Ocean acidification: the "evil twin of global warming"

From the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies James Cook University

“Evil twin” threatens world’s oceans, scientists warn

http://i3.fc-img.com/CTV02/Comcast_CIM_Prod_Fancast_Image/84/402/1216667608592_5432_0002_mif_290_210.jpg
'Twins" 1988 - Schwarzenegger and DaVito

The rise in human emissions of carbon dioxide is driving fundamental and dangerous changes in the chemistry and ecosystems of the world’s oceans, international marine scientists warned today.

“Ocean conditions are already more extreme than those experienced by marine organisms and ecosystems for millions of years,” the researchers say in the latest issue of the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution (TREE).

“This emphasises the urgent need to adopt policies that drastically reduce CO2 emissions.”

Ocean acidification, which the researchers call the ‘evil twin of global warming’, is caused when the CO2 emitted by human activity, mainly burning fossil fuels, dissolves into the oceans. It is happening independently of, but in combination with, global warming.

“Evidence gathered by scientists around the world over the last few years suggests that ocean acidification could represent an equal – or perhaps even greater threat – to the biology of our planet than global warming,” co-author Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and The University of Queensland says.

More than 30% of the CO2 released from burning fossil fuels, cement production, deforestation and other human activities goes straight into the oceans, turning them gradually more acidic.

“The resulting acidification will impact many forms of sea life, especially organisms whose shells or skeletons are made from calcium carbonate, like corals and shellfish. It may interfere with the reproduction of plankton species which are a vital part of the food web on which fish and all other sea life depend,” he adds.

The scientists say there is now persuasive evidence that mass extinctions in past Earth history, like the “Great Dying” of 251 million years ago and another wipeout 55 million years ago, were accompanied by ocean acidification, which may have delivered the deathblow to many species that were unable to cope with it.

“These past periods can serve as great lessons of what we can expect in the future, if we continue to push the acidity the ocean even further” said lead author, Dr. Carles Pelejero, from ICREA and the Marine Science Institute of CSIC in Barcelona, Spain.

“Given the impacts we see in the fossil record, there is no question about the need to immediately reduce the rate at which we are emitting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” he said further.

“Today, the surface waters of the oceans have already acidified by an average of 0.1 pH units from pre-industrial levels, and we are seeing signs of its impact even in the deep oceans”, said co-author Dr. Eva Calvo, from the Marine Science Institute of CSIC in Barcelona, Spain.

“Future acidification depends on how much CO2 humans emit from here on – but by the year 2100 various projections indicate that the oceans will have acidified by a further 0.3 to 0.4 pH units, which is more than many organisms like corals can stand”, Prof. Hoegh-Guldberg says.

“This will create conditions not seen on Earth for at least 40 million years”.

“These changes are taking place at rates as much as 100 times faster than they ever have over the last tens of millions of years” Prof. Hoegh-Guldberg says.

Under such circumstances “Conditions are likely to become very hostile for calcifying species in the north Atlantic and Pacific over the next decade and in the Southern Ocean over the next few decades,” the researchers warn.

Besides directly impacting on the fishing industry and its contribution to the human food supply at a time when global food demand is doubling, a major die-off in the oceans would affect birds and many land species and change the biology of Earth as a whole profoundly, Prof. Hoegh-Guldberg adds.

Palaeo-perspectives on ocean acidification by Carles Pelejero, Eva Calvo and Ove Hoegh-Guldberg is published in the latest issue of the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution (TREE), number 1232.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
209 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Enneagram
March 30, 2010 10:09 am

Peter Miller (09:29:32) :
How can a very weak acid like carbonic acid (H2CO3) react with calcium carbonate (CaCO3), the stuff which corals etc. are mostly made off? It is just not chemically possible
IT DOES Baby

savethesharks
March 30, 2010 10:09 am

From the article: “Given the impacts we see in the fossil record, there is no question about the need to immediately reduce the rate at which we are emitting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” he said further.
Circular reasoning at its best! [Or worst!].
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

Enneagram
March 30, 2010 10:11 am

But it does it with Calcium oxide.

