posted 08-24-2002 10:10 PM            

.....any attempt to rectify these issues will be systematically ignored, scapegoated, or classified 'unofficially expendable'. It seems that most pertinent issues have been restrained by such methodology for at least a decade. We still have the freedom to speak, but it's apparent who our enemies are in this sense. It's also apparent that although we may be able to speak our minds, they stopped listening or caring long ago. Now it's all just superficial.....

I agree completely. Even the *illusion* of genuine, productive dialog between concerned citizens and government seems to be fading rather quickly of late. It is very difficult to continually extend oneself in the service of concrete problem-solving when the parties to which one is appealing consistently refuse to acknowledge the true status, let alone the existence, of the problems.

.....All of our ecosystems are being altered, and there is no way that any human could foresee the consequences of all this.....

Yes. Whether it is via multi-source pollution, or via various well-documented attempts to quantify and track same, or via various well-documented attempts CLEARLY well-underway to mitigate the results of same, or resulting from still poorly-understood natural variables and cycles - or, most likely, a combination of all of the preceding - there is no longer, in my opinion, any part of our marine, terrestrial, atmospheric and near-Earth space environments that is NOT being quantifiably altered in one way or another by human activity.

Obviously, the most graphic and widely observable example of this alteration is taking place in the sky right over our heads. Whatever the reason(s) for this radical change in the appearance of our atmosphere since approximately 1997, the fact that things HAVE changed - and very observably - is no longer even remotely an issue for debate.

What is, IS. And it is in that *very basic level* that I am exclusively interested.

.....It truly is pure ignorance and I'm afraid it too clearly illustrates how we need to begin fighting the system, respectively. If we don't our children will undoubtedly suffer, and likely us as well.....

I think we're seeing this trajectory already, in the form of increasingly complex and difficult-to-manage public health crises, global drought, crop failure, increasingly spontaneous and extremely destructive storm behavior, widely-fluctuating regional temperatures within very short time periods, marine and freshwater 'dead zones', the emergence and spread of intractable exotic disease within our plant and animal populations, serious depletion of our marine and freshwater fish stocks, marine mammals desperately flinging themselves out of the sea, the measurable decline in certain bird populations, contamination and/or drying up of remaining fresh water supplies, the recent proliferation in some regions of locust, grasshopper and other scavenging insect populations, huge swaths of forested land going up in flames and burning for weeks uncontrolled, increasingly documented mutation of delicate amphibian and marine species - and so forth - not to mention, once again, the condition of our SKIES.

It is definitely the poorer regions of Earth which will suffer [and ARE suffering] most acutely from many of the above-mentioned crises already underway.

I cannot even imagine what the next two or three generations will find themselves confronted with if things continue the way they're going.

.....By the standards of AmeriKan politics, the better actor gets the job, and only the rich and greedy need apply.....

Yes. And that is why I think our only hope at this point is to begin cultivating faith in the idea that we don't need to be politicians, or feel consigned to working only through politicians, in order to organize ourselves in small working groups in our own regions and simply start somewhere, DOING what needs to be done to at least slow down some of the damage we are witnessing.

I personally think that, even under the most cooperative and best-informed of circumstances, it's going to take the sustained, committed effort of at least three generations to actually reverse our current trajectory.

It was Mother Teresa who said, "It is the little things, done with great love, that make a difference." Look at what she accomplished in a human lifetime on very limited material resources.

posted 08-25-2002 10:05 AM            

Ocean Carbon Sequestration
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/sea-carb-bish.html

[NOTE: Ocean carbon sequestration is different than ocean iron fertilization in that sequestration has to do with actual storage of excess atmospheric CO2 [in liquid form] on the ocean bottom -- whereas iron fertilization has to do with pumping up the proliferation of CO2-sucking algae by adding iron to the selected area.]

