Home » Iron fertilisation without animals could spell disaster

Iron fertilisation without animals could spell disaster

by simon

During the last ice-age 20,000 years ago, there was a particularly cold period. Scientists have thought this might have had to do with an influx of iron into the Southern Ocean. Biologically-available iron is really rare in the sea. When it’s added in quantity it supercharges algal photosynthesis leading to more carbon uptake and reduced atmospheric warming. But iron fertilisation without animals could spell disaster.

Fertilising the Southern Ocean

The paper titled “A circumpolar dust conveyor in the glacial Southern Ocean” just published in the journal Nature Communications [1] has discovered that dust from Central South America may have contributed 80% of the iron input during that period. Each of these findings shines a new spotlight on the subject of Iron fertilisation … the idea that we could artificially prime the Southern Ocean with dust, as a way to combat climate change.

Animal impact is not being considered. Without sufficient wildlife this end-of-pipe engineering solution could have equally negative consequences for human life support.

Ocean ecology was built on functional processes driven by animal communities over millions of years. The clinical precision by which animals deliver nutrients in time and space is part of a long-term lifecycle. If precision isn’t reached, the system doesn’t stabilise and the animals don’t survive. If the animals don’t survive, precision can’t be reached. The existence of animals is the mechanism for stability and human existence.

If precision isn’t reached, the system doesn’t stabilise and the animals don’t survive – and if the animals don’t survive, precision can’t be reached.

If we decide to do iron fertilisation in the absence of animal populations, our application will be nowhere near as precise as it needs to be, to avoid ecosystem disfunction, which could lead to collapse of fisheries. As evidence of this, loss of global soil fertility is entirely down to the over-application of fertilisers on land. It’s the same process. Iron fertilisation and farm fertilisation are both adding energy to systems. Our imprecise application of fertiliser on land, already threatens world food security within a few decades.

Evidence from the past

20,000 years ago, when the Earth was subject to iron fertilisation from the continent, this was sufficient to alter the temperature of a whole planet. Speciation, the rate at which animals evolve, is fastest when temperatures are cold, which is why the prehistoric record shows massive increases in species richness after ice-ages. During this last cold period, animal populations were able to adapt and rebalance the waste energy and bring Earth back to a temperature more suited for human life.

Wind forward to today, and we are in the midst of a mass extinction. We have lost 98.5% of the Blue Whales from the Antarctic, for example. These animals, among many others, are the mechanism that could allow us to subtly re-engineer systems, in the knowledge they provide a safety-net for our unsystematic approach–for that is all it can ever be. We can never precisely replicate ocean iron-cycles without animals to do that for us.

Iron fertilisation without animals could be a disaster
Albatross populations on sub-Antarctic breeding islands have halved in the last 35 years [2]. Seabird decline will become a huge problem in future, if we are to have any chance of rebuilding fisheries and engineering increases in ocean productivity / tackling climate change.

We’re talking about throwing massive amounts of free surplus energy at enormously sensitive systems that drive a planet’s core functionality for human survival. Why would we imagine we could be any better at that, than we have been with fertilising the land?

The take home message

The take home message is simple. Before we even consider iron fertilisation, we need to make sure we’ve rebuilt and are maintaining wildlife population processes close to a natural state – that means having wildlife in the right proportions. Then we have to apply any efforts extremely carefully, if at all. Because rebuilding wildlife populations and stemming our use of fossil fuels might just be a savvier alternative.

  1. Struve, T., Pahnke, K., Lamy, F. et al. A circumpolar dust conveyor in the glacial Southern Ocean. Nat Commun 11, 5655 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18858-y
  2. Deborah Pardo, Jaume Forcada, Andrew G. Wood, Geoff N. Tuck, Louise Ireland, Roger Pradel, John P. Croxall, Richard A. Phillips. Climate and fisheries drive albatross declines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2017, 114 (50) E10829-E10837; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1618819114

patreon banner

You may also like

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More