“Give me half a tanker of iron and I will give you an ice age.”- Russ George

Eco-maverick Russ George has (presumably) figured a way to reduce carbon in our atmosphere as well as increase marine life and for a fraction of the cost of ‘accepted’ reduction methods.

He believes (with good reason from what I’ve read) that by seeding the ocean with finely ground iron he can increase phytoplankton blooms. These blooms are at the very bottom of the food chain in the ocean and have a vital role in feeding the oceans. They also sequester great volumes of carbon.


“ Phytoplankton absorb 100,000 carbon atoms for every iron atom they consume. Do the math: just one ton of iron can fix 367000 tons of CO2.”
-A quote from an article by Charles Platt in the most recent issue of ‘Make’ Magazine.

Russ George said to colleagues at a conference, “Give me half a tanker of iron and I will give you an ice age.”- Russ George

Russ George believes that a few hundred thousand tons of .5 micron hematite spread at the right times and places in the worlds oceans could undo global warming, increase pelagic whale habitat and increase fisheries.
This method may be viable and may be valid. Early tests seem to validate the theory and were very real and visible results.


Strangely enough, the same global warming groups that want to spend tens to hundreds of trillions on over priced carbon reduction efforts, a failed carbon credit system and insanely expensive experimental carbon reduction efforts are fighting to prevent Russ George and his company from making any progress.

The “Green” organizations are fighting Russ Georges company, Planktos, at every turn and are reaping millions in donations to do so. The global “Climate Change” cabal seems dedicated to the economy and income that climate change will entail for the powers that be but they don’t seem to be in any way interested in ideas that will work and at the same time reduce the incredibly high cost.

I have found a site under the Planktos name and am looking into this very interesting story.

My questions are :

1 Have any of you heard of this?

2 Could it be real. (It seems so as far as I’ve been able to get on the subject.)

3 If it is a viable method, what true reason beyond greed would the “Green Cabal” have for fighting it?

Yes, I believe “Green Cabal” to be a badgerprints original (at least I’ve never heard anyone else use it) and would happily take credit for coining the phrase.

Looking forward to any input on this possible new recourse for our environment and the possible ‘conspiracy’ to stop it.


[edit on 22-7-2009 by badgerprints]

we know that where we add something to the environment the results are unpredictable at best.

what is being suggested is that we screw around with a complex system we don't fully understand in order to fix a problem we shouldn't be causing in the first place.

fixing an imbalance we caused by creating an imbalance elsewhere seems like a stupid idea to me, it's that kind of idea that caused all the issues in the first place.

what we actually need to do is take some responsibility for own own actions, not something that is hugely popular with the childish mind but something that people will have to understand eventually.

Originally posted by pieman
we screw around with a complex system we don't fully understand

fixing an imbalance we caused by creating an imbalance elsewhere seems like a stupid idea to me

something that is hugely popular with the childish mind

Strangely enough this seemed to be the same type of thing that the opponents were saying.

The problem is that the damage is done. If we can actually fix it instead of using the situation to control people and their money by forcing huge expenditures on "carbon reduction" ,which we know won't happen successrfully, then why not actually find a solution? This seems to be a better place to go and do research and find out some facts. It's better than taking some type of "high ground" to tell everybody who doesn't agree with you that they are "childish"

The oceans are already in a poor state because of overfishing and trillions of tons of crap that has been pumped into them by man. If man finds something that will actually repair some of the damage, how is it a "stupid idea" as you so succinctly put it?

By the way, thanks for your openminded and mature contribution to what I hoped would be an interesting subject.

[edit on 22-7-2009 by badgerprints]

Originally posted by pieman

fixing an imbalance we caused by creating an imbalance elsewhere seems like a stupid idea to me, it's that kind of idea that caused all the issues in the first place.

Believe me when I say, I've lived most of my life in warm tropical climates. I went to sub-zero frozen land for a short while. I'm definitely not accustomed to the cold but....

I would choose a freezing over sweltering heat any day :/ It's relatively easy to keep warm but you can only 'keep cold' indefinitely... We can't run naked right?

-Far less diseases in cold.
-Cold increases longevity of electronics

If this practice triggers Ice Age, so why not? And we people in poor countries around the equator will have our revenge and make migration to our countries as difficult as you made us undergo into I'm JK of course!

This concept seems very effective, but the problem is that we are not even sure Global Warming is occuring. About 50% say we have been in global cooling for the past several years.

If the Earth has already made suitable adjustments, and is in a cooling cycle, and we do something drastic, we may cause more harm than good!

