AWI insists it has looked into potential effects on the environment and biodiversity.
But the German Environment Ministry is quoted in a German newspaper and news agencies as having expressed concern that Germany’s credibility as a leading power in the protection of biodiversity could be undermined by this experiment.
Yes indeed, Minister Gabriel.
One just wonders how this could get this far, with the ship already steaming ahead to the Antartic, without the concerns of environment groups and the Convention on Biodiversity issue being adequately addressed.
The Research Ministry (which provides a considerable amount of funding to the AWI), is now having the project examined by 2 independent scientific bodies.
Let’s see what happens next.
The official “Lohafex” position on the project and the controversy

A few more facts about the iron fertilization idea. Why am I talking about this now? It’s not new, but the increasing concern about the urgency of combatting climate change and the fact that this large-scale experiment is underway in nature, with as yet unresearched possible consequences, make this a good time to take a closer look.
First a bit more background:
Scientists believe “fertilizing” the ocean surface with trace amounts of iron will lead to blooms of phytoplankton, which soak up carbon dioxide in the marine plants. When the phytoplankton die, they sink to the depths of the ocean, with the carbon safely “locked” inside their cells, potentially storing it for decades or centuries in sediments on the ocean floor.
The trouble is we don’t know exactly how much carbon can be captured and stored this way, for how long, or, more crucially, what it means for the ecosystems of the ocean. This is being referred to as “geo-engineering” and sometimes seems to be taking us into the realms of science fiction stories. What does it mean for the species in the ocean, ocean acidity or the level of oxygen in the water?
Some scientists even fear it could lead to the release of nitrous oxide, another powerful greenhouse gas.
Interest in ocean fertilization is not driven by purely scientific or altruistic considerations. There is a commercial interest. Private companies have been working on the idea, because carbon credits can be sold.
It’s interesting that there is not a lot of big media coverage of it. The British Mail on Sunday did have a full page on it earlier this month. It outlines the questions – how much algae will sink to the bottom of the ocean, “safely” trapping Co2, and how long will it stay there? It also draws attention to the findings of a British scientist team that tiny particles of iron are released naturally into the sea, in the Southern Ocean, when icebergs melt. This proof that iron is occurring naturally in the region is, according to the paper, what led to the UN giving permission to move ahead with the experiment.
“Will green algae save the world from global warming?”
Nevertheless, the planned experiment is relatively large in scale and expected to produce a green algae bloom visible from space. Sceptical scientists say the negative effects may not become obvious until it’s too late to do anything about it.
More background on the Treehugger website

I’m following with great interest a voyage by the German polar research vessel Polarstern to the Antarctic to conduct an experiment in “ocean fertilization” and the controversy over the project.
Some organisations are highly concerned about the experiment and feel it’s in breach of international agreements to protect biodiversity:
Background from the opponents, the ETC or “Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration
The project is a German-Indian venture. There’s more information in English on the website of the National Institute of Oceanography.
Project to fertilize the ocean with iron
I haven’t found much on this on the AWI website, that’s Germany’s Alfred-Wegener-Institute for Polar and Marine Research. I’ll try to contact them and follow this story up.
The trouble is a lot of people are very concerned about interfering with the oceans in this way without knowing the likely consequences. The idea is that the iron will lead to a bloom of algae, which will ultimately sequester Co2. But it is not without risk.
The ETC cites an online article on the 2008 Convention on Biodiversity meeting here in Bonn, Germany,and the strong concerns documented their about iron fertilization.
media coverage of CBD view, May 2008
If you have strong views on this or links to further information on the issue, I’d be pleased to hear them.

I’ve just been reading an interview with the UK premier Gordon Brown in the Observer. Like Barack Obama, he’s planning to “do a Roosevelt” with a “new deal” programme to tackle the ecomomic crisis.And Brown too is planning to include alternative energies and other climate-related projects.He is proclaiming a “historic opportunity” to reach a new international agreement on climate change. I’m sure the opportunity is there. The question is whether the industrialised countries can grasp it and come up with solutions to get India and China on board by the end of the year to come up with an effective post-Kyoto.I’m also sure Brown and Obama are right when they say fighting the recession will not come at the cost of the climate, but that the environment is part of the solution.
(See www.observer.co.uk)
Every crisis also opens up some opportunities. Perversely, the economic crisis could help solve the climate one. There’s plenty of scope for investing in – and ultimately making profit from- climate-saving measures. And at the risk of encouraging the old cliche about the “canny” Scots, I have to agree with my countryman GB (great initials for a British pm) that money is probably the key here.(As with most issues in our society, I fear). Financial incentives tend to motivate more people than the urge to save the planet for future generations. High petrol prices made people think about driving less or changing their cars, not saving the environment. So more power (preferably renewable) to the “green deals”.

British climate scientists are predicting 2009 will be one of the five warmest years on record. Exactly what that means is a complicated business and, of course, all part of some longer-term calculations. But as far as I’m concerned, it’s a worrying forecast and the climate data available does not make me optimistic at the end of this 2008.
Reuters summary of the forecast

In the part of Germany where I live, it has actually turned very cold over the past few days, with temperatures down to minus 10C at night. Where does that leave us with global warming, asks Christopher B. in his comment. Indeed I have heard some sceptical neighbours say “so much for global warming”. The trouble is we would like to be able to understand everything instantly and draw immediate conclusions from what we experience. And with global climate patterns, that is just not possible and we need a really long-term view. Yes, it can be colder locally and still getting warmer overall. And as a planet, we are not doing anything like enough to avert potentially catastrophic warming.
Yesterday, I was talking to a friend on a winter hike in the “Eifel” region, about a prediction on the radio the other day that the Arctic was melting much faster than expected, and a reminder that if the Greenland ice sheet melts, sea levels will rise by up to 7 metres. (I’d like to give you a link to the report we heard, but am having trouble locating it on the websites where I’d expect to find it. Strange how some worrying reports just come on a couple of time then seem to disappear.)
Anyway, I was surprised when “Siggi”, who is normally quite critical of industry, said at least the German car-makers were putting an effort into developing smaller cars that use less fuel. Now this is not what German cars are generally known for, and it seems to me they have a long way to go. But compared to the US car market, we are exemplary, Siggi pointed out. Well, everything is relative. Normally, I am more inclined to the glass being “half-full” than “half-empty” approach.
But just because another country, continent, region, sector, is even worse than we are – that doesn’t make us good. Does it?