ie8 fix

Forget global warming, consider global blooming

By | January 6, 2009, 7:34pm PST

Summary: Recently I tried to warn an indifferent public about the curse of the killer jellyfish. This time, it’s an even tinier threat, but also a great one. Deadly and toxic algal blooms are increasing in the world’s coastal waters. Researchers cite degraded water quality from increased nutrient pollution as the cause of [...]

Recently I tried to warn an indifferent public about the curse of the killer jellyfish. This time, it’s an even tinier threat, but also a great one. Deadly and toxic algal blooms are increasing in the world’s coastal waters. Researchers cite degraded water quality from increased nutrient pollution as the cause of increased HABs (harmful algal blooms). The algae can kill fish, marine mammals and other micro-organisms. And make you very sick.

Further they say all the added nutrients in the coastal waters are coming from man made sources, like all the fertilizer pouring down the Mississippi from the American Corn Belt due to the recent ethanol boom.

Poll

The end of society as we know it will come

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Disclosure

Harry Fuller

http://blogs.zdnet.com/green/?page_id=2

Biography

Harry Fuller

Harry Fuller is a media veteran, having spent decades in TV news in the San Francisco Bay Area. As GeneralManager of KPIX-TV (CBS) he founded one of the nation's first TV station websites in early 1995. He was News Direcor at TechTV when it was founded in 1998. In 2001 he moved to London to become Executive Producer for CNBC Europe. Four years later he returned to San Francisco as Executive Editor for CNET's news.com.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
53
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Are you suggesting Nuclear Energy
brucelund 17th Jan 2009
You must be suggesting nuclear energy - there really are no other viable alternatives that have proven to scale. However, I do not think that will happen because the unlikely scenario stated above is not taken seriously.
0 Votes
+ -
oye
richvball44 6th Jan 2009
sometimes you sound like a total whack job
0 Votes
+ -
LA 2017
kozmcrae 6th Jan 2009
A television program predicted this scenario over 30 years ago.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0273868/
0 Votes
+ -
What scenario
frgough 7th Jan 2009
that some loon would try to scare people about a non-existent problem?

Did you see the muck the Chinese were raking out of their waterways prior to the olympics? Huge, massive matts of algae. Guess what, the planet didn't die. Humanity didn't die. There were no mass extinctions. In fact, the marine life was doing fine; what lived there simply shifted in response to the changed environment. You know, that adaptation thing.
0 Votes
+ -
You rest your case on that?
kozmcrae 11th Jan 2009
The Chinese cleaned out a pond and nothing changed? Why don't you help us all out by cutting your personal CO2 output by not exhaling.
0 Votes
+ -
Tell me about it
frgough 7th Jan 2009
because, of course, we all know that nothing eats alagae for food.
All of the above and more.
0 Votes
+ -
The mini ice age killed 10s of millions of people in Europe do to failed crops. The potato saved Germany because they didn't bank on the Lumper like the Irish. The French starved because it was a devil's idea of a plant and insisted on grain. Then they started the French Revolution. Now superstition is with us once again and millions will starve.
0 Votes
+ -
our society as we know it will come to an end as a result of environmental policies put into effect. You'll be standing in line for a loaf of bread and hunting for cow chips to heat your homes while the environmentalists drive by in their heated limos doing the important work of saving the planet.
0 Votes
+ -
Just rebadged Commisars.
osreinstall 7th Jan 2009
No socialist believes in eating their own dog food. Just a cynical ploy to convince others to do without so they can have. A Malthusian wet dream come true.
0 Votes
+ -
Now I get it.
kozmcrae 11th Jan 2009
You don't give a rat's ass about any of this environmental stuff. You'll say anything just to get someone angry or upset. You speak nonsense. You're a fool. You are empty. This is your fun. And that's it. I don't feel sorry for you. I'm glad you found an outlet for your emptiness. It's better than throwing roofing nails on the freeway.
0 Votes
+ -
Besides the CO2 that is released is plant food that manufactures oxygen for us humans. As for you getting upset over someone else's free speech, sounds like you are the one with the problem. Global warming is caused by Sun activity.
0 Votes
+ -
Blame the Sun.
kozmcrae 12th Jan 2009
That's good. It's all the Sun's fault. So all we need to do is to get NASA to blast a giant shield out into space and we'll be all set.
0 Votes
+ -
It is the source of all heat.
osreinstall 12th Jan 2009
Globe heats up when there are sun spots. This throws solar flares at us that increases the energy the earth's atmosphere absorbs. Global warming and global cooling is a natural cycle that man must learn to live with instead of fighting it. Our earth has been cooling since 2001. Sun spot activity has decreased somewhat. Think uncle Al got the memo? This hysteria about the climate is another religion to be debunked.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes, Global Cooling can be very destructive, and the earth has been warming since the peak of that last Ica Age, at least until 1998,that is...

