Peace Magazine , page . Some rights reserved.
Search for other articles by kgsimons here
A Project Save the World Forum with Kathryn Moran and Peter Fiekowsky When it comes to the challenge of solving climate change, there are many proposed solutions. One of the more controversial and thought-provoking is Ocean Iron Fertilization (OIF), a method of enhancing the ocean’s capacity to sequester carbon dioxide (CO2) by introducing iron to stimulate phytoplankton growth.
This controversial method was the focus of a recent discussion hosted by Project Save the World where we invited Peter Fiekowsky, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, and Kathryn Moran, President and CEO of Ocean Networks Canada, to delve into this topic. Their conversation revealed the promise, risks, and nuances of OIF, as well as other emerging technologies in the fight against global warming.The host, Metta Spencer, began by introducing Peter Fiekowsky as a familiar face in Project Save the World discussions.
Fiekowsky has a background in physics and engineering from MIT and is deeply invested in climate restoration initiatives. His interest in OIF and other technologies has led him to focus on the pressing need for large scale CO2 removal. Kathryn Moran, a newcomer to Project Save the World conversations, joined from her office in Victoria, British Columbia, accompanied by her two poodles. Moran brings extensive expertise in ocean science, having led significant research efforts at Ocean Networks Canada. Her work spans ocean observation and carbon removal technologies, including the ambitious “Solid Carbon” project, which combines direct air capture and ocean-based CO2 sequestration.
The discussion began with Moran explaining the mission of Ocean Networks Canada: to advance ocean observation and develop data-driven solutions to better understand and mitigate the effects of climate change. One of her organization’s key projects is solid carbon, which captures CO2 from the air and stores it permanently in basalt formations beneath the ocean floor. Moran highlighted the potential of basalt for long-term carbon storage, noting that oceanic basalt offers the largest potential capacity, with some formations capable of holding hundreds of gigatons of CO2.
This sparked a comparison with Iceland’s Climeworks project, which similarly sequesters CO2 in basalt, demonstrating that permanent storage is possible and scalable.Fiekowsky, with his entrepreneurial mindset, approached the conversation from a solution focused perspective. He emphasized the urgency of the climate crisis and advocated for rapidly implementing the most effective and proven methods, pointing to the natural cycles of ice ages as a potential model for large-scale CO2 removal. His focus is on methods that can be deployed quickly and at a large scale, such as OIF, which has shown potential in increasing phytoplankton growth and thus enhancing the ocean’s natural ability to absorb CO2.
Spencer asked: If we could only invest in one method of carbon removal, what should it be? Moran diplomatically responded that she couldn’t pick just one. Instead, she argued that we should continue investing in research across multiple methods to gather data and make informed decisions. It’s not about choosing one solution, but about understanding how different solutions can work together. She emphasized the importance of conducting experiments to measure the risks and benefits of each approach. Fiekowsky,
on the other hand, had a more direct answer. He expressed strong support for OIF as a low-cost, high-impact
solution, citing the example of past volcanic eruptions like Mount Pinatubo.
The eruption not only cooled the planet temporarily by releasing sulfates into the atmosphere but also deposited iron-rich dust into the ocean, which stimulated phytoplankton growth and drew down CO2 levels. Fiekowsky believes that replicating this natural process could be one of the fastest and most effective ways to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
He mentioned that OIF could cost as little as one cent per ton of CO2, It’s not about choosing one solution, but about understanding how different solutions can work together. making it a remarkably affordable option compared to more expensive methods like direct air capture. However, Moran cautioned that while OIF has promise, it needs to be thoroughly tested and understood before being scaled up.
She pointed out that one of the biggest concerns with OIF is the potential for harmful side effects, such as harmful algal blooms, which could disrupt marine ecosystems. Additionally, there’s uncertainty around whether the CO2 absorbed by phytoplankton will remain sequestered in the deep ocean or will eventually be released back into the atmosphere. These are questions that need to be answered through carefully designed experiments.
The conversation also touched on the role of indigenous communities in climate solutions. Moran, whose work involves collaborating with coastal indigenous communities, stressed the importance of involving these communities in discussions about climate interventions. Indigenous people, she noted, have a deep connection to the ocean and a vested interest in its health, but their perspectives on geoengineering solutions like OIF vary widely.
Moran emphasized that any large scale climate solution must be accompanied by social research to ensure that communities understand the risks and benefits and have a voice in decision-making processes.
Toward the end of the discussion, the host brought up a notable experiment conducted by the Haida Nation in collaboration with entrepreneur Russ George, which involved sprinkling iron into the ocean to boost salmon populations. While the experiment reportedly led to a significant increase in salmon numbers, it was controversial and labeled by some as “rogue geoengineering” because it didn’t go through the proper regulatory channels.
Moran clarified that while this experiment garnered attention, it wasn’t the first of its kind; scientific OIF experiments had been conducted earlier in the Southern Ocean. However, the Haida experiment did highlight the potential for OIF to benefit not only the climate but also fisheries, a crucial resource for many indigenous communities. The conversation closed with both Fiekowsky and Moran agreeing on the need for more research and experimentation.
Fiekowsky remains optimistic about the potential of Udemy OIF, believing it could provide a quick and effective solution to the climate crisis. Moran, while more cautious, sees value in exploring OIF as part of a broader portfolio of ocean-based carbon removal strategies, but only with the necessary safeguards in place to avoid unintended consequences.
The conversation underscored the complexity of addressing climate change. There is a need for diverse approaches, open minded research, and careful consideration of both the scientific and social implications. Whether through OIF, direct air capture, or other emerging technologies, the path to a sustainable future will require innovation, collaboration, and a willingness to take calculated risks in the pursuit of global climate repair. You can watch this forum on Project Save the World’s website and then join the discussion by clicking on the blue Comment button on this page: https:// tosavetheworld.ca/episode-631- ocean-solutions-to-climate.
On the last Sunday of every month (except December 31), Project Save the World welcomes you to a Zoom
discussion with activists around the world. 2:00–4:00 pm Eastern time zoom.us We edit the recording and
post it later where you can discuss it on our website: tosavetheworld.ca SubStack