NGO pleads for $15 billion "ocean acidification" monitoring system

Via Eurekalert, from the NGO Partnership for Observation of the Global Oceans (POGO), a press release that says, “panic! please send money”. Here’s the punch line:

The Foundation says the average level of pH at the ocean surface has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1 units, “rendering the oceans more acidic than they have been for 20 million years,”

Note that any pH lower than 7.0 is considered “acidic”. Distilled (pure) water has a pH of 7.0. Right now the ocean with a pH of 8.1 is considered “basic”.

Even more interesting is this map below from WikiMedia showing the change in global ocean pH over the last two hundred years. The map information says:

Estimated change in annual mean sea surface pH between the pre-industrial period (1700s) and the present day (1990s). Δ pH here is in standard pH units. Calculated from fields of dissolved inorganic carbon and alkalinity from the Global Ocean Data Analysis Project climatology and temperature and salinity from the World Ocean Atlas (2005) climatology using Richard Zeebe’s csys package . It is plotted here using a Mollweide projection (using MATLAB and the M_Map package). Note that the GLODAP climatology is missing data in certain oceanic provinces including the Arctic Ocean, the Caribbean Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Malay Archipelago.

click to enlarge

So, with accuracy like this, and such small pH changes obviously measurable, and the pH not yet anywhere near acidic, why do we need a global $15 billion pH measurement system again? It seems all they need is a few places covered to infill some data.

Here’s the press release:

Speed installation of system to monitor vital signs of global ocean, scientists urge

‘It is past time to get serious about measuring what’s happening to the seas around us’

The ocean surface is 30 percent more acidic today than it was in 1800, much of that increase occurring in the last 50 years – a rising trend that could both harm coral reefs and profoundly impact tiny shelled plankton at the base of the ocean food web, scientists warn.

Despite the seriousness of such changes to the ocean, however, the world has yet to deploy a complete suite of available tools to monitor rising acidification and other ocean conditions that have a fundamental impact on life throughout the planet.

Marine life patterns, water temperature, sea level, and polar ice cover join acidity and other variables in a list of ocean characteristics that can and should be tracked continuously through the expanded deployment of existing technologies in a permanent, integrated global monitoring system, scientists say.

Caption: A mooring with a suite of ocean acidification and other environmental sensors at Heron Island on the Great Barrier Reef is the latest tool in an expanding global network of ocean measurements, informing scientists of changes in ocean chemistry.

Credit: Dr. Bronte Tilbrook, CSIRO, Australia

The Partnership for Observation of the Global Oceans (POGO), representing 38 major oceanographic institutions from 21 countries and leading a global consortium called Oceans United, will urge government officials and ministers meeting in Beijing Nov. 3-5 to help complete an integrated global ocean observation system by target date 2015.

It would be the marine component of a Global Earth Observation System of Systems under discussion in Beijing by some 71 member nations of the intergovernmental Group on Earth Observations.

The cost to create an adequate monitoring system has been estimated at $10 billion to $15 billion in assets, with $5 billion in annual operating costs.

Some 600 scientists with expertise in all facets of the oceans developed an authoritative vision of characteristics to monitor at a 2009 conference on ocean observations, (www.oceanobs09.net).

Furthermore, as documented in the forthcoming proceedings of the 2009 conference (to be published shortly by the European Space Agency), the value of such information to the world’s financial interests and to human security would dwarf the investment required.

“Although the US and European Union governments have recently signaled support, international cooperation is desperately needed to complete a global ocean observation system that could continuously collect, synthesize and interpret data critical to a wide variety of human needs,” says Dr. Kiyoshi Suyehiro, Chairman of POGO.

“Most ocean experts believe the future ocean will be saltier, hotter, more acidic, and less diverse,” states Jesse Ausubel, a founder of POGO and of the recently completed Census of Marine Life. “It is past time to get serious about measuring what’s happening to the seas around us.”

The risks posed by ocean acidification exemplify the many good reasons to act urgently.

