Furor over ocean fertilization

In 2007, when WWF got wind of an almost identical sounding proposal to dump 100 tons of iron ore in the ocean west of the Galapagos, masterminded by one of the same people behind the Haida Gwaii scheme, the chief scientist for WWF’s International Climate Change Program at the time, Dr. Lara Hansen, made this comment: “There are much safer and proven ways of preventing or lowering carbon dioxide levels than dumping iron into the ocean. This kind of experimentation with disregard for marine life and the lives of people who rely on the sea is unacceptable.” In the end, that proposal was shelved, likely due to strong opposition from WWF and others.

Coastline and Pacific Ocean, Moresby island,  Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii, British Columbia, Canada. (C) Kevin McNamee / WWF-Canada

And we’re still opposed. The potential negative environmental effects of this type of ill fated “ocean fertilization” hasn’t gone away. They include: potentially damaging down-stream, long-term effects like changes in species composition and possible production of methane and nitric oxide, two powerful greenhouse gases; the difficulties with verifying or quantifying the results of creating plankton blooms; and the fact that dumping iron is unlikely to work as a method of carbon sequestration. We have better climate change solutions.
There’s controversy in Haida Gwaii about how this project was approved.  Billed as a salmon enhancement project by the company that performed the fertilization, the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation, the project was apparently approved by the Old Massett Village Council.  This was not an initiative of the Council of the Haida Nation, the governing body for the Haida Nation.

Pacific Ocean waves crashing on coast of Moresby Island, Queen Charlotte Islands/Haida Gwaii, British Columbia, Canada.  (C) Kevin McNamee / WWF-Canada

So many were left scratching their heads this week when the UK’s Guardian newspaper broke the story about this ill-conceived scheme.  How did this happen? Where were the regulators? Didn’t anyone realize that you needed approval for such an undertaking?
No permit for ocean fertilization appears to have been obtained for the deposit of the iron ore at sea as required by Environment Canada (EC).  Nor was a permit likely. EC’s clearly titled Information Bulletin “Ocean fertilization activities are currently not allowed except for qualified research” states ocean fertilization without a research permit is prohibited and that: “It is worth noting that under this framework, activities that will yield direct financial gains cannot be considered “legitimate scientific research.”
Projects with the potential to change ocean chemistry and interfere with oceanic food chains need to be carefully thought out. When characterized as a solution to climate change, and promoted as a money making venture generating potentially commercially valuable carbon credits, even more scrutiny is needed. International and Canadian law prohibit ocean fertilization in the vast majority   of circumstances. (See the WWF backgrounder for more information). Those rules are in place for a reason and need to be enforced. Comments in the media suggest Environment Canada is now looking at enforcement options.
Ultimately, WWF believes that ocean fertilization and other geoengineering techniques are not the answer to climate change. By far the most effective way to mitigate climate change is through the rapid reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.