GAIA AND THE EARTH SYSTEM Peter Timmerman, 2009

Searching for Life on Earth Until very recently, it was assumed by most scientists that the Earth was a rocky ball upon which the plants and animals lived, but these plants and animals (life) were accidental inhabitants, somewhat like a layer of mud on a basketball. The mud is on the basketball, but has no business with the basketball itself. However, in the last 40 years, a number of scientific revolutions have taken place, ranging from the acceptance of theories of continental movement on massive plates as driving forces for earth system changes, to the Gaia hypothesis. Astronomy, planetary science, paleontology, geology, biochemistry -- across many disciplines a series of mutually enlightening discoveries have completely transformed our understanding and awareness of the Earth. It is now well established that the Earth is an extraordinarily dynamic system, and that an essential element of this dynamic is life itself. Life is not just a visitor: it is woven deep into Earth processes. We can see it as one of the shapers of the physical world. As with the voyages of discovery to the Moon, which had unexpected consequences for our perception of the Earth, so the voyages of discovery to the further planets of our solar system have had their consequences as well. Spectral analysis is a way of determining the chemical composition of things from a distance through analysis of the light radiating from, or reflecting off them. By analogy with the way that things of different colours reflect differently, it was discovered in 1814 by Joseph von Fraunhofer that when light is reflected off or travels through different materials with different chemical composition, their spectral pattern is different, characterized by Fraunhofer lines or gaps in the spectrum. These are gaps where the objects chemical constitutents absorb rather than reflect light. In this way, one can determine, for example, the general chemical composition of Mars without having gone to Mars -- a telescope hooked up to a spectral analyser (or radio telescope for non-visual parts of the spectrum) will do. The Gaia Hypothesis This technique leads us into the story of the emergence of the Gaia hypothesis, which is one of the great 20th century scientific ideas, whatever its ultimate fate as a hypothesis. The story goes like this, and it is told in fine detail in Homage To Gaia (Lovelock, 2000). In the late 1960s there were proposals raised to send a probe to Mars to find out if there was life on Mars. The problem was that they couldnt send a person to Mars at that time, or yet; so they had to work out a series of experiments, physical and chemical experiments, that would be able to be carried on a spaceship, land on Mars, interact with the Martian surface, and send back information about the results of those experiments -that is, one could just read the printouts of the experimental data sent back. There were

issues of size of the package of instruments to be sent up, their robustness, etc. ; but the big question was: how would you detect life? Jim Lovelock, an independent scientist, who had been one of the first to detect chloroflourocarbons in the Antarctic -- chlorofluorocarbons are the main source of problems in the ozone layer -- was hired to help think through this problem. Various scenarios had been put forward, and attempts had been made to work on the problem by, for example, going to the arid desert of Chile, which is inhospitable (but alas, teeming with life). Lovelock thought about the problem for awhile and then said, look, if you take a look at a spectrum analysis of the planets Venus and Mars -- that is a spectrum gives you the chemical composition of the planet depending on the reflective properties of the gases and elements involved -- these planets are eseentially at chemical equilibrium. This is a technical term. If you take a number of chemicals that can react with each other, and you put them in a test tube together, and you let the processes rip, eventually all the processes will be carried out, and you will be left with the products of the reaction. This is the playing out of entropy (about which more later), the running down of physical and chemical systems. Nothing more can happen, no more surprises. The Venusian and Martian systems, in their different ways, are played out. If you contrast that with the Earth, you find that, among other things, there is 21% oxygen, which is an incredibly reactive gas, and all sorts of other detectable products which suggest that there is intense activity going on, keeping these gases far from equilibrium. If you took a representative mix of the chemicals in the Earths atmosphere and heated them up, you would get an explosion, among other things. It is a volatile unstable mix: it should not be there. Lovelock presented these arguments to the people at NASA supporting the Martian landing, and they were not very happy, because he basically told them it was a waste of time to go. Lovelock became further intrigued by the idea that if you wanted to prove there was life on Earth, what would you look for? Suppose you were on a distant planet and you wanted to know if Earth was worth looking at, and you could manage a spectral analysis, you would be struck by the strange chemical mix of the Earths atmosphere. Lovelock argued that the evidence of the chemical composition of the atmosphere alone not only indicated that there was life on earth, but that the atmosphere was a continuing product of the biosphere -- that is, it was sustained by the array of organisms on the planet. For example, I have already mentioned oxygen -- oxygen is incredibly reactive - that is why architects have trouble with rust, and why the edges of your books go brown after sitting around for a few years -- they are oxidizing, basically catching on fire very slowly. If the percentage of oxygen in the atmosphere was much higher than it is (around 30%) all the forests in the world would burn up from constant forest fires. Also the atmosphere has methane -- this reacts very easily under the bombardment of sunlight and the presence of oxygen to create carbon dioxide and water and essentially disappear. This means that something like 1,000 million tons of methane have to be added to the