I say that several common sense approaches are the best idea:
1. Conserve Energy (no brainer)
2. Find renewable energy sources
3. Regulate, Fine, Eliminate polluters
4. Fix our "consumer" way of life and start conserving "stuff"
5. Leave complex and fragile ecosystems alone!

www.storyofstuff.com...

This video has been posted several times, but everyone needs to see it, and spread the word. This will confirm what you already know is wrong with our consumer lifestyle!

Ah I love the cold
Im way too hot even in the winter. I wear a tshirt in the snow. Id be fine with it.
It probably will not happen because it can not make much money for people... even 'global warming' has become an industry, hell everything is capitalised (exploited) nowadays.
I watched on the Daily Show an energy minister suggested simply painting roads white and roofing houses in white, which reflects heat and would create jobs. It works they do it in Mexico (have been there a few times) and they do it in Greece far as Im told.
And in reflecting heat you will not absorb it and so save on energy (less air conditioners) and then less greenhouse gas!
So simple and helpful yet probably will never be implemented.
Guess the governments like their shadows.

One more time class.

GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT MAN MADE.

thank you.

The fellow from planktos seems to be a fiscal genius as well as nature related. He has tested it, why not give him a few parsels to test with?

CAP AND TAX! CAP AND TAX!

gotta feed that global elite taxation machine that the Gore-acle so loves to champion! Nevermind his having connections to the company that's in charge of the holdings

come on folks. global warming is nothing more than a way to control us. The freakin polar bears are fine and if you visit, they STILL will eat you.

Ok, we got ridd of ALL the co2 in the world, what happens ??

Let us say there are NO co2 at all any where, would the world stop changing ?

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Ok, we got ridd of ALL the co2 in the world, what happens ??

Let us say there are NO co2 at all any where, would the world stop changing ?

Great Question! The answer is EVERYTHING DIES!

So, yes, after everything is dead, we can be sure the problems are not man-made anymore.

reply to post by getreadyalready


Exactly my point, the trees uses co2, and co2 do not ( NOT) drive the climate. The co2 follows the climare, the hotter it is , the more co2 there is.

Not Our FAULT...

reply to post by ChemBreather


You've got it the other way round, CO2 is the cause of, not the effect of global warming, or climate change.

Originally posted by Thebudweiserstuntman
reply to post by ChemBreather

 

You've got it the other way round, CO2 is the cause of, not the effect of global warming, or climate change.

50/50 ! You guys can argue this, bring in expert testimony, and have Congressional Hearings, you will never get anywhere!

There is a ton of credible science saying each of you are correct!!! This is a complicated system, and we (earth scientists) have no macro understanding of it. We have a lot of micro understanding, but when you put it all together our models fail!

Therefore, we should leave it the h*ll alone!!! At least for now!

Al Gore did not invent the internet, but he may have invented Global Warming!!

reply to post by badgerprints


Somehow i am not getting a good feeling about changing a fragile system in this way without knowing exactly what the outcome would be....

Chris Rapley, director of the Science Museum in Londen, and Gaia theorist James Lovelock, came up with a pretty wild idea aswell.

Ocean Pipes proposal
In September 2007, Lovelock and Chris Rapley proposed the construction of ocean pumps comprising pipes "100 to 200 metres long, 10 metres in diameter and with a one-way flap valve at the lower end for pumping by wave movement" to pump water up from below the thermocline to "fertilize algae in the surface waters and encourage them to bloom".[26] The intention of this scheme is to accelerate the transfer of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to the ocean by increasing primary production and enhancing the export of organic carbon (as marine snow) to the deep ocean. At the time the authors noted that the idea "may fail, perhaps on engineering or economic grounds", and that "the impact on ocean acidification will need to be taken into account". However, a scheme similar to that proposed by Lovelock and Rapley is already being developed by a commercial company

Source: Wikipedia (because all the other sites gave a 401)

Oh and did somebody already mention climos, i believe it similar to what Planktos is doing....

Here in Holland we've got prof. talking about some type of rock called Olivine, which has the ability to absord hugh amounts of CO2. Grind it to a pounder an spread it around or something.....can find a descend english article about that one..

Oh well, since global warming is all BS anyway, i say let these looneys have a wack at it because it is pretty vain ,if you ask me, that we humans think we can destroy this planet. Worst that could happen is that we destroy ourselfs....

That would probably only bother us, not Mother Earth.