Caption: Scientists explore on and beneath polar ice. Their aircraft remotely sense animals through properties of scattered light. Marine animals themselves carry tags that store records of their travels and dives and communicate with satellites. Fish carry tags that revealed their migration past acoustic listening lines. Sounds that echoed back to ships portray schools of fish assembling, swimming, and commuting up and down. Standardized frames and structures dropped near shores and on reefs provide information for comparing diversity and abundance. Manned and unmanned undersea vehicles plus divers photograph sea floors and cliffs. Deep submersibles sniff and videotape smoking seafloor vents. And nets and dredges catch specimens, shallow and deep, for closest study.

Credit: E. Paul Oberlander / Census of Marine Life

POGO-affiliated scientists at the UK-based Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science recently published a world atlas charting the distribution of the subset of plankton species that grow shells at some point in their life cycles. Not only are these shelled plankton fundamental to the ocean’s food web, they also play a major role in planetary climate regulation and oxygen production. Highly acidic sea water inhibits the growth of plankton shells.

The Foundation says the average level of pH at the ocean surface has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1 units, “rendering the oceans more acidic than they have been for 20 million years,” with expectations of continuing acidification due to high concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Because colder water retains more carbon dioxide, the acidity of surface waters may increase fastest at Earth’s high latitudes where the zooplankton known as pteropods are particularly abundant. Pteropods (see links to images below) are colorful, free-swimming pelagic sea snails and sea slugs on which many animals higher in the food chain depend. Scientists caution that the overall global marine impact of rising carbon dioxide is unclear because warming of the oceans associated with rising greenhouse gases in the air could in turn lead to lower retention of carbon dioxide at lower latitudes and to potential countervailing effects.

Says Foundation Director Dr. Peter Burkill: “Ocean acidification could have a devastating effect on calcifying organisms, and perhaps marine ecosystems as a whole, and we need global monitoring to provide timely information on trends and fluxes from the tropics to the poles. Threatened are tiny life forms that help the oceans absorb an estimated 50 gigatonnes of carbon from Earth’s atmosphere annually, about the same as all plants and trees on land. Humanity has a vital interest in authoritative information about ocean conditions and a global network of observations is urgently needed.”

Ocean conditions that require monitoring can be divided into three categories:

  • Chemical – including pollution, levels of oxygen, and rising acidity;
  • Physical / Geological – including sound, tide and sea levels, as well as sudden wave energy and bottom pressure changes that could provide precious minutes of warning before a tsunami; and
  • Biological – including shifts in marine species diversity, distribution, biomass and ecosystem function due to changing water conditions.

Benefits of the comprehensive ocean system envisioned include:

  • Improved short-term and seasonal forecasts to mitigate the harm caused by drought, or by severe storms, cyclones, hurricanes and monsoons, such as those that recently put one-fifth of Pakistan temporarily underwater and left 21 million people homeless or injured. International lenders estimate the damage to Pakistan’s infrastructure, agriculture and other sectors at $9.5 billion. Improved weather forecasting would also enhance the safety of the fishing and shipping industries, and offshore operations such as wind farms and oil drilling. Sea surface temperature is a key factor in the intensity and location of severe weather events;
  • Early identification of pollution-induced eutrophication that spawns algal blooms responsible for health problems in humans and marine species, and harm to aquaculture operations;
  • Timely alerts of changes in distributions of marine life that would allow identification of areas needing protective commercial re-zoning, and of immigration by invasive species;
Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
201 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Matt
November 1, 2010 5:29 am

Here’s a thought: Why not get a proper network of temperature stations for 30 billions first? I mean, people are really interested in those figures…

Dave Springer
November 1, 2010 5:29 am

“Most ocean experts believe the future ocean will be saltier”
Hold on a minute. If CAGW is true then the oceans will become progressively less saline as all the fresh water locked up as ice over Greenland and Antarctica warms and melts.
Who are these “experts” and WTF could they possibly be thinking?
I can’t trust these people at all anymore. They’ve become hysteric and irrational.

Neil Jones
November 1, 2010 5:30 am

The next excuse for “cutting Carbon”

kramer
November 1, 2010 5:33 am

Has anybody ever noticed how many NGOs there are that support leftist causes? There’s a lot of them and they play a fairly large role in getting their causes implemented.

