Biodomes

Biodomes

Tatum Robinson

Link to infographic 

As ecotourism gains popularity as a travel option, the demand grows for more sustainable travel options in varying locations. Biodomes have gained popularity in large cities as a way for urban citizens to experience and appreciate nature without traveling to the remote locations that are often ecotourism hubs. One of the most popular biodomes is in the densely populated city of Montreal, Quebec. There are also plans to open biodomes in Tucson, Reykjavik, and Dubai. Since biodomes are still relatively new, there are some controversy surrounding the ethics, sustainability, and accessibility of biodomes. Despite the controversy, biodomes are a modern way to create appreciation of nature in urban areas, and draw tourists in to ecotourism even in areas where ecotourism may not usually be possible.

Biodôme de Montréal (Claude Lafond)

Biodomes are a form of controlled and self sustaining ecosystems that replicate outdoor environments. Biodomes are similar to green houses, except greenhouses have exchanges with elements from the outside world like oxygen, water, and fertilizers, while biodomes are completely sealed off from the outside world and thrive entirely on resources already inside. Also, Biodomes allow animals to be raised inside, while greenhouses typically focus on plants (Brook). Biodomes can also be home to many different kinds of ecosystems. Biodôme de Montréal boasts 4 ecosystems; a tropical rain forest, Laurentian Maple Forest, Gulf of St. Lawrence, and an Antarctic island. Biodomes can serve as a way to conduct research in a controlled, yet natural environment, which allows observation of species that may not otherwise be possible in an outdoor ecosystem.

Tropical Rain Forest biome in Biodôme de Montréal

Despite the research benefits that come along with biodomes, there is controversy surrounding the ethics and fair treatment of animals housed in these facilities. This is a controversy that has been alive in the case of animal treatment at zoos, and the same questions are now being asked about biodomes. There has been specific criticism on housing larger animals in biodomes, such as penguins or primates. In a blog post written in 2008 by a blog focused on animal rights, some of the  exhibits at the Montreal Biodome are criticized. The penguin exhibit is around 50 meters, but King and Emperor penguins are known to travel hundreds of kilometers per year. (Mcarthur). This brings up the question of animal ethics regarding possible space in an indoor ecosystem, and how large animals can be in these types of environments and still thrive. In 2014, the Montreal Biodome conducted a study on salinity levels, and how they could be adjusted to preserve water quality and best benefit aquatic species. This study was done with smaller animals in mind, such as fish, lobster, and urchins. The research team described the priority of the study as follows: “Welfare concerns are now coupled with an increasing need for the sector to affirm its role in conservation, education, research and sustainability” (S. Picq). Due to the space restrictions present at both zoos and biodomes, it can be difficult to keep large animals in a way that adheres to animal ethics and rights. However, it also may be possible that the quality of research that comes from studying species in biodomes may outweigh the ethical concerns.

Penguins at Biodôme de Montréal

Biodomes first started to come to light in the 1980s. This is when the Eden Project, a biodome system in the United kingdom with the largest indoor rainforest in the world began to start construction, as well as the Montreal Biodome. Both opened their doors in the 90s. This is also the time period that Biosphere 2, a biodome that failed the first time around began construction, began construction. More biodomes were to follow, such the Green Planet in Dubai, and the Amazon Spheres. However, these did not come to fruition until very recently, around 2016/2017. Biodomes are still very modern, with studies still being done on the functionality as well as the ability for organisms to truly thrive inside. Since biodomes are such a new concept, there is not a large quantity of public information available that does not come directly from the websites of existing biodomes, which are meant to draw in customers and focus on the positive aspects. However, there is information on what works and what does not when it comes to construction of biodomes, after the failures of Biosphere 2.

Biosphere 2 2010

Biosphere 2 is a biosphere located in Oracle, Arizona. It is currently a functioning biodome focused on tourism and scientific studies, and has been owned by the University of Arizona since 2011. But before the university took it over, the system experienced a colossal failure that would serve as a cautionary tale for other biodomes across the globe. The point of Biosphere 2 was to prove that human colonization on other planets, such as Mars, was possible, as well as the possibility to use the structure as an apocalyptic shelter, if life on Earth or, “Biosphere 1”, became uninhabitable. In 1991, 8 “bionauts” entered biosphere 2 in attempt to stay within the structure for 2 years to prove the possibility of living in such a system (The University of Arizona). The endeavor made national headlines and was eagerly followed by citizens around the globe. However, almost as soon as the biodome was sealed and the crew members were inside, there was a drastic decline in oxygen within the dome. Almost 18 months into the project, oxygen had to be pumped inside the dome to keep both the crew and the species inside alive, which totally defeated the concept of living in a self sustaining system.