Peace

What i don't get is why the climate change nazi brigade...the really hardcore ones.Say that we should stop releasing so much CO2 so our grandchildren can live in a better world blah blah.But i thought the effects of CO2 dont suddenly *stop* after we stop releasing so much CO2, but take decades to make themselves known.If thats the case and the perma frosts in sibera are going to melt anyway and release silly amounts of methane into the atmosphere....surely the worlds climate is going to change no matter what we do? btw i don't believe an anthropological global warming anyhoo.

[edit on 22-7-2009 by Solomons]

Its the Carbon trading they want, their other illegal derivatives markets are failing they need to find another to manipulate.
The ones behind the trading, not governments, Rothschild private brokers will make more money than anyone else in Carbon Trading.
They will fix it so their buddy's get cheap carbon credits to pollute as much as they like while hiking up the price of everything they sell.
They are not interested at all in fixing the environment or taking care of it.
Its just about more money to them, and subsequent power they get from the money.
They lust after more power like a starving person does food.
By giving them the right to put a price on Carbon you are essentially giving them the right to put a price on life itself.
Which makes them feel like mini Gods.

[edit on 22-7-2009 by CaptainCaveMan]

I'd like to see some laboratory testing and data before we let this guy start filling up the oceans with iron.

Test in a lab, if that goes well, test in the field on a very small scale.

Then show us all with the data that this indeed does work.

Then his bandwagon will fill.

To answer the OPs questions:

1. No i have not heard of this before

2. If the science is correct and phytoplankton can consume that much CO2 if stimulated then i believe it would work. Though i would hesitate to add anything to an ecosystem where the effects on the higher species up the food chain would be untested.

3. The Green Cabal (i love that term hehehe) is only interested in fooling the sheeple out of more of their hard earned cash and rights so it dosnt surprise me that they would oppose anything that they didnt think of first.

Now my own personal opinion on the global crisis.

I find it truly amazing that with the amount of pollutants we pump in to our environment everyday that there isn't some kind of side effect. Common sense dictates that we are changing our environment with our manufacturing processes, our forestry industry raping our only natural air filters and our consumerist society wasting valuable finite resources that we will one day run out of.

Now with that being said in central Ontario where i live we've been having the crappiest summer that i can recall (actually its been awesome this week but i digress) the highest temperature Ive seen this month was 26c that to me suggest cooling. BUT and its a big but i can only measure my local effects and really don't pay attention to world weather, so i cant say for sure if its cooling everywhere. Ive heard of the cycles that the earth goes through and i believe that that may be part of the "problem" but everything being equal we are as much or more contributing to that "problem".


Just my 2 cents on the matter

For some reason i got a mental image ...

New's headline...
Taliban steal boat full of iron..
Threatening ice age if we don't surcome to the Muslim way of life.

OH lordy..
If true a boat load of iron would be more dangerous than a nuke perhaps.

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by Thebudweiserstuntman
reply to post by ChemBreather

 

You've got it the other way round, CO2 is the cause of, not the effect of global warming, or climate change.

50/50 ! You guys can argue this, bring in expert testimony, and have Congressional Hearings, you will never get anywhere!

There is a ton of credible science saying each of you are correct!!! This is a complicated system, and we (earth scientists) have no macro understanding of it. We have a lot of micro understanding, but when you put it all together our models fail!

Therefore, we should leave it the h*ll alone!!! At least for now!

Al Gore did not invent the internet, but he may have invented Global Warming!!

Are you thinking about Who sued Who for False statements and spreading propeganda ???
Who gets awards by spreading wrong information ? AL Gore and his ManMade GW scam is Sued for exactly this, remember? by the Founder of the Weather Channel and about 20.000 other experts..

Ocean seeding is an old, old theory and has been tested experimentally both in the lab and in the field.

Theoretically, it works, but it will not be put into practice for a number of reasons - principally because particulate iron, or iron oxide as it would soon become in the marine environment, is not accessible from an ecological perspective. In practice, all that happens is that it sinks and rusts. To produce such vast quantities of metabolisable iron salts would produce more CO2 than would be consumed by the resulting phytoplanktonic blooms.

Also, as soon as you remove a rate-limiting step (eg. iron availability) from such a complex system, you find that productivity doesn't increase too much before you hit the next rate-limiting step which must be overcome. It's not an 'environmental disaster waiting to happen' as some have suggested - it's simply an impractical approach to lowering atmospheric CO2. Acidification of the oceans by dissolved CO2 is also an unpredictable complicating factor, which may be amplified by the melting of the ice caps (and yes folks, they really are melting...).

Whoever said "Global warming is not man made" needs to exercise some common sense and spend less time on conspiracy forums. I assume they were referring to climate change anyway since I don't think anyone with a degree of understanding has used the term "global warming" in years?

N