next »

[tanian]

Environment, eh? Well here's a thought for you all. I've been busily reading all manner of topics about algae used to seed mars for life and how gravity drive works etc. etc., but although these things may seem fascinating, what's the point in seeding a planet if we'll ultimately kill it off anyway? Here's a radical new thought- and one I hope that will cause further debate:

What would happen if we seeded the Oceans of the Earth with huge colonies of phytoplankton?

Would it reduce greenhouse gasses effectively? This has been cited as one of the major causes for the Earth becoming an oxygen rich envirionment in the first place.

And secondly, would it create the further problem of having too much o2 in the environment? What could be the implications of this other than the short term effect of heightened performance in o2 respiring species?

It seems to me we are killing off plant life faster than we can renew it. Plankton grows fast- ever have space monkeys?- so why not replace the greenery we lose with renewable sea borne colonies?

We'd still lose the animal life, but we'd at least keep the air we need to breathe, and possibly our climate too.

People are far too preoccupied with the grander things- like space travel, lunar mining and relativity bending, than they are with the biggest issue of all- will it all come to nothing? Well, not on my watch.

I myself would rather be able to feel the sun on my cheeks. This planet is, after all, the very reason we exist.

[tanian]

You'll have to forgive my generalising, but it was late.

By 'killing off plant life' I was referring to deforestation, because from my admittedly basic understanding of the rainforests there are many forms of plant life involved in those rather fragile ecosystems, all of which is joepardised by deforestation. While it is true that certain species such as grasses could find it easier to survive in open spaces, i.e. deforested areas, I am certain that some species would not survive the transition.

By 'climate change'I was referring to the results of greenhouse gasses and global warming. Such issues are commonly equated with a rise in temperature, rise in sea level etc. (I'm pretty sure we all have the general idea...) and the ill thought out idea is simply to increase photosynthesising species on the sea as we decrease them on the land.

I'm well aware of the size of some plankton colonies, there's a rather fascination exhibition at the Living Coasts centre in Torquay, Devon, that is quite enlightening on the subject (they also have some fantastic penguins). The fact that these colonies regularly grow so large that they can be seen from space quite surprised me.

Plankton are indeed hardy species. It seems to me that they can survive in the fathest most barren parts of the oceans (and very little else does) and respire in a place where very few people are likely to set up a logging company.

The idea is merely speculation, but I've heard the same idea bandied about with regard to altering the atmosphere of mars etc.

To be honest I really don't know enough about the subject.

Generally the thought was using these 'terraforming' notions to counter the effects of greenhouse gasses on our planet, so if you have any ideas be sure to add them.

I would be very interested to see if we have the science to clean up our environment, and to offset some of the damage caused by emmisions before there is too much damage done.