Peter S Liss School of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia Norwich UK [email protected]...
-
Upload
annabel-tombs -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Peter S Liss School of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia Norwich UK [email protected]...
Peter S LissSchool of Environmental SciencesUniversity of East Anglia Norwich [email protected]
Iron Fertilisation – Some Secondary Effects
NO μM3
Jickells et al., Science, 2005Jickells et al. 2005
Sue Turner
Fe addition to the ocean
Boyd et al. 2007Boyd et al. 2007
SEEDS 1
Plankton net samples (100mm, 0-20m) in the patch on day 2 and day 11
Day 11 Day 2
Watson et al. 2000
Ironex II - like SOIREE - like
datamodel
(Aumont and Bopp, 2006)
(Aumont and Bopp, 2006)
(unrealistic) global-scale iron fertilization experiment
Method :• no more iron limitation• for 10 or 100 years
Results :• - 33 pmm after 100 years• - 7 ppm after 10 years, but if stopped, sequestered carbon is lost rapidly• non-local effects (on productivity, …)
Jin & Gruber 2003
Nitrous Oxide
Charlson et al. 1987
0 10
-100-80-60-40-20
0
-0 .1 0 .8 1 .6 2 .4 3 .2
0 10
-100-80-60-40-20
0
0 15 30 45 60
SOIREE ‘99: EVOLUTION OF DMSP AND DMS IN THE UPPER WATER COLUMN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE IRON-ENRICHED PATCH
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
days after start of iron enrichment days after start of iron enrichment
SUZANNE TURNERDMSP nmol l-1 DMS nmol l-1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
DMSP inside
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
DMS inside
DMSP outside DMS outside
Turner et al. 2004
New Directions: Enhancing the natural sulfur cycle to slow global
warming
Wingenter et al. 2007
Methyl iodide concentrations during a Southern Ocean iron enrichment experiment (EISENEX, Nov-Dec 2000)
CH3I ng/l
Adele Chuck
-100
-50
0 5 10 15 20Day since fertilisation
-100
-50
0.06 0.10 0.14 0.18 0.22 0.26 0.30 0.34
OUT PATCH
IN PATCH
Depth
(m
)D
epth
(m
)
0
4
8
12
16
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20
ng l-
1
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20
ug l-
1
340
345
350
355
360
365
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20
uatm
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20
ng l-
1
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20ng
l-1
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20
nmol
l-1
chlorophyll a
dimethyl sulphide
methyl nitratecarbon dioxide
methyl iodide bromoform
dayday day
IN OUT
Southern Ocean Iron Fertilisation (EISENEX): Liss et al. 2005
Air Quality
05101520253035
Syn
,S
yne
choc
occu
PR
YM
N,
Pry
mne
sio
PE
N,
penn
ate
diat
o
Pha
eo,
Pha
eoc
ysti
H +
Aci
l,he
ter
otop
hiug
C l-
1
Syn, Synechococcus
RFP, Red Fluorescing Picoplankton
PRYMN, Prymnesiophytes
DINO, autotrophic dinoflagellates
PEN, pennate diatoms
CEN, centric diatoms
Phaeo, Phaeocystis
HD + HF, heterotrophic (dinoflagellates + flagellates)
H + A cil, heterotophic + autotrophic ciliates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Syn
RF
P
PR
YM
N
DIN
O
PE
N
CE
N
Pha
eo
HD
+H
F
H +
A c
il
ug C
l-1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Syn
RF
P
PR
YM
N
DIN
O
PE
N
CE
N
Pha
eo
HD
+H
F
H +
A c
il
ug C
l-1
IronEx II: Plankton community composition within patch 1 for day 0 and day 5 of the experiment
(from Coale et al., 1996)
day 0 day 5
Biodiversity
Other Secondary Effects
A) Nutrient robbing
B) Cyclones/hurricanes
C) Geo-engineering and ocean acidification
SOLAS Position statement on large-scale ocean fertilisation (2007)
Large-scale fertilisation of the ocean is being actively promoted by various commercial organisations as a strategy to reduce atmospheric CO2 levels. However, the current scientific evidence indicates that this will not significantly increase carbon transfer into the deep ocean or lower atmospheric CO2. Furthermore, there may be negative impacts of iron fertilisation including dissolved oxygen depletion, altered trace gas emissions that affect climate and air quality, changes in biodiversity, and decreased productivity in other oceanic regions. It is then critical and essential that robust and independent scientific verification is undertaken before large-scale fertilisation is considered. Given our present lack of knowledge, the judgement of the SOLAS SSC is that ocean fertilisation will be ineffective and potentially deleterious, and should not be used as a strategy for offsetting CO2 emissions.
Royal Society, 2009
“Give me half a tanker of iron, and I’ll give you an ice age.”
Martin, 1988
“Human beings are now carrying out a large scale geophysical experiment (i.e. added CO2 to the atmosphere) of a kind that could not have happened in the past or be reproduced in the future (Roger Revelle and Hans Suess, 1957) .
Pilots in the Royal Flying Corps in WWI were not issued with parachutes (nor were they allowed to buy their own) since this “might impair their fighting spirit”.
“Only fools find joy in the prospect of climate engineering. It’s foolish to think that risk of significant climate damage can be denied or wished away. Perhaps we can depend on the transcendent human capacity for self-sacrifice when faced with unprecedented shared, long-term risk, and therefore can depend on future reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. But just in case, we’d better have a plan” (Ken Caldeira, 2008).
“A focus on tinkering with the entire planetary system is not a dynamic new technological and scientific frontier, but an expression of political despair” (Greenpeace, 2008).
The US Presidential Science Advisory Council in 1965 identified geo-engineering as the only response to the CO2 climate problem, reporting that “The possibilities of deliberately bringing about countervailing climatic changes therefore needs to be deliberately explored” – the possibility of reducing fossil fuel use was not discussed.
• Age of scientific innocence is over (Fe fertilisation, CRU)
• Geo-engineering may be needed if all else fails
• Research to eliminate unworkable ideas and thoroughly test those that might be useful (including secondary effects and unintended consequences)
• Favour – carbon capture/removal schemes – reversible– scaleable from small to large
• Against – large direct schemes (particularly SRM)
• Governance – legal, political, financial aspects
Any Questions?