![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Failure IS An Option
Dec. 23rd, 2010 03:14 pmI'm not at work tomorrow (driving downstate) so this will probably be the last post before Christmas. For those of you that celebrate, Merry Christmas! (For all others, please enjoy your weekend.)
On to the topic of the day. Via Tobias Buckell, a man on fire, I read an interesting article about using the Biosphere 2 to study global warming. You may remember the Biosphere 2 from back in the day. Basically, it was an attempt in the early 1990s to set up a totally self-contained environment, much like what you'd need to colonize space. The experiment was a failure. What happened was that oxygen levels in the dome fell drastically while CO2 levels went up. In the end, supplemental oxygen from outside was needed.
But Biosphere 2 was an interesting and useful failure. Part of the oxygen problem was caused by concrete in the structure. The concrete was reacting with CO2 and oxygen, creating calcium carbonate. In effect, the concrete was rusting. A lesson learned - no concrete for space habs.
Another lesson learned was the impact of soil bacteria. The little critters were going hog-wild in the heavily (organically) fertilized soil, sucking in oxygen and expelling CO2. Lastly, and of great impact for global warming research, was the understanding of CO2 exhalation from plants. From the Discovery article:
As it stands, photosynthesis, which takes in carbon dioxide, only slightly outstrips respiration, which releases it again. The difference between intake and output—just 1 to 2 percent of the total carbon going into ecosystems—accounts for the amount of carbon fixed in things like the trunks [of trees].
After the collapse of the original self-contained experiment, the facility, which is open for tours, was used for large-scale tests of global warming. One of those tests has put paid to the notion that, as temperatures rise, plants will suck in more CO2. As one researcher said, "carbon just chased itself around the cycle faster," resulting in no net benefit.
Biosphere 2 had a small ocean, which, perhaps surprisingly, remains self-sufficient (nobody feeds the fish). However, elevated CO2 levels resulted in a more acidic ocean, which radically slowed coral growth. This means even less oceanic CO2 sequestration.
Failure is always an option. The trick is to learn from one's failures.
On to the topic of the day. Via Tobias Buckell, a man on fire, I read an interesting article about using the Biosphere 2 to study global warming. You may remember the Biosphere 2 from back in the day. Basically, it was an attempt in the early 1990s to set up a totally self-contained environment, much like what you'd need to colonize space. The experiment was a failure. What happened was that oxygen levels in the dome fell drastically while CO2 levels went up. In the end, supplemental oxygen from outside was needed.
But Biosphere 2 was an interesting and useful failure. Part of the oxygen problem was caused by concrete in the structure. The concrete was reacting with CO2 and oxygen, creating calcium carbonate. In effect, the concrete was rusting. A lesson learned - no concrete for space habs.
Another lesson learned was the impact of soil bacteria. The little critters were going hog-wild in the heavily (organically) fertilized soil, sucking in oxygen and expelling CO2. Lastly, and of great impact for global warming research, was the understanding of CO2 exhalation from plants. From the Discovery article:
As it stands, photosynthesis, which takes in carbon dioxide, only slightly outstrips respiration, which releases it again. The difference between intake and output—just 1 to 2 percent of the total carbon going into ecosystems—accounts for the amount of carbon fixed in things like the trunks [of trees].
After the collapse of the original self-contained experiment, the facility, which is open for tours, was used for large-scale tests of global warming. One of those tests has put paid to the notion that, as temperatures rise, plants will suck in more CO2. As one researcher said, "carbon just chased itself around the cycle faster," resulting in no net benefit.
Biosphere 2 had a small ocean, which, perhaps surprisingly, remains self-sufficient (nobody feeds the fish). However, elevated CO2 levels resulted in a more acidic ocean, which radically slowed coral growth. This means even less oceanic CO2 sequestration.
Failure is always an option. The trick is to learn from one's failures.
