That was quite an interesting read! Also, TIL that some varieties produce useful amounts of protein -- I'd always thought of seaweed as a convenient wrapper, or seasoning, not as a source of any...
That was quite an interesting read! Also, TIL that some varieties produce useful amounts of protein -- I'd always thought of seaweed as a convenient wrapper, or seasoning, not as a source of any useful nutrition.
Every ecosystem and species is different, but it'd be interesting to know if adding a mussel farm changes the analysis at all. If not, that would be a fantastic way to double dip.
This is really hopeful stuff. Unlike land forests that displace a lot of animals when cut down, for algae farms the fish can swim over to an adjacent patch when we harvest. Yes I definitely want...
This is really hopeful stuff. Unlike land forests that displace a lot of animals when cut down, for algae farms the fish can swim over to an adjacent patch when we harvest.
Yes I definitely want farmed mussels and farmed seaweed together!
The article talks about bicarbonate being a better long term solution than just captured in algae, and oyster/mussel shells are bicarbonate right?
What if we have for human food profit patches, and also ocean animals buffet patches where they come eat the shellfish and let the shells drop to the ocean floor? The algae will provide homes for small young fish as well.
Sorry for taking so long to reply -- got a bit distracted. The answer appears to be a little complicated 😅 looking around, there seems to be mixed support on whether bivalve farming is a net...
The article talks about bicarbonate being a better long term solution than just captured in algae, and oyster/mussel shells are bicarbonate right?
Sorry for taking so long to reply -- got a bit distracted. The answer appears to be a little complicated 😅
looking around, there seems to be mixed support on whether bivalve farming is a net source or sink of CO2 (e.g. 1, 2), largely it seems for same reason that we have a tough time doing carbon accounting on forests: these are very complex ecosystems, and measuring net CO2 sequestration is pretty difficult in this situation.
That said, we can see other ecosystem impacts (e.g. shelter for marine animals, increased water column clarity leading to increased plant growth, reversal of eutrophic conditions, etc.) pretty rapidly, and it seems like these sorts of farms are positive from that perspective!
What if we have for human food profit patches, and also ocean animals buffet patches where they come eat the shellfish and let the shells drop to the ocean floor? The algae will provide homes for small young fish as well.
Maaaaaybe! I have admittedly odd views on this, but I feel that agricultural efforts should focus on decreasing land use -- period -- then remediate remaining land in order to return it to a healthier state. So, in this case, that'd mean intensively farming seaweed + bivalve farms, and then using the spare space (and capital) to repair nearby ecosystems that've been damaged by boat wake erosion, sediment deposition, illegal waste disposal, oil spills, etc.
It'd be nice to have something that we do for ourselves (i.e. growing food) be beneficial enough for the environment around us that we could directly contribute it back, but I have a feeling that the law of unintended consequences has a good intentions-seeking guidance system 😅
Ugh yeah, if we make a new kind of market people will have a new kind of demand on our resources :/ But! :) be exciting to see wher this one goes. We don't always mess up. Thanks for looking into...
Ugh yeah, if we make a new kind of market people will have a new kind of demand on our resources :/
But! :) be exciting to see wher this one goes. We don't always mess up.
Fakhraee explains that coastal seaweed farms are an extremely effective way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere because these algae sequester carbon at high rates. "This nature-based technology removes CO2 and converts it to biomass, but one of the main challenges discussed is that it is expected that most of the carbon and biomass produced would eventually be used by microbes in the water or in the sediment to produce CO2. That was the main concern, whether these are actually a good way of capturing carbon or not."
It's quite fascinating since it feels like most carbon sinks that are discussed require not being harvested; harvesting reintroduces captured carbon dioxide into our supply chains (e.g with wood)...
It's quite fascinating since it feels like most carbon sinks that are discussed require not being harvested; harvesting reintroduces captured carbon dioxide into our supply chains (e.g with wood)
I am no scientist though — so perhaps there are other systems which work similar to this one for carbon capture which I am unaware of.
There have been a few (successful!) attempts on using forms of algae to eat carbon-enriched oxygen through water - literally pump outside air into an aquarium, containing the CO2 in the water, and...
There have been a few (successful!) attempts on using forms of algae to eat carbon-enriched oxygen through water - literally pump outside air into an aquarium, containing the CO2 in the water, and the top-level algae eats the filtered CO2 and grows, creating (or converting CO2 into) a biomass that can be used either as storage, or to be used as fuel.