Editor
November 1, 2010 5:37 am

BTW, I’ll have you know I just wasted several precious minutes looking up whether that elevated position for bleach (pH 13) was valid.
I found a few references to pH 12.6. The main thing I found was an equlibrium reation involving hypochlorite and hypochlorous acid, so it appears that’s what scrounges up the H+ and leaves excess -OH. NaOCl + H2O == HOCl + Na+ + OH
I also found that my one and only experiment of mixing some bleach and ammonia (done outside on the driveway and mainly downwind of me) may not have created chlorine, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleach . However, lowering pH shifts an equlibrium reaction in favor of releasing chlorine, see http://chemistry.about.com/b/2009/02/02/why-people-mix-bleach-and-vinegar.htm . A number of comments to that blog are from people who thought bleach and vinegar was safe and found out otherwise. So I guess I have to try that some breezy day. I think I’ll pass on pool chemicals though….

Robinson
November 1, 2010 5:37 am

I’m thinking of moving to another planet, because a lot of the people on this one are insane.

Pascvaks
November 1, 2010 5:39 am

Don’t worry. It won’t happen. The Chinese will never fund such a stupid idea. Not unless it cripples the West.

Wade
November 1, 2010 5:43 am

How can anyone say the ocean is more acidic today than it has been in 20 million years? Our complex measuring instruments aren’t 20 million years old. And then they are talking a 0.1 drop in pH as being the end of the world. Furthermore, how do you know that the average ocean pH has always been 8.2? How do you know that 8.2 is the pH the ocean should be at?

Fred2
November 1, 2010 5:47 am

Honestly, how expensive would be to ask to drop but a couple buoys, instrument some commercial ships, and ask some of the ocean racer (you know the loonies who race around the antarctic in single man sailboats every couple of years or so, and so forth) to have some logging gear aboard?
I’ll bet I could get some university engineering students to make the gear as a science/manufacturing project, for peanuts, the rest of themwould do it for free, the installation might need to be professional, but we’re talking thousands, not millions.
Add in a Phd’s salary & expenses for for a couple of decades and we’re still talking very low millions… on the outside.

November 1, 2010 5:55 am

Even if they were right, why should I care if a few corals die? There’s a lot better things I could do with my share of the $15 billion – such as spend it on my boat.

Louise
November 1, 2010 6:04 am

You guys aren’t quite so dumb as to think that ‘ocean acidification’ means that anyone thinks the oceans will turn to acid are you?
What term do you expect to be used? How about de-alkalination?
Increasing (or decreasing) acidification refers to change in pH. pH is a log scale so a change of 0.1 is actually a change of 30%.
Does anyone really think that increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will have no effect on the amount of CO2 absorbed by the ocean, and that this in turn will have no effect on life in the oceans?
If you truly believe this, you need your bumps feeling.

wws
November 1, 2010 6:05 am

In the case of this headline, “less is more.”
Cutting the lead line down to “NGO pleads for $15 billion” tells us all we need to know about this story – their motivation, the level of integrity behind their request, and our necessary response.

November 1, 2010 6:06 am

The pH of ocean water can shift a full point on one day, at least in coastal water, e.g. from 8.5 to 7.5 and then back the next day. A change of 0.1 appears fairly small compared to natural fluctuations.

3x2
November 1, 2010 6:09 am

Let me guess – 15,000,000,000 dollars and a decade later the data will show no appreciable change either way until someone “applies corrections”. This “corrected” data will then be merged with proxy and best guesses from the extensive pH sampling network in operation for the last two hundred years and… oh, look, another hockey stick. Colour me shocked, I just didn’t see that one coming.
Can’t wait for the paper (around 2030) that dumps the Argo data and “discovers” the missing heat using pH as a proxy. The pH version of “Robust Tropospheric Warming Revealed by Iteratively Homogenized Radiosonde Data”.
[stamp] Project Rejected.