Considering that (so-called) Global Warming ended in 1998, that global temperatures have actually cooled in the past year, and that global sea levels actually dropped last year, I don't think we need to worry about Global Warming anyway.

It's merely a way for governments to control individuals and businesses. People around here are already letting the local government control their thermostats by remote control.
0 Votes
+ -
We are becoming a beehive collective.
osreinstall 8th Jan 2009
Ever watch the Discovery Channel? Lots of doomsday scenarios. Nothing like scaring the population into compliance. I think we are running out of oil and this is their way of getting us ready for less energy in the future. This must be the change brother.
0 Votes
+ -
Nicely put!
stano360 9th Jan 2009
The Little Ice Age cracks me up because it makes all of the fear mongers look like dopes!
0 Votes
+ -
Ice is rough on crop production.
osreinstall 9th Jan 2009
But nevermind about that. The war on CO2 must continue. What a way to control people by putting a CO2 meter on folks.
0 Votes
+ -
Obama administration tops them all
LBiege Updated - 7th Jan 2009
This phony economy was driven by debt and needs to clean it up. People consumed beyond their means and need to stop doing it. Now what is Obama's prescription? A stimulus plan in order to get Americans spending again.

HUH??!! What the heck kind of "change" is that?

Just watch how Obama's insane government spending spree spawns a massive inflation in 2009 and mows everyone down.
0 Votes
+ -
And this has what...
bjbrock 7th Jan 2009
to do with the article?

I think your take on economics comes from the funny pages.
0 Votes
+ -
Actually...
JohnMcGrew@... 7th Jan 2009
...his take is quite accurate. Solving a debt crisis
by forcing us to accept more debt? There's little
funny about it.

At least I'll be paying off my mortgage with worthless
dollars. It will be like owning my house for 1/3rd
price!
0 Votes
+ -
Huh?
stano360 9th Jan 2009
His economics are Econ 101.
0 Votes
+ -
No, they are not
mejohnsn 10th Jan 2009
did you both flunk Econ 101?
0 Votes
+ -
Can't blame it all on Obama
RAK5 7th Jan 2009
I voted for McCain so I'm no a big Obama fan but you can't blame the current policy or the planned stimulus package only on him, if I remember right I believe Bush was trying to do the same thing. Just shows how bad of shape this country is in when the government feels the only solution to fix the economy is for the citizens to go on spending sprees buying a bunch of junk to fill up our houses we can't afford.

Pretty bad when 75% of your economy is based on consumer spending... maybe we need to ship some more jobs overseas, maybe we should sign more free trade agreements, they have worked out pretty well so far...NOT
0 Votes
+ -
You don't make any sense
stano360 9th Jan 2009
All of this stimulus nonsense is because politicians are appealing to voters ignorance. The misconception that Roosevelt's handling of the Depression was a success.

You infer that Free Trade is bad, yet complain about jobs going overseas. Which do you want? Do you want open economic borders where we can freely ship merchandise and services abroad (more domestic jobs) or do you want countries to have more trade restrictions and force companies to build plants and offices overseas?

This fiasco that we are in is caused by our sense of entitlement. The "I'm a plumber, but deserve to live like a lawyer" mentality (except some plumbers make more than lawyers!). The other element is the government manipulating markets. Lenders don't lend based on the value of the customers business, but on the ability to sell the loan to government backed companies, based on fixed standards (and very loose standards from the government to "help" minorities and the poor).
0 Votes
+ -
Tropical rainforests in Antarctica
pjotr123 7th Jan 2009
They were there once, as geological surveys have shown. I hope they will return there. It'll be a nice place for a vacation: see the polar chimps climb the polar coconut trees.

Cheer up! The Dutch agency responsible for defence against the water, has calculated that with only a couple of billion euro's, the coastal line of Holland can be defended. Even if all the ice in the world would melt. So no fears for Amsterdam.

I'm pretty sure that the U.S. government can do the same for New Amsterdam. If not, just give our former territory back to us Dutchies and we'll do the job for you. happy

Greeting from ice cold Netherlands (coldest winter in years), Pjotr.
The reason the tropical rainforests were there is not because the planet was warmer, it was because the continent of Antarctica was next to the equator.