Excerpt from above-referenced material:

.....One of the most promising places to sequester carbon is in the oceans, which currently take up a third of the carbon emitted by human activity, roughly two billion metric tons each year. The amount of carbon that would double the load in the atmosphere would increase the concentration in the deep ocean by only two percent.

Two sequestration strategies are under intense study at the Department of Energy's Center for Research on Ocean Carbon Sequestration (DOCS), where Jim Bishop of Berkeley Lab's Earth Sciences Division is codirector with Livermore Lab's Ken Caldeira. One is direct injection, which would pump liquefied carbon dioxide a thousand meters deep or deeper, either directly from shore stations or from tankers trailing long pipes at sea.

"At great depths, CO2 is denser than sea water, and it may be possible to store it on the bottom as liquid or deposits of icy hydrates," Bishop explains. "At depths easy to reach with pipes, CO2 is buoyant; it has to be diluted and dispersed so it will dissolve."

What happens to carbon dioxide introduced into the ocean in this way may soon be field-tested in Hawaii. Over a two-week period researchers plan to inject 40 to 60 metric tons of pure liquid CO2 over 2,500 feet deep in the ocean near the Big Island.

One variable they will be measuring is acidity. Water and carbon dioxide form carbonic acid, "but once diluted in sea water, carbonic acid is not the dominant chemical species," Bishop says, "because of seawater's high alkalinity and buffering capacity." If calcium carbonate sediments are involved, acidity is even less. "Think of Tums," he suggests......

7/13/01
President George W. Bush
Statement on Climate Change http://www.usis.usemb.se/Environment/bush_on_climate_change.html

Last month, I announced the fundamental principles to guide a scientifically sound and effective global effort to reduce the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As I said then, my Administration's climate change policy will be science-based, encourage research breakthroughs that lead to technological innovation, and take advantage of the power of markets. It will encourage global participation and will pursue actions that will help ensure continued economic growth and prosperity for our citizens and for citizens throughout the world.

Today I am pleased to report on specific initiatives that have been advanced in the past month by my Cabinet-level climate change working group. These initiatives represent important steps in putting our principles to work through partnerships with other nations, industry and non-governmental organizations. They are designed to increase our scientific understanding of climate change, to tap the enormous promise of technology in addressing greenhouse gas emissions, and to promote further cooperation on climate change with our partners in the Western Hemisphere and beyond.

To advance the science of climate change, the Secretary of Commerce has convened an interagency work group charged with developing a federal research plan that will prove vital to increasing our understanding of the dimensions and dynamics of climate change. Prominently, NASA will invest over $120 million in the next three years in research on the natural carbon cycle, climate modeling, and the link between atmospheric chemistry and climate to help reduce uncertainties in the science highlighted by the recent National Academy of Sciences report requested by my Cabinet-level working group.

To advance technological innovation, the Department of Energy has just signed agreements to begin two significant new projects to study carbon sequestration. The first agreement is with The Nature Conservancy, the world's largest private international conservation group, to study land use and forestry practices for storing carbon more effectively in Brazil and Belize. The second is with an international team of energy companies - BP-Amoco, Shell, Chevron, Texaco, Pan Canadian (Canada), Suncor Energy (Canada), ENI (Italy), Statoil Forskningssenter (Norway) and Norsk Hydro (Norway) - to develop a new set of technologies for reducing the cost of capturing carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion plants. Grants for six other sequestration research projects have also been awarded under this $25 million initiative that leverages an additional $50 million from the private sector and foreign governments.

To further cooperation in the Western Hemisphere and beyond on climate change, the Department of Treasury yesterday entered into a $14 million "debt for forest" agreement with the Government of El Salvador under the Tropical Forest Conservation Act. By funding tropical forest conservation in that country, the agreement will secure important benefits of carbon sequestration and climate change mitigation.

Fostering further scientific cooperation on climate change among nations in our hemisphere, the Department of Commerce is bringing together more than one hundred scientists from the United States, Mexico and South America to study the regional impacts of climate change, another important area of uncertainty highlighted by the National Academy of Sciences study.

