I never knew chilly, heavier water could do this:
The deep seas are a vast reservoir of carbon dioxide, dissolved under pressure, but the chilly and hence heavy water from the disappearing bergs – helped by the Fleuve and its fellows – sank to the bottom and pushed that ancient reserve of trapped carbon towards the surface. Gas bubbled out and entered the air, pushing onwards the wave of warming. Within a couple of centuries the glaciers began their precipitate retreat, the oceans rose by tens of metres, and we were in the modern world.
From this mythic article in the Telegraph, written by a professor of Genetics.
That water sure has to sink a long way, and as we all know, cold and warm water don’t mix. /sarc
|
Of course, some simple grade school science on water density can tell us a lot too. From Steve Spangler’s Science:
The Floating Egg
It’s so simple and amazing. A raw egg will float in very salty water but will sink in plain tap water. Why? Salt water is more dense than regular water. You’ll need to make a very saturated salt solution by dissolving roughly 4 tablespoons of salt in about 2 cups of water. Use pickling or Kosher salt to make a clear salt solution. Table salt may be used, but the solution will be somewhat cloudy due to the additives used to make the salt free-flowing.
Fill a glass half full with the salt water. Slowly add plain water by pouring it down the sides of the glass, being careful not to mix the two liquids. Gently drop the egg into the water and watch as it sinks through the plain water, only to abruptly stop when it hits the salt water. The egg floats on the top layer of the salt water.
=====================================
Also, for those that might argue that berg meltwater just above freezing is more dense because it is colder, there is a curious thing that happens at 4C, as outlined in this Iowa State course:
“In regions where precipitation is high, such as the Intertropical Convergence Zone in the central Pacific Ocean shown in the lecture on Atmospheric Structure and Circulation (figure 9), fresh-water rain will ride on top of the saline ocean water. Similarly melting ice in polar regions will be less dense than nearby ocean water of temperature 4 oC because of its lower temperature and lack of salt.”
==========================================
And Verity Jones adds this in comments:
“Arctic sea [melt] ice plays a critical and hitherto unknown role in the removal of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO2)”
“…in this study, the researchers have found that sea ice itself plays an important role in CO2 capture, effectively pumping this potent greenhouse gas out of the atmosphere. As sea ice forms, it rejects brine, rich in inorganic carbon compounds (derived from atmospheric CO2), into the underlying seawater, a process further stimulated by carbonate precipitation within the sea ice. The summer sea ice melt liberates water which is strongly depleted in CO2. The very low concentration of CO2 in this surface water then drives the extraordinary uptake of CO2 from the atmosphere.”
==========================================
h/t to Pablo ex pat who quips: “Geomythology is a new science to rival Climomythology”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
P.F. says:
July 13, 2010 at 11:21 am
Katabasis says: July 13, 2010 at 10:32 am “How is it possible that a species would show changes at the genetic level, within 50 years, in response to a tiny increase in temperature over that period?”
Look into the finches on the Galapagos.
___________________________________________
Look at the common gray squirrel.
When I was a kid (50 -60’s) the squirrel would dart back and forth avoiding the predator (car) and get squashed now city squirrels head straight across the road and do not zig zag. their poor country cousins still zigzag in my neck of the very rural woods.
John from CA says:
July 13, 2010 at 11:42 am
CO3- + 2 H3O+ -> H2CO3 + H2O
The H2CO3 is also use by shellcreatures to build ther shells b.t.w.
Certainly snail gene frequencies are affected by climate, whether it is changing or not. For the last few years Sweden has been plagued by “killer snails” a large, prolific and voracious brown species that was accidentally introduced from southern Europe.
Swedish gardeners have been hoping for a cold winter that would hopefully kill off these southerners.
Last winter was very cold, and this summer I have jndeed only seen a very few “killer snails”. However we are not rid of the pests, because the crafty little critters have interbred with the native black forest snail (a moderate pest) and the resulting dark brown hybrids are unfortunately just as voracious and prolific as their brown ancestors, and additionally can survive cold winters.
Evolution in action, and it doesn´t even take a professor of genetics to figure out what is going on.
“effectively pumping this potent greenhouse gas out of the atmosphere”
The description may show how sea ice and melt water work, but the characterization of CO2 is patently wrong.
Why is it that each scientist only understands part of the picture and they constantly neglect parts of their own model?
Do they not know where their knowledge ends and their assumptions, based on the opinions of others, begins? A good scientist should have a good foundational understanding of ALL parts of his/her model or construct.
Global warming is a religion; not a science.
Thanks for the examples folks – however, going with the “weather versus climate” distinction, whilst I can see how weather events (such as an unusally cold winter) may have a direct effect on a population I’m struggling with the idea that there will be significant changes in a species in a response to a gentle (say) 0.5 C increase in temperature over a matter of decades, especially as it is a fluctuation within perfectly natural norms. Can someone enlighten me further?
I think he means this sort of “heavy”
Neil’s heavy concept album – hole in my shoe
@ur momisugly Gail Combs
Isn’t that more of an adaptation then a change at the genetic level?
Squirrels learn their skills from the expieriences of their parents. If one of the parents has a working skill to avoid cars it will be given on to their youngsters.
Squirrels who know how to avoid cars will survive and reprocreate. Evolution.
Just an aside: If water did not have the characteristic of expanding at +4C while cooling down and keep that expanded, less dense characterisitc as it continues to freeze and solidify, life on this planet would be very much different, if it would exist in the first place. Imagine the oceans and other water bodies freezing bottom up instead of top down. They would freeze forever, I think.
