree that we should try things. When NASA was first founded, it was a relatively small and slow research group that was very happy with going at a slow pace but then Kennedy poured lots of money (and Engineer) onto the project and we ended up on the moon. A similar process has played out in the space program today as some tradition aerospace companies prefer a slow steady pace (Boeing, ULA, Blue Origin) where others (SpaceX, RocketLab) want to move quickly, try things, and learn. I feel we need more balance on progress on technologies to address Global Warming - There are ways to try big things without destroying the planet and we really don't have the time to wait on the lethargic approach of academic research. Sometimes I think their cries are less about the risk to the planet and more about the risk to their funding.
@JJP1890
Жыл бұрын
even if it doesn't reduce co2 significantly then as long as there aren't negative side effects it could be a huge boon for ocean life and food supplies so would still be something we should consider doing. Also there are many different ways this could be implemented such as consistently sprinkling relatively small amounts across large expanses of open ocean rather than dumping a bunch near a coast line. Also this whole "we shouldn't mess with this delicate ecosystem" is a little irritating when we've been damaging it for centuries at this point. Like yes make sure we don't go too far in the opposite direction but if there is a potential way to give back and help ocean life (and by extension all life) we should seriously examine and consider it.
@johnchan9392
Жыл бұрын
With the small recent trail proved to work, scaling it slowly and in segments is the next safe way to go. Scaling in increments allows engineers and scientists to manage the risk vs reward. It may be slower to completion of a full scale size but eventually we will get there that benefits the World as a whole.
@user-jk4bs6ym7l
Жыл бұрын
Our oceans are indeed very complex systems and we still don’t know enough about how exactly they work. I would agree that small-scale research is the way to go. However, even if it would appear to have worked, I do not believe this should be done on a geoengineering scale, due to the complexity and unknowns of our oceans. First, you are right we need to learn how to reduce the amount of CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, this process is now beginning with the large-scale wind and solar projects around the world, new farming methods, and the reduction in farming that may come about due to precision fermentation. Second, as CO2 levels are brought down marine biologists should locate areas in the oceans that have been worst affected by human activity and treat on a scale that will help in that location, not globally.
@pogikano
Ай бұрын
Each of the salmon being caught were several years old. The population increase probably had nothing to do with a fertilization event only one year prior. There are always large fluctuations in fish population numbers.
@reverands571
Жыл бұрын
In addition, anchored Kelp forests, usually done for cleaning up oceans off rivers, would help, too.
@rockskipper5353
Жыл бұрын
What happens to you, if you over load on iron? .. what do u think will happen to the fish and plant life ? Iron is a MICRO nutrient(meaning we don't need much of it to throw off the balance of all the othere nutrients)........ I wander where the deadly blue green algi came from
@arthurblackwell9076
Ай бұрын
Why is rain diminishing replaced with extreme weather events, could a molecular thin layer of hydrocarbons be interfering with evaporation from the oceans surfaces? With the low level cumulus produced from the water vapour, there is an heat uptake from the surface to be released from the clouds into space during the night. Could rust fertilisation of the ocean surfaces be the way to control the Earth's weather which is currently increasingly warming each year?
@aconlin
Жыл бұрын
After the bush fires in Australia, a few years back, there was a continental sized plankton bloom that they estimate sequestered enough carbon to negate the carbon released by the fires. I am in favour of ocean iron fertilisation.
@petearnold8020
Жыл бұрын
100% any fishermen and divers worldwide head for wrecks because of the life that lives in and around them... thats without any rust effect into surrounding water. there must be correct knowledge about this worldwide as it is so pre tested in a variety of coastal situations. many large wrecks on rocks get a x 100 dissolve rate with them getting constantly rolled around during storms breaking them up and oygen in the air and salt on the surface accelerating the rust formation to enter the ocean. pier columns also a place of ocean life thriving.
@capicolaspicy
Жыл бұрын
Definitely sounds like it shows enough potential promise to keep researching, but I agree we do not know anywhere near enough to go forward with any large-scale program. We've already seen plenty of negative impacts from humans attempts to mess with nature!
@MarkBarrack
Жыл бұрын
Way to go George. I will give him credit for sales.
@Solar_Max
Жыл бұрын
I loved the "deep sea creature" scene showing stingrays - which I see in less than 6 inches of water on morning walks along the beach.
Пікірлер: 1 М.