My Environmental Protection Agency Administrator also met with the Canadian and Mexican environment ministers on June 29 and pledged to jointly consider "market-based approaches for carbon sequestration, energy efficiency and renewable energy in North America." Today, the United States will host a meeting with the Japanese Environment Minister at which they will focus on opportunities for bilateral cooperation on climate change, including enhanced, joint climate modeling research.

Finally, in keeping with my commitment to engage internationally, the United States has participated and will continue to participate constructively in international discussions on climate change, including in the upcoming Sixth Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP-6) that begins this Monday in Bonn, Germany.

These initiatives illustrate the efforts my Administration will continue to encourage strongly. These partnerships leverage resources to achieve tangible results. In many cases, their scope is international, reflecting the fact that both the problem and solutions for climate change extend beyond the borders of any one nation. And they represent the kind of investments in scientific and technological knowledge on which real progress on this long-term challenge must be based. I am pleased that those who are signing agreements with us or who have otherwise pledged to pursue joint research with our government share our vision of enhancing our knowledge and making progress on this important issue.

DOE: Fossil Energy
http://www.fe.doe.gov/coal_power/sequestration/index.shtml

Carbon Sequestration

Fossil fuels will remain the mainstay of energy production well into the 21st century. Availability of these fuels to provide clean, affordable energy is essential for the prosperity and security of the United States. However, increased concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) due to carbon emissions are expected unless energy systems reduce the carbon emissions to the atmosphere.

To stabilize and ultimately reduce concentrations of this greenhouse gas, it will be necessary to employ carbon sequestration - carbon capture, separation and storage or reuse.

Carbon sequestration, along with reduced carbon content of fuels and improved efficiency of energy production and use, must play major roles if the nation is to enjoy the economic and energy security benefits which fossil fuels brings to the energy mix.

The President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) underscored the importance of carbon sequestration in its report "Federal Energy Research and Development for the Challenges of the Twenty First Century." PCAST recommended increasing the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) R&D for carbon sequestration.

The report stated: "A much larger science-based CO2 sequestration program should be developed. The aim should be to provide a science-based assessment of the prospects and costs of CO2 sequestration. This is very high-risk, long-term R&D that will not be undertaken by industry alone without strong incentives or regulations, although industry experience and capabilities will be very useful."

The joint Office of Fossil Energy and Office of Science April 1999 draft report Carbon Sequestration: State of the Science subsequently has assessed "...key areas for research and development (R&D) that could lead to an understanding of the potential for future use of carbon sequestration as a major tool for managing carbon emissions."..... [more]

Letters Opposing Ocean CO2 Sequestration

http://www.pacificwhale.org/alerts/CO2_articles.html

16 July 2002
Reuters
Greenpeace ship heads to Oslo to fight CO2 dumping
http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories/2002/07/07162002/reu_47851.asp

OSLO -- Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior is heading for Oslo this week to stop an experiment to dump 5.4 tons of liquid carbon dioxide in the sea off mid-Norway, a climate campaigner said Monday.

Truls Gulowsen said Greenpeace was due to host a meeting onboard the ship Wednesday among the Norwegian Environment Ministry, researchers, and environment groups aiming to stop the pilot project, designed to test disposing of CO2 in the ocean.

A consortium of research institutions from the United States, Norway, Canada, Australia, and Japan, which fund the project has decided to put the plan on hold while the ministry considers its environmental, political, and legal impacts.

The project to test ocean dumping of CO2 -- a climate gas known to damage the ozone layer -- was originally scheduled to start this summer, to determine whether the method is feasible in reducing emissions to the atmosphere.

