To The Dump, To The Dump, To The Dump, Dump, Dump...

So let's just say you have a couple hundred thousand metric tons of iron filings laying around the house. While in the tub one day, you conceive of a terrific idea of dumping all that iron into the ocean, thus seeding phytoplankton growth (iron is a limiting nutrient for phytoplankton) and sequestering atmospheric carbon for centuries deep underwater. Voila! Hello carbon sink... goodbye global warming. And even better, you can sell shares of your iron filing dumping as carbon offsets to individuals and business who are looking to feel more carbon neutral. It's a win-win deal!

But hold on. What about other greenhouse gases in addition to CO2 that could be produced as a side effect? Or what might a rain of iron filings mean for benthic ocean communities? Where does the iron filing supply come from and what contaminants might it have? And since not all phytoplankton are alike, what happens if you spur on harmful algal blooms. Finally, couldn't the lure of massive profit potentially taint your research into the efficacy (or threats) from your iron dumping scheme?

Enter San Francisco-based climate startup Climos, which has proposed a code of conduct to address contentious aspects of how such experiments are conducted.

The 2-page document calls on anyone doing experiments to protect the marine environment by obtaining permits from relevant authorities, do full environmental assessments, and avoid sensitive ecosystems. It calls for openness through release of data, third party verification of carbon uptake, and collaboration with the broader scientific community.

The San Francisco Bay Area has become something of a birthing-ground for climate engineering businesses. Climos, and it's Silicon Valley neighbor Planktos, both engage in iron replenishment (sounds a lot nicer than iron dumping, huh?) to allegedly restore declining plankton growth in the open seas. They are not without their critics. Friends of the Earth, WWF, ETC Group, Greenpeace, and several Galapagos-based conservation groups (among others) have raised numerous concerns in addition to those mentioned above to the concept of iron dumping. Planktos seems to regard these points of contention as misperceptions of crucial details about their work and the scientific and political context in which it is based. In response, they have posted a laundry-list of dismissals of such concerns on their website.

Certainly a code of conduct for business practice is an important step. I hope Climos, Planktos, and others will be truly committed to full collaboration with, and openness to, conservation concerns. My fear, however is that establishing a code of conduct is putting the cart before the horse. Climos and Planktos may be jumping to a forgone conclusion that their process and methods are safe for overall ocean health. A code of conduct, lacking demonstrable and well-supported evidence, becomes just another example of greenwashing and spin.