This Jones lecturing us on water densities, CO2 release, global warming and all that, should really read a book or ten first. This Jones seems to know a lot about many things according to his musings on the Telegraph, and he thinks that he is smart. I think I’m smarter than him, but considering that I m stupid, I just shut up and let the writing for those scientists who do science not for money but for, um, science.
@ur momisugly Scott Basinger says:
July 13, 2010 at 11:05 am
I think that you mean g/cm3 instead of cm2..
Gail Combs says:
July 13, 2010 at 12:12 pm
“[…]
Look at the common gray squirrel.
When I was a kid (50 -60′s) the squirrel would dart back and forth avoiding the predator (car) and get squashed now city squirrels head straight across the road and do not zig zag. their poor country cousins still zigzag in my neck of the very rural woods.”
Mammals have pretty good brains – it would give the squirrels an advantage to store such reactions in their memory; the species could adapt much faster. So i would bet that this behaviour is learned. It would be an interesting experiment to find out. (No, you don’t really have to crush squirrels. You could observe their behaviour and stop shortly before you crush them.)
gcb says:
July 13, 2010 at 9:43 am
> As pointed out above, water is at its densest at 4 degrees Celsius – which is why lakes don’t freeze from the bottom up.
No! all that’s required is ice be less dense than 0°C water. Clear ice density is about 0.917 (grams/milliliter).
BTW, seawater density is a function of salinity and temperature, but typically is around 1.028 at freezing and has peak density at the freezing point, see http://sam.ucsd.edu/sio210/gifimages/dens.gif
Charles Higley
Who says you have to be a “good” scientist to spread alarmisms and get grant money?
The laws of science have been handed over to the lawyer/politician. These old laws are no longer in vigore, or have been altered to suit modern times and climate change. The law of gravity has been modified to make pigs fly, mercury now expands when it freezes and fresh water is now denser than salt water, while one can build a greenhouse in his garden without having to put a glass panel on top of it, just like our atmosphere.
One can lobby his local MP to change these science laws according to one’s need, from time to time.
Glowbull warming is a made up ‘brain washing’ not a science.
space scientist
Richard says:
July 13, 2010 at 12:16 pm
CO3- + 2 H3O+ -> H2CO3 + H2O
The H2CO3 is also use by shellcreatures to build ther shells b.t.w.
=====
Interesting, but I’m not following.
CO2 + H2O -> H2CO3
Where did we get the loose Hydronium and the Carbon trioxide?
LOL, please don’t say boat exhaust from the Northwest Passage.
@John from CA
July 13, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Excuse me, i must say i was looking a bit bewondered over what i typed too.
Sleeping 6 hours in three days doesn’t help the senses become aware of what is actually wrong then.
It should have read: CO2 + H2O -> H2CO3 -> 2 H3O+ + CO3-
Hence the “accification”( H3O+ ) and the shell building. ( Ca+ + CO3- -> CaCO3 )
With a bit of luck i’ll be on Bonaire for half a year starting this spring so the time difference will be a bit less. Perhaps that wil help to clear my mind. 😉
Thanks Richard,
Been there — grab a rem cycle and you’ll feel better.
As I was searching to find an answer I wondered if this is what you were thinking:
2H3O+ + CO3^2- –> CO2(g) + 3H2O
That’s a boatload of CO2, I thought you might be having some fun with it.
Thanks for clarifying. I guess an issue occurs with the absence of calcium ions? Is this the concern about thinning sea shells and ocean acidification?
@ur momisugly John.
I’m just trying to get things straight for myself. Hence i ask stupid looking questions some might find. In discussions i had here in Holland i did the same and found that it is best to begin at the basics. In lay-man’s term if you want.
First of all it keeps the discussion and the point clear, second it has some new insights to those who are not that familiar to the subject.
( Not to mension the people who read these thing in the middle of the night. 😉 )
Ow! I hurt myself laughing too hard.
“but the chilly and hence heavy water from the disappearing bergs”
“Gas bubbled out and entered the air, pushing onwards the wave of warming.”
Disappearing bergs because why, warming?
He himself suggests that there is warming occurring prior to the release of the CO2.
This brings us back to does CO2 levels follow warming?
Correction:
“This brings us back to does CO2 levels follow warming?”
This brings us back to does CO2 levels follow temperature change?
Phil. says:
July 13, 2010 at 10:41 am
“….A case of where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, ….
….The dense brine expelled when seawater freezes is dense and sinks to the bottom. Old sea ice and bergs are ~fresh and so will stay near the surface.”
Phil, considering that you did not answer my last question to you (about why you consider all of the increased atmospheric CO2 content to be man-made), I may have only a slight chance that you do better on this question:
Can you be a little more explicit why you figure, “Old sea ice and bergs are ~fresh and so will stay near the surface”?
I always thought that ice floats for no other reason than that H2O in its solid state has nine-tenth the density of its equivalent mass of H2O in its liquid state. For that reason it can be argued that ice will not merely stay near the surface of the water it floats in but it will always stay right at the top of it, with one tenth of its volume projecting above the water. Observations bear that out, while I don’t believe that anyone has ever seen ice float “near the surface” of the body of water containing it.
2nd question: Is it only dense brine that sinks to the bottom of the water into which it is expelled, or is that true of all brine, regardless of its density?
3rd question: Is expelled brine of specific density hydrophobic, or does it like to mix with seawater (or freshwater for that matter) of lower density?
Already a lot of comments but I gotta say I did the floating egg experiment with my son as a third grade science fair project. I’m not an oceanographer or physicist (and definitely not a climatologist) but density differences between pure water and brine solutions isn’t rocket science. A dumb ole geologist like me (and a third grader) figured it out.
No Worries Richard,
I’m also trying to understand that which they make difficult with hidden data and their failure to present the Science in an insightful way.
Best Regards,
John from CA