"This experiment threatens international law designed to stop the ocean being used as a dumping ground. It must never happen," Gulowsen said. "We are very satisfied that the project is put on hold, but it is still important to spread the message that this is totally unacceptable," he said.... [more]

23 August 2002
Norway scraps experiment to dump CO2 at sea
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/17419/story.htm

OSLO - Norway bowed to protests by environmentalists yesterday and denied permission for a controversial experiment to dump tonnes of liquid carbon dioxide (CO2) into the ocean off its shores.

Carbon dioxide, produced by burning fossil fuels, is one of the gases that causes global warming. Researchers believe dumping it in liquid form deep in the ocean will help reduce the carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.

Environmentalists fear high concentrations of carbon dioxide would harm marine life. Norway said it had studied the environmental and legal implications of an application by a consortium of research institutions to dump 5.4 tonnes of CO2 in the ocean.

"The possible future use of the sea as storage for CO2 is controversial," Environment Minister Boerge Brende said in a statement.

"Such a deposit could be in defiance of international marine laws and the ministry therefore had to reject the application," he said.

The ministry said the plan required more international debate.

The project is funded by research institutions from Norway, the United States, Canada, Australia and Japan, and was scheduled to start this summer.

Environmental group Greenpeace led the campaign against the experiment, saying it violated international conventions on dumping industrial waste at sea.

posted 09-09-2002 10:51 PM            

i try to maintain the clown position now
good will be with you
all

posted 02-20-2004 02:58 AM            

I've already posted a considerable amount of reference material on the **geo-engineering project** known as Open Ocean Iron Fertilization in the past - and nobody reads it. So much for being "secretive." I DO share information, as anyone who knows me knows very well.

These iron fertilization pilot studies are generating *dimethyl sulfide* - which serves as cloud condensation nucleii over the marine layer and MAY be the source of that *abnormal fog*. These pilot studies also pump up the proliferation of a certain type of phytoplankton, Pseudo-nitzschia sp., which produces domoic acid, which KILLS everything within its reach.

Please look into this. These projects are going on in the ocean all over this globe. In the northern and southern Pacific. In the Indian Ocean. In the North Sea. In the Gulf of Mexico. Off the coasts of Australia and Hawaii.

Ocean Iron Fertilization is a geo-engineering technique intended to pump up the proliferation of CARBON-DIOXIDE-SUCKING phytoplankton - and the reason they want to do this is that, yes, there really IS too much CO2 in our atmosphere and they want to make of the oceans a more effective carbon sink.

Do I condone this activity? NO! NO! NO! NO! And neither do many marine scientists who understand the DAMAGE it can potentially wreak on our marine ecosystems.

ocean iron fertilization
Pseudo-nitzschia sp.
domoic acid
dimethyl sulfide
dead zone
......................................................................
Bad News . . . .

Thought I'd add an update to Deborah's
post.

Posted on Thu, Feb. 19, 2004

Monterey, Calif., scientists fertilize ocean with iron.

Aim of experiments is to increase plankton

By QUINN EASTMAN
Monterey (Calif.) Herald

In experiments that could help counteract global warming, oceanographers from Monterey County have been dribbling dissolved iron into the Pacific Ocean as fertilizer to promote the growth of plankton.

While some scientists say the proposed geoengineering plan could have disastrous side effects, researchers have agreed that the iron-fertilization experiments will continue on a small scale because of their value in teaching scientists about ocean ecology and chemistry.

Ken Johnson of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute organized a discussion of iron fertilization at last week's American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle. He led a three-ship research cruise to the Pacific Ocean south of New Zealand in 2002 along with Kenneth Coale, director of Moss Landing Marine Laboratories and Ken Buessler from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts.

Coale described the results of their 2002 iron fertilization experiment, the latest of about eight that have been conducted around the world since 1993.

They spread iron in two 15 kilometer by 15 kilometer squares and monitored the growth of plankton and the chemistry of the water. In Seattle, Coale showed pictures of the ships, which appeared small next to nearby icebergs, and vats of iron sulfate solution on the decks. He said the experiment was the first to measure plankton growth in parts of the ocean where the amounts of nutrients besides iron varied.