In these cases you have to look at it less as a goal of the elimination of CO2, and more as a recycling process for CO2, where the CO2 is the fuel (of the fuel) that is recycled back into biomass, that can then be used as fuel.
I kind of find the idea that the very excess we have created that can destroy us, might just the best fuel source we can have. It's everywhere, it's renewable, its 'clean' in essence (no byproducts, other than carbon and oxygen), even though its dirty in its 'raw' released form for the planet.
You might be talking about something else, but using algea to make oil and dericed products is a delay tactic by the fossil fuel industry. This video from Climate Town explains it well (in an...
You might be talking about something else, but using algea to make oil and dericed products is a delay tactic by the fossil fuel industry. This video from Climate Town explains it well (in an engaging and funny way, as with all of his videos).
That was quite an interesting read! Also, TIL that some varieties produce useful amounts of protein -- I'd always thought of seaweed as a convenient wrapper, or seasoning, not as a source of any useful nutrition.
Every ecosystem and species is different, but it'd be interesting to know if adding a mussel farm changes the analysis at all. If not, that would be a fantastic way to double dip.
This is really hopeful stuff. Unlike land forests that displace a lot of animals when cut down, for algae farms the fish can swim over to an adjacent patch when we harvest.
Yes I definitely want farmed mussels and farmed seaweed together!
The article talks about bicarbonate being a better long term solution than just captured in algae, and oyster/mussel shells are bicarbonate right?
What if we have for human food profit patches, and also ocean animals buffet patches where they come eat the shellfish and let the shells drop to the ocean floor? The algae will provide homes for small young fish as well.
Sorry for taking so long to reply -- got a bit distracted. The answer appears to be a little complicated 😅
looking around, there seems to be mixed support on whether bivalve farming is a net source or sink of CO2 (e.g. 1, 2), largely it seems for same reason that we have a tough time doing carbon accounting on forests: these are very complex ecosystems, and measuring net CO2 sequestration is pretty difficult in this situation.
That said, we can see other ecosystem impacts (e.g. shelter for marine animals, increased water column clarity leading to increased plant growth, reversal of eutrophic conditions, etc.) pretty rapidly, and it seems like these sorts of farms are positive from that perspective!
Maaaaaybe! I have admittedly odd views on this, but I feel that agricultural efforts should focus on decreasing land use -- period -- then remediate remaining land in order to return it to a healthier state. So, in this case, that'd mean intensively farming seaweed + bivalve farms, and then using the spare space (and capital) to repair nearby ecosystems that've been damaged by boat wake erosion, sediment deposition, illegal waste disposal, oil spills, etc.
It'd be nice to have something that we do for ourselves (i.e. growing food) be beneficial enough for the environment around us that we could directly contribute it back, but I have a feeling that the law of unintended consequences has a good intentions-seeking guidance system 😅
Ugh yeah, if we make a new kind of market people will have a new kind of demand on our resources :/
But! :) be exciting to see wher this one goes. We don't always mess up.
Thanks for looking into this!
It's quite fascinating since it feels like most carbon sinks that are discussed require not being harvested; harvesting reintroduces captured carbon dioxide into our supply chains (e.g with wood)
I am no scientist though — so perhaps there are other systems which work similar to this one for carbon capture which I am unaware of.
There have been a few (successful!) attempts on using forms of algae to eat carbon-enriched oxygen through water - literally pump outside air into an aquarium, containing the CO2 in the water, and the top-level algae eats the filtered CO2 and grows, creating (or converting CO2 into) a biomass that can be used either as storage, or to be used as fuel.
In these cases you have to look at it less as a goal of the elimination of CO2, and more as a recycling process for CO2, where the CO2 is the fuel (of the fuel) that is recycled back into biomass, that can then be used as fuel.
I kind of find the idea that the very excess we have created that can destroy us, might just the best fuel source we can have. It's everywhere, it's renewable, its 'clean' in essence (no byproducts, other than carbon and oxygen), even though its dirty in its 'raw' released form for the planet.
You might be talking about something else, but using algea to make oil and dericed products is a delay tactic by the fossil fuel industry. This video from Climate Town explains it well (in an engaging and funny way, as with all of his videos).