You HAVE heard of the "theory" of Continental Drift, haven't you?
0 Votes
+ -
Wait, stop the presses . . .
stano360 9th Jan 2009
It's a miracle! A Euro that hasn't drank the Global Warming Kool-Aid!
0 Votes
+ -
Global Warming cause my wife to leave me, the dog crapped on my bed, the preacher punched me in the nose ALL because of global warming!
0 Votes
+ -
I got a pimple from it too!
stano360 9th Jan 2009
I gained about 3 pounds over Christmas from Global Warming. Damn those greed Americans!!!
0 Votes
+ -
...
0 Votes
+ -
Oh, I'm sure someone will try...
JohnMcGrew@... 7th Jan 2009
...once the government offers a few-tens-of-billions
of corporate welfare to try.
0 Votes
+ -
He's refering to the algae blooms
stano360 Updated - 9th Jan 2009
What a conundrum for environmentalists. Global warming leads to algae blooms leads to cheap easy bio-fuels leads to less global warming leads to less algae leads to less bio-fuel . . . Ahhhhh! Someone Obama please help us!!!!!
0 Votes
+ -
algae to biofuel
heidiparent@... 7th Jan 2009
YES...they're already doing it, just google "aglae to fuel" and you'll find a plethora of stories!
0 Votes
+ -
algae to biofuel
HooNoze 7th Jan 2009
Thanks Heidi. I've always been more interested in geothermal and wind power, so I've never looked at algae production too much. I did have a quick look via google though, and it looks like some they have some good ideas, like feeding CO2 to the algae. It may not be 100% solution, but it seems like it may be able to make a significant contribution. I think I'm going to start paying more attention to it now.
0 Votes
+ -
Read More Closely!
mejohnsn 10th Jan 2009
Then you will find that the projects ucrretnly in the press using algae for fuel are using special algaes that just happen to produce a useful oil. There is no guarantee that the algae in the toxic blooms has a useful oil.

I rather doubt they do.

So this would be a new project: turn the naturally present carbohydrates in the toxic algae into usable fuel. Not so straightforward, but perhaps solvable.
0 Votes
+ -
...which is why the current obsession with CO2, which
is not a pollutant, is tragic and dangerous.

Governments worldwide are committing trillions of
dollars to battle the non-issue of CO2 at the expense
of real issues like coastal runoff and particulate
emissions. It???s ironic that the eco-socialist agenda
of trashing the economy will only cause an increase in
real pollution. When people are more concerned about
their jobs and feeding their families, they care far
less about their impact on the environment.

For example, just imagine how much worse air pollution
will get as billions more people start heating their
homes with coal and other materials because
electricity and heating oil become too expensive and
scarce after all of the new ???offset??? taxes are
applied.

As for regulating CO2, please consider this: There is
no aspect of your life, from the moment you are
conceived until long after you???re dead and buried that
does not involve converting matter into CO2. Once
government bureaucracies gets the power to regulate
the emission of CO2, there is absolutely no activity
that you partake in life that will not be subject to
regulating by people you???ve never seen, heard of, or
voted for. Sure, today they???ll talk about regulating
politically-incorrect activities such as owning SUVs
and jetting off to the Bahamas. But once those
carbon-spewing evils are vanquished, what will be
next? Sooner or later, they will work their way down
to either some activity that you enjoy in your life,
or worse, some activity that represents your
livelihood.
therefore we should be worried about global blooming, we should take advantage of the world's attentio to the latter problem to address the former.

After all: the premature death of all those fish due to toxic blooms puts more carbon back into the atmosphere when the corpses decay. Nor does the algae take enough carbon out of the air.

As for the rest of McGrew's spew about CO2, it is thoroughly misguided. Of course we have to exhale, but we do NOT have to create more free CO2 in the atmosphere than we take out with other activities.

On the contrary: as things are now, we put far more CO2 into the air than we take out, and that is because of our other activities. The bulk of our "carbon footprint"d does NOT come from our own exhalation.
Until we start looking at the real problem, overpopulation we don't have a chance, so lets face it we don't have a chance.

Algae blooms, pollutions, global warming, water shortage, food shortage, oil shortage, most wars... lets face it they are all caused by overpopulation. If the population keeps growing we are going to run out of something we can't live without soon or just polute the planet so bad we can't live on it anymore.
0 Votes
+ -
Overpopulation is not an issue
brucelund 7th Jan 2009
The argument that limits to population growth have been reached have no merit. Food is just another form of energy - so is the ability to create clothing, clean water and shelter and indirectly the standard of living in general. We currently use a very minute fraction of the total energy available and very inefficiently at that. Saying population is the problem simply misses the possibilites and is probably just a manifestation of tribal thinking.
0 Votes
+ -
True.
Dr_Zinj 7th Jan 2009
The world is overpopulated. Our ideal level of population for the planet is roughly 1 billion people; we're currently at 6 or 7 billion and still climbing.