Xavier
March 30, 2010 10:11 am

“Evidence gathered by scientists around the world over the last few years suggests that ocean acidification could represent an equal – or perhaps even greater threat – to the biology of our planet than global warming,” co-author Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and The University of Queensland says.
Whoo hoo! 3 qualifiers and 2 get-out-of-jail free deflections in one sentence. Oh, and the second dash is in the wrong place, but the writer is probably to blame – he was distracted by trying to fit another ‘impact’ into the article. Words – they’re all you have. Learn to grammar better.

wsbriggs
March 30, 2010 10:15 am

When your profession is threatened by the existence of informed lay persons, then those who feed at the public trough try to find another source for slops. Too many people know a significant amount about the atmosphere, so maybe fewer know anything about the ocean. Certainly, reading the post makes me think they’ve missed another target – too many people responded quickly with factual information. Oh well, they’ll keep trying.

Jim
March 30, 2010 10:15 am

If one removes all sentences containing the word ‘may,’ there isn’t much left.

A C Osborn
March 30, 2010 10:17 am

I think that they realise the CO2 Global Warming is just about dead so they need something else to justify their Carbon Trading.

savethesharks
March 30, 2010 10:17 am

In a tour de force survey of the scientific literature to expose the scam that is the short “documentary “Acid Test” and the myth of “catastrophic ocean acidification”, Dr. Craig Idso’s not-so-easy read is here:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/acid_test.html
And then, much shorter read [two pages] by Dr. Isdo about the REAL causes of the demise of reefs around the world.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/commentaries_essays/coral_reefs.html
I think he made this one only two pages as if to say to the world and to the scientific community: DUH!
The new Evil Twin of CAGW, let’s call it CAOA [Catastrophic Anthropogenic Ocean Acidification] with their shared demonization of CO2, throw other legitimate environmental concerns, under the rickety, tye-dyed fume-belching VW bus.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

March 30, 2010 10:18 am

Dollars to doughnuts we’ll be seeing headlines like “Ocean acidification is dissolving Arctic ice” in the near future…

March 30, 2010 10:18 am

You guys heard of the algal-biofuel peddling, ocean alkalanizer Brian Baird?
Funny that freshwater algae will ‘fix’ carbon, produce bio-jet fuels, qualify for carbon credits and save the globe from warming?

Henry chance
March 30, 2010 10:19 am

“These changes are taking place at rates as much as 100 times faster than they ever have over the last tens of millions of years” Prof. Hoegh-Guldberg says.
100 times faster. Exaggeration is a form of dishonesty. If someone meets this gent, ask him how he measured that before he made his claim.

Cassandra King
March 30, 2010 10:23 am

If I may translate.
We marine scientists have noted just how much grant money can be attracted by promoting the AGW theory and we have also noted that the climate science community has become somewhat tainted with negative publicity and this has resulted in the AGW funding agencies looking around for another line attack promoting the AGW theory.
As marine scientists we are perfectly placed to take over some of the funding that our colleagues have been hogging for so long, our claims while utterly bogus in nature are happily so diverse and sound so superficially plausible that the AGW scare could be continued for long enough to enact the the true narrative.
Yours in anticipation of generous funding
The marine science community.
Does that sound like a reasonable translation?

Duncan
March 30, 2010 10:25 am

Every study done in recent years shows no effect or a slight benefit for increased oceanic CO2, until it gets to levels far higher than we could push it.
“Lie” is unkind, but maybe not too strong a word for this.

DirkH
March 30, 2010 10:26 am

“Frank Lansner (10:08:46) :
“CORAL-GATE”:
read:
http://hidethedecline.eu/pages/posts/corals-and-the-great-barrier-reef-43.php
K.R. Frank Lansner”
MODS! This deserves frontpage exposure!

March 30, 2010 10:28 am

It looks like business as usual over at the ARC Centre of Excellence in Coral Reef Studies. Here is what I wrote about one of their press releases in August.
http://www.anupchurchchrestomathy.com/2009/08/strong-meaningless-message.html
I wonder if this paper actually has some original research in it this time?