Neil
November 1, 2010 6:11 am

Just curious . . .
– Ocean Acidification is directly related to CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere
– For much of earths history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png) the earth has experienced significantly greater levels of CO2 than at present?
– So how did marine life survive in the past?
Guess we need to give these “scientists” $15B to find out? Can I have a piece of this action . . .

chris y
November 1, 2010 6:14 am

Anthony, you say “So, with accuracy like this, and such small pH changes obviously measurable, and the pH not yet anywhere near acidic, why do we need a global $15 billion pH measurement system again?”
This is an excellent question. The fact that POGO is asking for $15B to purchase assets, followed by $5B per year in perpetuity, shows that an adequate monitoring system does not exist today. It is impossible to create a global map showing today’s absolute ocean pH (let alone a small change in global pH from 2 centuries ago) because the data does not exist with sufficient spatial resolution. This is tele-connections gone wild.
It also exposes the fact that the purported bicentennial global pH decrease of 0.1 units relies heavily on paleo proxies. Claiming accuracies of <<0.1 pH based on paleo proxies is, shall we say, wishful thinking.
I support the idea of funding an upgrade to ARGO to add pH and perhaps spectrally-resolved turbidity measurements. We may start to understand ocean pH after collecting 3 decades of data on ocean pH.
A price-tag of $15B plus $5B per year probably means the UN is somehow involved.

hell_is_like_newark
November 1, 2010 6:19 am

Several years ago, the NY times posted online a story about how some of these ocean acidification = death of coral tests were done (sorry.. I don’t have a link). The original experiments were done by dumping carbonic acid directly into the tank containing the coral. Result: Lower pH and coral death.
The experiments were then re-done by bubbling in CO2, instead of dumping acid into the tank. Very different results. Algae growth became very healthy. The algae in turn produced by products that helped the coral grow. Result: Reduced pH, but very healthy coral.

kzb
November 1, 2010 6:20 am

Bit of a correction to one statement is needed: pure distilled water in equilibrium with the atmosphere has an acid pH, can be as low as about pH5, precisely because of dissolved CO2. Surface waters are near neutral because the natural acidity of rain is neutralised when it reacts with the planet surface.
Another point: the measurement of pH. If you think we’ve seen some numberwang with temperature measurements, wait until you see this. Measurement of pH is far more fraught with pitfalls than measurement of mere temperature, especially in the environment. If they start telling us the pH is going down by 0.001 units per year (or something), I for one won’t believe a word of it.

Jimbo
November 1, 2010 6:22 am

NGO pleads for $15 billion “ocean acidification” monitoring system

Why?

“This paper’s results concerning average seawater salinity and acidity show that, on a global scale and over the time scales considered (hundreds of years), there would not be accentuated changes in either seawater salinity or acidity from the observed or hypothesized rises in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. ”
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006…/2006GL026305.shtml

Here are other contrary papers and reports:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;320/5874/336
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=7545&tid=282&cid=63809&ct=162
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080421160728.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100108101425.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11511624
http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/acid.htm

Alex the skeptic
November 1, 2010 6:24 am

The oceans contain 50 times the CO2 contained in the atmosphere. So, if atmospheric CO2 is, say, doubled and Henry’s law comes into action, then things start getting a bit complicated. What would be the effect of an insignificant increase in atmos CO2 on the gigantic scale of CO2 existing in the oceans and their acidification?
Can I have the 15 billion dollars? Upon receipt of the money I will produce a peer-reviewed report (peer reviewed by two of my best friends) to the person signing the 15-billion dollar cheque. This report will conclude anything this chap would wish to be concluded. Such as: ITS WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT……… CATASTROPHIC…… THE FISH WILL ALL DIE………………. JUST ANYTHING THAT WOULD MAKE HIM HAPPY

peakbear
November 1, 2010 6:28 am

Has anyone read the Argo Homepage?? I’m not quite sure why we spent so much on a state of the art monitoring system when they already knew the results of what it was going to monitor. I wish they actually made the data available in a handy format as I would be interested in plotting up some data. Surely this is the kind of thing that Google could easily plot live on Google Earth…
http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/
“Why do we need Argo?
We are increasingly concerned about global change and its regional impacts. Sea level is rising at an accelerating rate of 3 mm/year, Arctic sea ice cover is shrinking and high latitude areas are warming rapidly. Extreme weather events cause loss of life and enormous burdens on the insurance industry. Globally, 8 of the 10 warmest years since 1860, when instrumental records began, were in the past decade. “