atmosphere every year, and 2,000 million tons of oxygen. We could also go down a list of other chemicals -- their improbability, their suspension far from equilibrium. Lovelock then went on to argue that the Earth was itself a self-regulating system, which he called GAIA. It is important to point out that it is not automatically clear that this self-regulating system is itself what some people would call an organism. Gaia comes from the Greek word Ge, and it is a poetic term, the name of the Greek Goddess of the Earth -- actually given to Lovelock by his neighbour, William Golding, author of Lord of the Flies. Since the development of the Gaia hypothesis, a lot of New Age people have taken to a certain amount of Earth-worship, as if Gaia was a single big motherly organism. It is not clear however exactly what Gaia is, if the hypothesis is correct. One problem is that it is not subject to competition, so far at any rate. It is unique. Second, it is the platform for organisms, within which organisms function, so while it is plausible that it might be a superorganism, it more or less is its own environment, except of course for the sun, deep space and the occasional rain of comets and meteors. This has led some people to call it a metanism. Third, and most complex of all, it is hard to see how all the individual organisms, working for their own survival, should somehow also be working for the larger environment for which they are a part -- this is one of the reasons why a holistic, organic metaphor arose. It is also important to stress that there are complications to the Gaia hypothesis. For example, one of the reasons why the notion that life was itself a shaper of the biosphere took a long time to work its way into traditional geology is the fact that many of the processes that involve elements like oxygen are strongly regulated by non-living physical and chemical processes, such as weathering, volcanism, and others. Also, some of the early claims about biological regulatory processes are now seen more sceptically (see Smil, 2002, for a reasonable review of the current scientific assessments). There are one or two scientists who argue in favour of what they call the Medea hypothesis (Medea was a dangerous woman in Greek literature who slaughtered her children and murdered her husdands latest lover) that the Earth is not as fond of life as Gaiists think: that the history of the Earth is full of extinctions and big ecological disasters on a planetary scale. Nevertheless, the strength of the Gaia hypothesis is that it challenges the piecemeal view of the Earth, and provides a narrative of the Earth system through time that is both exciting and compelling in its sweep and implications. Let us turn to some of the fundamental elements of the Earth system. Light and The Sun The fundamental process that powers life on Earth is the capture and handling of energy, mostly from solar power, but some also derives from earth processes (driven by gravitational forces and residual radioactivity). A basic image to work with is of a fountain of water that drops into a catchment cup or bucket, and then spills over that into

