65 



of the research questions await further funding and completion of 

 the studies already initiated. 



But, in commencing we have taken an important step. The re- 

 mainder of my comments will, of necessity, be speculative since 

 data to be otherwise are lacking. Let me sketch out the differences 

 between marine biomass production on the east coast and on the 

 west coast and then examine some of the alternatives that may 

 present themselves in the next several years. 



There are significant differences between the oceanographic 

 characteristics of the east and west coasts: 



First of all, the east coast is bounded by a broad, gently sloping 

 continental shelf over 100 miles in width, and the water is less 

 than 300 feet deep. Water depths comparable to those off California 

 where biomass farming is being conducted, and where the conti- 

 nental shelf is very narrow, only occur far from shore in the East. 



Second, nutrients, which are a limiting factor in the productivity 

 of marine biomass farming on the west coast, occur in abundance 

 in New York's coastal waters. Nitrogen values similar to those 

 artificially induced in the west coast operation are found naturally 

 in most shelf waters of New York. Nitrogen, furthermore, in New 

 York's waters is primarily nitrate and ammonia. Thus, the high- 

 technology nutrient pump required for the west coast farm would 

 be unnecessary in a New York operation. 



Third, the light penetration in the east coast waters is more 

 restricted than along most areas of the west coast. The depth to 

 which photosynthetic action can occur in New York waters may 

 well be the most significant factor in designing test farms. Al- 

 though light penetration in the coastal waters of New York is 

 limited in part by suspended sediment carried from land, most of 

 the turbidity is due to phj^oplankton growth stimulated by nutri- 

 ent enrichment from human activity. 



The fourth factor, the North Atlantic has a well-deserved reputa- 

 tion for tempestuousness. It may prove to be a hostile environment 

 for marine biomass farming more so than the placid eastern Pacif- 

 ic. This will pose interesting challenges for the ocean engineers in 

 designing test farms. 



The results of these basic differences is that east coast biomass 

 production may involve techniques somewhat different from those 

 used on the west coast. This will not inhibit development of the 

 program; rather, the west coast experience will provide important 

 baselines from which other environments can be compared and 

 evaluated. Much of the basic information generated by the west 

 coast test farm will be used in adapting biomass operations to other 

 oceanographic and sociopolitical regimes. 



One important area requiring immediate research is the selec- 

 tion of suitable feedstock species on the east coast. Macrocystis has 

 been intensively studied on the west coast and its characteristics 

 have been found suitable for biomass production for conversion to 

 methane. 



Recognizing that one species may not be optimal in all coastal 

 oceanographic environments, the master plan developed by the Gas 

 Research Institute calls for such research. Macrocystis does not 

 occur naturally along the east coast. Its absence is probably attrib- 

 utable to a lack of sufficient rocky substrate for attachment of 