Bionauts 1991

The problem was found to be an ecological one, having to do with excess amounts of carbon dioxide from the excessively nutrient rich soil being consumed by the concrete walls rather than plants. Only 6 out of the 25 small vertebrates originally in the dome survived, and almost every insect species went extinct, causing major pollination problems within the plants “At the same time, some species absolutely thrived in this man-made environment. Crazy ants, cockroaches, and katydids ran rampant, while certain vines (like morning glories) threatened to choke out every other kind of plant” (Walker). The crew members were forced to put significant amounts of energy into simply maintaining their food crops. Biosphere II could not sustain a balanced ecosystem, and therefore failed to fulfill its goals.Overall, the conditions became unlivable and unsafe, and although the crew made it for 2 years, the mission left much to be desired. A similar mission was attempted a few years later, but also proved unsuccessful. After the facility was bounced around to different organizations, it was almost demolished, but ended up being purchased and refurbished by the University of Arizona in 2011.

Biosphere 2 2018

In understanding what makes biodomes such a unique tourism option, as well as assess the successes and failures of biodomes as an ecotourism option, it is crucial to evaluate biodomes by Martha Honey’s five part ecotourism definition. “...ecotourism is travel to pristine, and usually protected areas that strives to be low impact and (often) small scale. It helps educate the traveller, provides funds for conservation, directly benefits the economic development and political empowerment of local communities, and and fosters respect for different cultures and for human rights” (Honey 33). The first part of the definition is that tourists are travelling to places of ecological interest. This is interesting to evaluate, because while the inside of the domes provide sanctuaries of immense ecological interest, the area around the domes could be totally urban, like in Montreal. Overall, biodomes do technically meet this criteria because the tourism experience is an ecological one, but could also be argued otherwise as the cities that the biodomes are located in are not of ecological interest. It could be argued that since tourists are more likely than not finding lodging within the surrounding cities, that this part of the definition becomes obsolete due to the small amount of time that is really spent in the domes. The same goes for the next part of the definition, which is the travel to natural areas.

The Eden Project, United Kingdom

The third part of the definition is that tourists must conserve the environment. This is also an area of much controversy, and one that could be argued for either way. Tourists are not directly conserving the environment by just visiting biodomes, but many biodomes around the world focus on conservation and carry out research and action to contribute to conservation efforts, such as the Eden Project in England. “We’ve helped Natural England conserve some of Cornwall’s precious wildlife by propagating rare plants, such as junipers to re-establish on the Lizard, and 10,000 Devil’s-bit scabious to connect habitats for the endangered marsh fritillary butterfly” (Eden Project). Our horticultural skills and facilities have been essential for these projects.Therefor, by visiting a biodome, tourists are contributing to those efforts and initiatives by providing funding. Also, biodomes could reduce foot traffic to other outdoor natural areas, and may indirectly conserve those areas by reducing the number of visits to them. On the flip side, biodomes obviously require a physical infrastructure as well as amenities to keep tourists comfortable, such as restrooms, special lighting, and oftentimes food and beverages. These resources may dock biodomes points in the conservation aspect, but in this case, the pros seem to outweigh the cons.

The Eden Project, United Kingdom

The next part of the definition is that the tourism in question must benefit the local people. This is difficult to assess given the limited access of information in terms of where profits from biodomes go to, but in theory, a visitor to a biodome would positively impact the surrounding community not just because of revenue from the biodome itself, but because of the likelihood that tourists are not just visiting the biodome and leaving, but also staying, dining, and shopping within the community. A biodome also creates jobs for local people because of the construction, upkeep, research, and education positions needed to keep them running. Also, in a unique example of benefit to community, Amazon’s domes provide a work environment seated in nature, which is proven to promote more efficiency within employees. “Studies suggest that spaces that embrace biophilic design can inspire creativity and even improve brain function. With thousands of plants in a variety of natural spaces, The Spheres will provide an immersive and interesting experience to Amazonians and visitors” (Eiben).  However, biodomes require a lot of importing goods such as wildlife, flora and fauna, food, and other products, which limits local sourcing.