"This allows us to extrapolate how iron fertilization would affect larger expanses of the ocean," Coale said.

A remaining issue that previous iron fertilization experiments have not been able to pin down, he said, is exactly how much carbon sinks down to the bottom of the ocean long-term. He said oceanographers expect a German expedition to the Southern Pacific this year to begin to answer those questions.

John Martin at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories proposed the basic idea of iron fertilization, but he died in 1993 before getting a chance to physically test it. He had found that the main nutrient limiting the growth of plankton in 40 percent of the world's oceans was iron.

By adding iron, scientists could make plankton grow and soak up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. If enough plankton sank deep into the ocean without being eaten by other life, planetary engineers could offset the gases humans make with their cars and electricity plants. Carbon dioxide in car exhaust is a major greenhouse gas.

In Ken Johnson's presentation, he noted that drilling through ice in Antarctica and examining the bubbles in the ice have allowed scientists to plot the amount of carbon dioxide in the air. The amount goes down in ice ages and up in warm periods. The current concentration, Johnson said, was above the maximum seen for the last half-million years.

Iron levels, as measured by the amounts of soil and dust in the Antarctic ice, also swung up and down through Earth's recent history. Iron levels moved the opposite direction as carbon dioxide with each swing. What scientists need to learn more about, Johnson said, is how powerful a motor iron is in driving climate change. He said that current models are inaccurate, failing to take into account the upwelling of nutrients near coastlines or how plankton secrete chemicals that help iron dissolve.

Regardless of the uncertainty, scientists know enough about the expected side effects of iron fertilization to say it's a bad idea, said Sallie Chisholm, an oceanographer from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"It's not the answer," she said. "And there's no going back." Although she said it's a valuable research tool, she predicted that iron fertilization of the southern oceans on a large scale would ruin fish production elsewhere. It also might increase the production of other greenhouse gases, she said.

Mike Landry from Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego countered with the suggestion that iron fertilization might be used in a limited way to mitigate the effects of global warming. He mentioned the Northern Pacific near Alaska as a place where the effects of global warming will begin to disrupt local marine life. He urged closer attention be paid to larger animals like fish and whales in future iron fertilization experiments.
---------------------------------------------------------
© 2004 Monterey County Herald and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.kansascity.com

posted 04-16-2004 09:36 PM            

.....Thought I'd add an update to Deborah's
post.

Posted on Thu, Feb. 19, 2004

Monterey, Calif., scientists fertilize ocean with iron.

Aim of experiments is to increase plankton

By QUINN EASTMAN
Monterey (Calif.) Herald.....

Thank you very much for the update, Molliani. I just now saw this.

posted 04-18-2004 09:12 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark sky:
emfx13 said 09-10-2002
Yesterday i was looking up and i saw a flash off of something metallic in the sky,then another flash,then out of nowhere a plane just appear's before my eye's...Very strange!!!!
Personally, I saw several of these on Wednesday Feb 11th 2004 near Mt Shasta Northern California. I was Driving South on interstate 5 and pop~Flash a bright silver multiple flash in the sky (where no chemtrail was before) and there was a plane and the start of a new chemtrail. One even took off eastward, while most headed north.
There was no other (sun flash?) off these planes after they first appeared.
In other news it looks like "Chemtrail Reports" has overloaded again as page 51 refuses to load and reports since 2/8/04 are lost, have contacted the other mods, so we may have to start volume #3.

---

posted 04-18-2004 01:29 PM            

This is desperation...flying by the seat of the pants...truly "winging it".

And this is being directed by the same people who sold you the line of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" to invade Iraq...

and they told you that new oil sales would cover the costs...

and that our troops would be greated with flowers as liberators.

We're daily becoming more aware of where those "Weapons of Mass Destruction" really are...

right here in the "Homeland"....