Francisco
November 1, 2010 6:31 am

“Most ocean experts believe the future ocean will be saltier, hotter, more acidic, and less diverse,”
===============
“Hotter” and “more acidic” seem mutualy incompatible, if the source of acidification is supposed to be CO2 absorption. How is atmospheric CO2 going to simultaneously warm the oceans and get into them in order to make them more acidic?
“Saltier” also seems rather incompatible with the constantly announced future melting of land ice sheets. How is the expected addition of fresh water going to make the oceans saltier?
Having it both ways is never a problem with this kind of science.

latitude
November 1, 2010 6:31 am

I need to figure out how to make the field of science that I’m in a catastrophe.

Dave in Delaware
November 1, 2010 6:43 am

True story. At one time in my professional career, I had responsibility for manufacturing a specialty chemical with a product specification for pH to be within the range 8.0 to 8.3. The pH meters were routinely tested against known laboratory standards, and periodically calibrated by instrument technicians. The product was tested during manufacture, again in product storage, and finally a sample directly from the truck that carried the product to the customer was tested and retained.
One particular customer would occasionally return shipments as being out of specification on pH. We would retest our retained sample, and re-sample the returned product, with our results showing it to be within the required specification. After several such returns, we brought in an independent analytical chemist to help us resolve the discrepancy. He met with our people and with the customer, and reviewed testing protocols at both sites.
His conclusion was – we were using pH meters from company ONE, they were using pH meters from company OTHER. Both were respected instrument suppliers. When set up side by side, tests of product and standards showed a consistent offset of about 0.2 pH units between the two instruments. This was apparently due to small differences in the built-in reference electronics. And recall that, with an acceptable specification range of only 0.3 pH units, an offset of 0.2 was enough to appear out of specification sometimes, if measured on the other instrument. Our answer was to purchase pH meters from BOTH companies, and to ensure that our testing for that customer was always performed on the same model instrument that the customer used.
Note that the pH for the seawater at 8.1 is in this same nominal range. Determining pH can be tricky, even in a ‘pure’ sample. Seawater, with organics, dissolved gasses, and various buffering minerals, would make either a pH instrument reading or an alkalinity titration more problematic. When I see an ‘offset’ of -0.08, I am reminded of how hard it can be to get good accuracy and precision in pH measurements. ( /sarc – and the electronics in the pre-industrial period (1700s) were probably not up to standard /sarc off)

Louise
November 1, 2010 6:52 am

Wade – see http://www.oceanacidification.org.uk/pdf/OA_FAQs_PDF03_19_10.pdf
How do we know what ocean pH was in the past
even though the pH scale was not introduced
until 1909?
When ice sheets build up into glaciers, air
bubbles become trapped in the freezing ice.
Scientists have analyzed the CO2 concentration
of air in these bubbles and have developed a
record of the atmospheric CO2 concentration in
the recent past. Because large parts of the surface
ocean CO2 concentration remains roughly in
equilibrium with the atmospheric CO2
concentration, the ocean CO2 content can be
calculated from these air bubbles, and ocean pH
can also be calculated. In fact, the ice core record
shows that the atmospheric CO2 concentration
has never been higher than about 280 ppm
during the last 800,000 years, creating conditions
leading to an average preindustrial surface ocean
pH of ca. 8.2. — J. Bijma
How do we know what ocean pH was tens of
millions of years ago?
To estimate physical or chemical parameters
such as temperature or pH for periods before
instruments were available, scientists use socalled
proxy parameters or “proxies,” which are
measurable parameters that can be related to
desired but unobservable parameters. For
instance, marine calcifying organisms
incorporate many other elements into their hard
shells and skeletons besides the calcium, carbon,
and oxygen in calcium carbonate. When the hard
parts of these organisms that are preserved in
sediment are analyzed, the additional elements
provide information about environmental
conditions during the animal’s lifetime.
Historical ocean pH values and changes can be
studied using the concentration of the element
boron and the ratio of its stable isotopes (∂10B
and ∂ 11B) in marine carbonates. Additional
geochemical evidence and modeling provide
strong evidence that the average surface ocean
pH has not been much lower than about 8.2 for
millions of years. — J. Bijma