Alan
March 30, 2010 10:29 am

Marine biologists… the weirdest branch of Earth scientists. If you studied physical geography for a few years in university, you know what I’m talking about.

March 30, 2010 10:30 am

They are bound and determined to somehow keep some farce or the other going to justify grants and taxes. CO2, Methane, Ocean Acidification, Asteroids, Hemmoroids, Men from Mars, they’ll take anything they can and try and use it. They’re unconscionable.

March 30, 2010 10:31 am

Larus (09:58:15) :
The ignorance of some of the commenters here is staggering. Increased acidification is a problem not to fish but to the tiny organisms that build calcium-based shells (and seqester CO2 in the process as the carbon in their shells sinks to the bottom when they die).
Those tiny organisms that build their shells (and sequester CO2 in the process) *like* the additional “acid” — it allows them to take advantage of the additional calcium to build thicker shells.
As the acidification goes on, the ocean may lose some of its potential as a carbon sink. This has happened befoe in the distant past.
Did that happen *before* or *after* life got its start?

RHS
March 30, 2010 10:32 am

I wonder how the oceans and PH levels were affected by the glacial dam burst of Lake Agassiz about 10,000 years ago? The short version (best as I’ve read) was a lot of eastern Canada was under a fresh water lake behind a Glacial dam. When it burst, it took three days to empty and some guesstimates show upto a three meter sealevel rise from this event alone. I wonder what that did to the PH level??? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Agassiz
And we know sea life continued on….

Liam
March 30, 2010 10:40 am

It would be uncharitable to suggest that, with the AGW hypothesis crumbling, a fall back is needed to lobby for carbon taxes and research funding.

savethesharks
March 30, 2010 10:45 am

Charles Higley (09:59:14) :
Most eloquently said! Obviously from a specialist in the field. Thank you for that.
Also, let’s not let “them” forget what “they” just released last December!
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=7545&tid=282&cid=63809&ct=162
Even then, though, the circular reasoning fallacy raises its ugly head again by this now all-too-common end-quote:
“The bottom line is that we really need to bring down CO2 levels in the atmosphere.”
Huh??
This is how “they” HAVE to end their news releases and articles because
they :
i) want to continue their funding lifeline and
ii) when confronted with study after study which shows evidence to the contrary, summoning the CO2 Demon at the end is their only way out.
We have hit a new low….
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

Steve Goddard
March 30, 2010 10:47 am

Corals and other shellfish evolved during the Cambrian era, when atmospheric CO2 levels were 10-20X current values.

James F. Evans
March 30, 2010 10:47 am

Thomas J. Arnold. (09:15:47) wrote: “Yes but;
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V13/N9/EDIT.php
A good article with references worth looking up.”
Thanks, I read the paper, takes about five to seven minutes.
Yes, the linked paper puts so-called ocean “acidification” in proper perspective.
And, what perspective is that?
The paper linked above does an excellent job of showing this is another warmist scaremongering exercise, and, yes, as others have pointed out, a financial grant begging exercise.
I recommend reading the linked paper:
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V13/N9/EDIT.php

March 30, 2010 10:49 am

Schwarzeneggar nope
Schwarzenegger yes

R Shearer
March 30, 2010 10:49 am

This whole argument on “acidification” is based on a theoretical pH of what the ocean’s pH was like 200+ years ago and model estimates of what the ocean’s pH will be in 100 years.
Meanwhile, natural pH variation is +/- 1 pH unit over very short periods of time and measurement precision is at best +/- 0.1 pH unit in this type of matrix and accuracy is +/- 0.2 pH unit.
There has been no observed change in pH and to claim there has is pure fiction. Further, as noted above, the argument is not consistent with other AGW claims and man’s CO2 contribution is so minor compared to natural CO2, as far as this question is concerned, as to be negligible.
What are we to do, cap all of those natural oceanic vents that in some cases pump out 100% liquid CO2?
Lubchenco has to be one of the most dishonest (or ignorant) politicized scientists. The term “acidification” was clearly chosen to invoke an emotional response.