Since there are no currently active contests, we have switched Climate CoLab to read-only mode.
Learn more at
Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments

Proposal: . . . Sea-questration . . . Contest: Geoengineering 2014 Thank you for your contest entry. We appreciate your willingness to share your ideas and also the time and effort you put into developing a proposal and submitting it to the contest. We have reviewed your proposal and found that it contained intriguing elements; however, have chosen not to advance it to the next round of competition. We encourage you to keep developing your idea. Transfer your proposal to a Workspace to re-open it, make edits, add collaborators, and even submit it into a future contest. You can do so by logging into your account, opening your proposal, selecting the Admin tab, and clicking "Move proposal". We welcome you to stay involved in the Climate CoLab community: support and comment on proposals that have been named Finalists, and vote during the public voting period to help select the contest’s Popular Choice Winner. Climate CoLab will be opening more contests throughout the year and you are welcome to submit your proposal to those contests as well. Keep up the great work. We hope that by working together, we all can create solutions that wouldn't otherwise be possible. Sincerely, Contest Fellows If there are additional comments from the Judges & Fellows, they will be included below.

I hate to pile on, but I have to reject this one also for not being inline with the regulatory focus of this years topic. I've noticed how often you work on and edit your proposals, and its obvious you've but a lot of time into both of them. I hope you'll come back for next years geoengineering contest, especially if they are looking for substantive plans.

On a more specific note, as I was just looking through the proposal, I noticed again that you cite 8 metric tons of carbon dioxide sequestered per year per acre of Sargassum. That makes me doubtful about the scalability of the project because humans are currently emitted 9.7 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide/year ( That means it would take over a billion acres to cancel out all of carbon emissions. I did some back of the envelope calculations and the earth, in total is about 125 billion acres, so it would take about 1% of the earths surface. Even though we likely wouldn't need to reduce emissions 100% just with this technique, the scale is a red flag for me. i would love to see the question of scalability and a realistic estimate of carbon sequestration from this technique addressed in some depth.

You've done good work, though, and I hope you'll keep it up.

Share conversation: Share via:
No comments have been posted.