a lower cup, and so on until it hits the ground. Another image is that of a series of power transformers, that shift electricity from the high voltages in the power lines you see coming out of power plants, through a series of gearing down transformers, until it is manageable enough to get to your toaster. In the same way, the physical, chemical, and living systems on the planet, in different ways, catch, shunt, and moderate the highpowered energy radiating over the Earth from the Sun. This process is a way of surfing on entropy: entropy can be loosely defined as the universal degrading of energy, of which the most familiar form for earth processes is the degrading of high class solar energy to waste heat. Everything that is warm radiates heat (like you and me!), and the earth heated by the sun is no different. Some of the heat radiates out into space, but some of it is captured by the atmosphere, which bounces it back to the earth. The atmosphere and oceans absorb and re-radiate solar energy directly; and the currents of air and water spread the hotter energies of the equatorial region to other regions. The most important solar catchment process among living systems is photosynthesis, upon which much of life depends. There are other forms of energy catchment in living systems: recent discovering on the deep sea floor have revealed forms of life that live on the energy from hydrogen sulfide bubbling up from hot vents. Photosynthesis is a complex series of processes carried out by plants and algae, and what are called cyanobacteria. The complexities of photosynthesis are still not fully understood; in part because photosynthetic processes have evolved over time, and some of the earlier mechanisms are still functionally available to plants. The central activity of photosynthesis is the transformation of carbon dioxide (C02) and water (H20) in the presence of sunlight into carbohydrates (such as glucose -- C6H1206) and oxygen, which is thrown off as a waste product. The splitting of water by the harnessing of solar energy (actually only a small fraction of the incoming solar radiation) allows the plant to capture the energy of the hydrogen ions from the water, and uses it to synthesize the carbohydrates. This is all carried out with on average less than 1% efficiency, but it works. Plants are therefore referred to as autotrophs -- self feeders. The glucoses and the oxygen are in turn used by animals such as ourselves (the burning of the glucoses in the presence of oxygen is what gives us fuel to keep going), re-releasing carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere, and we are therefore heterotrophs -- other feeders. In this sense, plants are among the only true producers on the planet; we are consumers. There are also other creatures that dont use sunlight at all, and are sometimes referred to as chemotrophs or extremophiles because they tend to live in extreme environments like hot springs and deep ocean vents (which some scientists believe are very like what the Earths atmosphere was like before it became laden with oxygen, and get their energy from chemical reactions.) The Atmosphere & Oceans The atmosphere is 21% oxygen, and 78% nitrogen, and the rest of the components of the atmosphere occupy the tiny fraction that is left, including, among other things, water vapour. As stated above, the atmosphere and oceans are, among other things, absorbers

and carriers of heat energy from the sun. Much of this is due to the capacity of water to store large amounts of heat and release it slowly (for example, it takes a great deal of heat to move water into steam, a gaseous state, even after it has reached boiling point temperature, as you will know if you have ever tried to boil water). Water vapour is also a greenhouse gas, as are the other tiny fractions of gaseous elements such as carbon dioxide and methane. The Hydrological Cycle Because of waters pivotal role in virtually all chemical and biological processes, the hydrological cycle -- water in its solid, liquid, and gaseous forms -- acts as a kind of matrix in which the other cycles operate. The forces of evaporation by heat and transpiration (the movement of water through plants, also driven in part by heat) drives this cycle into the liquid and gaseous forms, which then return to the Earth through processes of condensation and runoff, etc. Apart from the water locked away in ice caps, there is a certain amount of fossil water deep in underground aquifers and in slow groundwater runoff. It is important to note that 97% of the water on the Earth is in the oceans, and much of the rest is, as noted, locked up in glaciers and ice. A fraction of 1% of the rest is available for our use. Much of that water is polluted and contaminated; and the amounts of available drinking, bathing, and cooking water per person in many parts of the developing world are decreasing. The Carbon Cycle Obviously central to the carbon cycle is the photosynthetic processes described above. Because of carbons generous ability to connect with other elements, it is ubiquitous in living things, and forms the basis of organic chemistry, which is just about completely the study of carbon. It is also ever-present in organic forms that are no longer alive, and have not been alive for hundreds of millions of years. Limestone deposits and other sedimentary rocks are the remains of carbon based life forms that have been pressed down over long periods of time; famously, some are labelled fossil fuels, and they are exactly as stated -- fuels that derive from the remnants of ancient fossil plants and animals transformed into coal, oil, and natural gas. So vast were the ancient swamps of the Carboniferous and other eras, that some fossil fuel experts speak of the Earth as swimming in fossil fuels, whose obtaining for our purposes is only constrained in most areas by superficial geological formations and the economics of exploration. However that may be, the fact is that human beings are currently taking advantage of this particular strange windfall. Whether oil will continue to be available at current rates is an open and hotly debated question: the availability of coal is not so debated -- but whether it can be extracted in an environmentally clean manner is not clear. Perhaps the most uncertain aspect of the current controversy over the increases of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from fossil fuel use is the role of the oceans. The oceans are a vast reservoir of carbon gas, which is absorbed in suspension (something like the bubbles

