New science findings

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
In the last hundred years, rising carbon dioxide from human activities has lowered ocean pH by 0.1 unit, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that pH will fall another 0.2 units by 2100, raising the possibility that we may soon see the same sort of ocean changes as those observed during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.


"What we're doing today really stands out in the geologic record," says lead author Bärbel Hönisch, a paleoceanographer at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory."


We know that life during past ocean acidification events was not wiped out - new species evolved to replace those that died off. But if industrial carbon emissions continue at the current pace, we may lose organisms we care about - coral reefs, oysters, salmon."


A “bromine explosion” in the Arctic back in 2008 has yielded a disturbing scientific analysis: the replacement of perennial sea-ice with younger seasonal ice could lead to mercury pollution in the Arctic.


In a new NASA-led study, American, Canadian, German and UK researchers believe they have identified the mechanism by which the melting ice cap alters the atmospheric concentration of bromine – and what happens to the bromine afterwards.


The bromine processes – described as bromine explosions by team leader Son Nghiem from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory – take place because of the interaction between sea ice salt and sunlight in the Arctic’s low temperatures.


In the “bromine explosion”, the bromine released by the salty ice creates molecules of bromine monoxide in the atmosphere, which then reacts with gaseous mercury in the atmosphere. The resulting pollutant falls to Earth’s surface.March 2008, by no coincidence, was also the year in which perennial sea-ice reached its lowest recorded level (also discussed in this story). Its loss is partly replaced by seasonal ice, but the younger ice yields more bromine, for two reasons: it hasn’t undergone the leaching process that removes salt from sea ice; and it contains more of the high-salt crystals called “frost flowers”, which provide more salt to fuel bromine releases.


If sea-ice continues to be dominated by younger, saltier ice, Nghiem said, extreme Arctic cold spells will lead to more bromine explosions – and more mercury pollution.



http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainabili...03/02/bromine_explosions_and_surface_mercury/
 
The most recent data is from 06, that is six years ago. Additionaly, how could something measured in Monterey compare with something at the arctic?
 
The most recent data is from 06, that is six years ago. Additionaly, how could something measured in Monterey compare with something at the arctic?


The most recent reading on that chart was in Dec 2008, just over 3 years ago. The atmosphere composition is the same over Monterey as in the Arctic

monterey_bay_ph.png
 
The most recent data is from 06, that is six years ago. Additionaly, how could something measured in Monterey compare with something at the arctic?
Well the Oceans are a very big place. 3/4 of our planets surface area. I'd need to see a larger sample population than Monterey Bay or some point in the Arctic. That is why I requested peer reviewed data. Same with the OP. I'd like to see a peer reviewed citation.
 
What people don't seem to realise is that the ocean's pH is actually slightly alkaline so if CO2 is being absorbed then that makes them more neutral or in other words less corrosive, not more.

The problem with using the term “acidify” for what rainwater does to the ocean is that people misunderstand what is happening. Sure, a hard-core scientist hearing “acidify” might think “decreasing pH”. But most people think “Ooooh, acid, bad, burns the skin.” It leads people to say things like the following gem that I came across yesterday:
Rapid increases in CO2 (such as today) overload the system, causing surface waters to become corrosive.
In reality, it’s quite the opposite. The increase in CO2 is making the ocean, not more corrosive, but more neutral. Since both alkalinity and acidity corrode things, the truth is that rainwater (or more CO2) will make the ocean slightly less corrosive, by marginally neutralizing its slight alkalinity. That is the problem with the term “acidify”, and it is why I use and insist on the more accurate term “neutralize”. Using “acidify”, is both alarmist and incorrect. The ocean is not getting acidified by additional CO2. It is getting neutralized by additional CO2.





http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/27/the-ocean-is-not-getting-acidified/
 
Last edited:
What people don't seem to realise is that the ocean's pH is actually slightly alkaline so if CO2 is being absorbed then that makes them more neutral or in other words less corrosive, not more.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/27/the-ocean-is-not-getting-acidified/
Corrosivity is not neccesarily the issue here Tom. Many aquatic forms have narrow homeostatic tolerences for shifts in pH. As stated in the article such shifts in pH would not necessarily kill of life in the oceans but it could mean an end to forms of life that cannot adapt to those shifts in pH that we might like to keep around. Coral for example.
 
why must you continually interrupt good old fashioned fear mongering with facts?
Conversely, for you science deniers, why interrupt good old fashioned political hackery with objective science.

Show me the peer reviewed data. If it does provide compelling evidence of macroscopic changes in oceanic pH then that would be legitimage cause for concern. My concern here would not be the climactic implications but rather the biological ones.
 
Corrosivity is not neccesarily the issue here Tom. Many aquatic forms have narrow homeostatic tolerences for shifts in pH. As stated in the article such shifts in pH would not necessarily kill of life in the oceans but it could mean an end to forms of life that cannot adapt to those shifts in pH that we might like to keep around. Coral for example.

Yes, I am perfectly aware of the effect of pH on biogenic calcification especially corals.
 
Last edited:
lol....tom completely pwned legion and mopp

notice how mott was quick to accept the OP, but when tom posted another study, he all of a sudden wants "peer" review....:rolleyes:
 
lol....tom completely pwned legion and mopp

notice how mott was quick to accept the OP, but when tom posted another study, he all of a sudden wants "peer" review....:rolleyes:

Shouldn't you be starting a thread about what would happen if the peer review was by a black guy about white guys?
 
Back
Top