On the Planktos experiment
Planktos' (PLK) Weatherbird II has yet to set sail for it's voyage to dump 100 tons of iron dust into the waters off the Galapagos Islands, in hopes of seeding the dwindling algae population, as a mechanism to absorb carbon dioxide from the oceans, resulting in a huge windfall of emission reduction credits. ER's that can be sold on the carbon market for a tidy profit.
The fact that Planktos expects to make money from this eco-engineering project should not be offensive to anyone. It is a prime example of a company thinking big, in order to capitalize on an open exchange. It is brave of Planktos to take on such a ambitious and daring project.
However, there is much debate about whether their operation will have such a tremendous negative impact (i.e. algae bloom and bust) in the Galapagos would be detrimental to that ecosystem, and possibly have much further ranging effects as the algae and diatoms flourish, consuming more oxygen than expected and stink up the atmosphere and cloud the waters when the algae die.
The tactics that the US and Ecuadorian government are pursuing to delay Planktos' imply this is a merely ocean dumping, for which the proper permits must be obtained.
Compared to the millions of tons of sewage and agricultural runoff into our oceans, with untold damages and environmental impact, would it not be reasonable to conclude that a load of 100 tons of iron dust poured into the ocean would be minor risk to the marine ecosystem and have potentially significant benefits if Planktos is right? If the size of Planktos' "experiment" is too grand for a first trial, would it not be reasonable to ask Planktos for a scaled down test? Say 1 ton or 10 tons of iron dust, in a less sensitive ecosystem?
The ethical question is not "Should Planktos pursue it's original quest?", but "at what scale (and where else), should Planktos demonstrate their carbon sequestration technology before industrial scale algae seeding takes place?"
If Planktos' process can reduce carbon from the atmosphere (which may benefit all), and can make them a dollar in the carbon market (which may benefit the share holders of Planktos), is this not an equitable and ethical experiment?
I look forward to your comments and discussion...
4:25 PM
How can a company sell carbon credits when it has nothing to sell, except a "science experiment" of unproven worth?
4:58 PM
Anonymous...
Great question. First, there will be no carbon credits to sell if the UN does not approve any methodology for which this type of project would qualify for. I don't know which methodology Planktos is trying to comply with or get their own approach approved.
Second, I fully believe that this type of experiment should be conducted in a lesser degree, but still of some easily measurable means of producing a quantifiable carbon sequestration baseline.
Once these two criteria are met, and Verification audits can be performed on such open water algae blooms, then Planktos will have something to sell.
If they can do all this, as they claim, then Planktos will be in a great position to have carbon offsets to sell in the carbon market. Plus they will capitalize on the intellectual property rights for this type of carbon sequestration.
Post a Comment