Amazon Spheres 

The fifth and final criteria for a tourist attraction to be considered ecotourism, and also, the area that biodomes excel at the most, is education for all involved. Biodomes provide environmental education in areas where it may otherwise be impossible to find a nature- immersive experience. Biodomes allow visitors to experience nature in a setting that is close to home, rather than traveling far distances to do so. Most biodomes focus on education in the form of tours, research, and programs offered for schools and other children’s groups. Biosphere 2 discusses the importance of education within the dome on their website:  “Its mission is to serve as a center for research, outreach, teaching and life-long learning about Earth, its living systems, and its place in the universe; to catalyze interdisciplinary thinking and understanding about Earth and its future; to be an adaptive tool for Earth education and outreach to industry, government, and the public; and to distill issues related to Earth systems planning and management for use by policymakers, students and the public” (The University of Arizona). Guides in the domes educate visitors on ecosystems, species, and climate within the domes, as well as often going into broader education on conservation. Biodomes allow visitors to experience and become educated on ecosystems that may otherwise be across the world for them, like the indoor rainforest in Dubai.

The Green Planet, Dubai 

Overall, it is important to analyze the five criteria for ecotourism in order to understand what makes biodomes such a unique aspect of tourism. In order for a trip to a biodome to be considered a true ecotourism experience, one must go beyond the dome and ensure that they are making a positive impact on the surrounding communities and environment by being conscious about lodging, dining, shopping, and travel methods. Biodomes are a great resource to bring nature to places where it may not otherwise be possible, and have the potential to spur ecotourism trips, but are not ecotourism trips in and of themselves. There are many points to consider in deciding if a trip to a biodome is truly an ecotourism experience, but Martha Honey’s five criteria can serve as a guide in deciding what kind of tourism experience constitutes ecotourism on an individualized basis.

The Green Planet, Dubai

Going forward, it is important for visitors of biodomes to keep Honey’s criteria in mind, as well as assess their environmental and social impact on the surrounding communities. Although there are many successes and failures of biodomes, as well as room to improve, they serve as a modern connection to nature in areas where this connection may be otherwise lost. Biodomes provide education to visitors, guides, and researchers as we come to understand the power of these resources and how to create a successful experience for all involved. Biodomes prove that there is a way to bring nature and environmental education to urban areas and places lacking in these experiences. Much like biodomes, ecotourism is also in its early stages. “In my assessment, although ecotourism is indeed rare, often misdefined, and frequently imperfect, it is still in its adolescence, not on its deathbed” (Honey 33). This quote speaks to not only ecotourism, but biodomes, and how there is much work to be done, but also, much time to do it.

The Green Planet, Dubai

Works Cited

Eiben, Ben. “Inspiring Innovation with Biophilia.” U.S. Amazon Blog, Amazon, 24 Mar. 2018, blog.aboutamazon.com/amazon-offices/inspiring-innovation-with-biophilia.

“FAUNA AND FLORA OF THE FIVE ECOSYSTEMS OF THE AMERICAS AT THE BIODOME.” Space for Life, Ville De Montréal , 2017, espacepourlavie.ca/en.

“Learn with Us, Educational Charity - .” Eden Project, Cornwall, Eden Project, 2017, www.edenproject.com/learn.

“Our Story.” The Green Planet, Dubai, UAE, The Green Planet, 2018, www.thegreenplanetdubai.com/en/schools.

Picq, S. “Coupling Salinity Reduction to Aquatic Animal Well-Being and Ecosystem Representativeness at the Biodôme De Montréal.” OPEN ACCESSJZAR Evidence-Based PracticeJournal of Zoo and Aquarium Research, vol. 3, no. 2, 2015, pp. 70–76.

Walker, Erin. “What Went Wrong?” Kenyon.edu, Kenyon College, biology.kenyon.edu/slonc/bio3/2000projects/carroll_d_walker_e/whatwentwrong.html.

“What Is Biosphere 2.” Biosphere 2 , The University If Arizona, 2017, biosphere2.org/visit/what-is-biosphere-2.