in a glass of soda water) and is either re-exhaled back out into the atmosphere, or finds its way into the shells of sea-going organisms (which may eventually become limestone). Calculations of the absorptive capacity of the oceans are very vague, and represent a major concern: if the ocean, which is now a sink for carbon, should reach its absorptive limit and begin to become a source for carbon, then the prospects for coping with global warming become dim indeed. Between 1800-1994, it has been calculated that the oceans absorbed 470 billion ton of carbon dioxide, and some scientist are concerned that wider changes in ocean chemistry are affecting ocean biology (e.g. coral reefs). The Nitrogen Cycle Another critical cycle for life on Earth is the nitrogen cycle. Nitrogen requires a little help from lightning or bacteria or (increasingly) human technology to cycle, since it is an inert gas. for our purposes, all we need to focus on is nitrogen fixation, which is essential for plant growth. This is carried out by a suite of bacteria that transform elemental nitrogen into ammonia and nitrates (a form of nitrogen and oxygen). Heterotrophs such as us get our nitrogen from plants; and when we, or other animals, or plants, die, decomposing bacteria rework the fixed nitrogen in our systems, and send it back out again as gas (denitrifying). Until very recently, the limited availability of nitrogen limited agricultural productivity. Farmers relied on animal (and human) manure; and on leguminous plants like clover that have nitrfying bacteria associated with them, to fertilize their crops. The discovery of a chemical process to synthesize ammonia (bringing together nitrogen and hydrogen gases -- known after the inventors as the Haber-Bosch process) has essentially transformed agriculture. The huge increases in agricultural productivity in advanced agricultural systems around the world is in large part due to the huge increases in the applications of synthetic fertilizers. However, the runoff from these fertilizers is the cause of massive nitrogen pollution loads in lakes, rivers and streams everywhere substantial agriculture is carried out. Among the effects is the fertilization of these bodies of water, resulting in outbreaks of unrestrained algae and other plant growths, essentially depleting the oxygen available for other beings. These eutrophic lakes have been a constant source of concern; and they are now joined by concerns over larger bodies of water at the mouths of rivers, such as the Gulf of Mexico at the mouth of the Mississippi, where the lack of oxygen has created substantial dead zones. The Sulfur and Phosphorus Cycles Two other cycles that should be mentioned are the sulfur and phosphorus cycles, both elements being necessary to various DNA and protein constructions, and -- in the case of phosphorus -- being necessary to compounds such as ATP (adenosine triphosphate) that are at the heart of chemical energy cycles in plants and animals. Both sulfur and phosphorus are primarily bound up in rocks, and are released into the cycling processes by erosion and through decomposing bacteria. They have very brief periods in atmospheric form, and so are unlike the previous cycles discussed. An important part of

the sulfur cycle is the ability of certain bacteria to use hydrogen sulfide (H2S) to carry out an analogous (in fact, an archaic) version of photosynthesis stripping off the hydrogen ions for future energy use, and leaving the sulfur behind as waste. Both cycles are being strongly affected by human activities. Phosphates (a form of phosphorus) is another constituent of many fertilizers, and has similar effects to nitrate depositions. Sulfur is being pumped into the atmosphere through the burning of coal and fossil fuels generally, resulting in the creation of sulfur dioxides. These are among the sources of acid rain, which is acidifying vulnerable soils and waters. Sulfates generated by human beings also act as aerosols particles that act as condensing agents for clouds, and help create smog. Suspended particulates do not just come from human activity, though: sea sprays and volcanic eruptions inject larger quantities of sulfate aerosols into the atmosphere. There are other mineral cycles that move materials around the Earth, of which calcium, iron, and others needed in small doses for life processes are of relevance. The Human Dimension As stressed, each of these major cycles is increasingly being affected by human activities. Apart from the purely biological needs that human beings have, we are now appropriating for our use something like 40% of land-based biomass for our own purposes, and an increasing amount of oceanic based biomass (as fish). Moreover, in order to produce food and make objects, human beings at our current scale of demand need to be able to manage and control the production processes efficiently according to our version of efficiency, i.e. for our purposes. This involves simplification and concentration of biological systems (agriculture), and the extraction and concentration of mineral resources (mining, industrial processes, etc.). These place additional burdens on the ability of the biosphere to cope with the waste energy, and recycle and decompose other waste products. It has become virtually impossible to model the dynamics and future of the larger earth cycles without taking the human dimension into account.

___________________________

REFERENCES
Gross, Michael. 2002. Light and Life. Oxford: University Press. Lovelock, James. 2000. Homage to Gaia. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press. Three books by Vaclav Smil are prime reading in this area:

Smil, Vaclav.2002. The Earths Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics, and Change. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Smil, Vaclav. 1997. Cycles of Life. New York, N.Y.: W.H. Freeman and Co for Scientific American. Smil, Vaclav. 1999. Energies. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.