People say we could eliminate starvation by better distribution of food. Ain't going to happen without MASSIVE use of energy that we don't have. EVERYTHING comes back to energy. The American standard of living is driven 90%+ by the presence of cheap energy. The reason the economy didn't recover with the 'economic stimulous packages' is directly attributable to the speculation-driven massive increase in oil prices. The pricing made any corrective measures stillborn before conception. Even though the prices have dropped since then, recovery isn't happening because everyone is hoarding their cash and afraid (with good reason) of losing what's left.

One positive thing that can be said about the Black Death in Europe is that it raised the living standards of the survivors by nearly a full magnitude. A global pandemic that kills 80 to 90% of the human race would do the same for us today. I'm positive that there are world leaders actually considering that as a viable solution. The hard part is figuring out how to let it happen without actually causing it, and how be in the surviving remainder.
0 Votes
+ -
Finally someone that.....
r1r1p1@... 7th Jan 2009
sees it as it really is. The world is way over populated. We can't grow enough food cheaply and efficiently to feed the world without destroying the planet. Everything we do to keep mankind going polutes the earth. Payday will arrive!!!!
0 Votes
+ -
over population
donaldf@... 7th Jan 2009
I have been saying for the last 30+ years the world is overpopulated. Many civilations have been wiped out because population outstripped resources. What are we using for energy today? Stuff that took millions of years to create. Once it's gone it's gone.
0 Votes
+ -
Really?
stano360 9th Jan 2009
Which civilization is that? Have they stopped teaching econ and history in school?
0 Votes
+ -
Overpopulation?
ElCondor11 7th Jan 2009
I had the opportunity to fly over areas of north Florida, as well as around the Atlanta area...the amount of land that is raw and unused is absolutely astonishing. Yes there may be some countries that are reaching the limit due to geography(Japan..) but all in all that ranks up there with global warming.

There is no oil shortage; as a matter of fact, if the environmentalists would get out of the way, the poor third world countries could begin to walk onto the playing field and use that God-given resource to fend for themselves (growing more food, adding irrigation, etc)
0 Votes
+ -
Overpopulation
HooNoze 7th Jan 2009
That is absolutely correct. Population is way too high. All we can do is create temporary solutions to alleviate immediate problems. It's not a perfect solution, but trying to create sustainable solutions now may ensure that our children/grandchildren will have sufficient resources.

Currently world population growth is estimated at about 1.188% (from CIA Factbook). At this rate the population will double in about 58-59 years and there are already disputes over resources. The disputes will probably continue until the problem is corrected.

Will this be the end of society as we know it? Maybe, but if we learn from our mistakes, the society that emerges in the future could be far better than anything we have now.
0 Votes
+ -
Quality is the key
LBiege 7th Jan 2009
If the whole population are diversely well educated and skillful then they are all taxpayers and therefore contributing. But if they are not and living on government food stamps then they become social liability.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Ovepopulation
bb_apptix 7th Jan 2009
Dude.

Fly over most of the U.S., or better yet, drive cross country, off the major Interstates. It's EMPTY of people! While certain areas may be "over" populated, most areas are underpopulated.
Hard to miss that global warming is last in the poll and that all the environmental issues are below "a comet smashes into the earth" - a very unlikely event. Environmental issues are not taken seriously by most people. Environmental issues sell newspapers but in the grand scheme of things are relatively unimportant. Even worse, some of the attempts to address environmental problems prove disasterous - e.g., biofuels.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Forget global warming, consider global blooming
heidiparent@... Updated - 7th Jan 2009
sorry this is a reply to a message above yes, there have already been many articles on this..research is proving that algae can indeed be the next eco-friendly (not like ethanol) fuel source
0 Votes
+ -
Algae - maybe
brucelund 7th Jan 2009
Great - sign me up when it is proven to scale. The solution should not consume a huge amount of real estate or have other problems "green" power typically has.
0 Votes
+ -
Are you suggesting Nuclear Energy
brucelund 17th Jan 2009
You must be suggesting nuclear energy - there really are no other viable alternatives that have proven to scale. However, I do not think that will happen because the unlikely scenario stated above is not taken seriously.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix