Oyster crisis: Yale 360 eco-activist author Elizabeth Grossman wrong again about ocean acidification

I remember during my tour of Australia last year, when our talk was rudely interrupted by the king of reef madness, Ove Hugh-Guldberg, my co-presenter David Archibald quipped from the dais, paraphrasing Samuel Johnson, that “ocean acidification is the last refuge of the global warming scoundrel.

Today’s scare story about oysters disappearing due to atmospheric induced ocean acidification is a perfect example of this.

We see this terrifying headline from Yale 360 environmental forum today:

Massive Oyster Die-offs Show Ocean Acidification Has Arrived

The claim is right out of the “ocean acidification is going to kill the entire food chain” playbook, bolding mine:

But this rural coastal spot and the shellfish it has nurtured for centuries are a bellwether of one of the most palpable changes being caused by global carbon dioxide emissions — ocean acidification.

It was here, from 2006 to 2008, that oyster larvae began dying dramatically, with hatchery owners Mark Wiegardt and his wife, Sue Cudd, experiencing larvae losses of 70 to 80 percent. “Historically we’ve had larvae mortalities,” says Wiegardt, but those deaths were usually related to bacteria. After spending thousands of dollars to disinfect and filter out pathogens, the hatchery’s oyster larvae were still dying.

Finally, the couple enlisted the help of Burke Hales, a biogeochemist and ocean ecologist at Oregon State University. He soon homed in on the carbon chemistry of the water. “My wife sent a few samples in and Hales said someone had screwed up the samples because the [dissolved CO2 gas] level was so ridiculously high,” says Wiegardt, a fourth-generation oyster farmer. But the measurements were accurate. What the Whiskey Creek hatchery was experiencing was acidic seawater, caused by the ocean absorbing excessive amounts of CO2 from the air.

The only thing missing is equating oysters to canaries in coal mines. A typical staple of such types of stories. Bellwether was used instead, but you get the idea.

When you have a look at who’s writing this, you see a pattern:

Elizabeth Grossman is the author of Chasing Molecules: Poisonous Products, Human Health, and the Promise of Green Chemistry, High Tech Trash: Digital Devices, Hidden Toxics, and Human Health, and other books. Her work has appeared in Scientific American, Salon, The Washington Post, The Nation, Mother Jones, Grist, and other publications.

In nutshell, with a publication record like that, I wouldn’t trust this woman with any sort of factual writing anymore than I’d trust activist Bill McKibben. So, I went looking to see if her claims held up. It didn’t take long to discover that her claim of “…acidic seawater, caused by the ocean absorbing excessive amounts of CO2 from the air…” was totally bogus.

First I decided to have a look at the Whiskey Creek oyster hatchery itself. It seems it has been touted as a success story:

Note that they are using tanks, with seawater drawn in from the estuary. Grossman bemoans the fact that the water has to be treated for use in the aquaculture tanks. Apparently, atmospheric induced ocean acidification is happening so fast that they just can’t keep up:

The situation at the hatcheries has improved substantially in the past couple of years, thanks largely to an ongoing, intensive scientific monitoring effort and to measures to control the pH of seawater in the tanks where oyster larvae are raised. But ocean acidification continues apace, which makes understanding what’s been happening to Whiskey Creek oysters vital to grasping what will eventually threaten every ocean organism that builds a shell or coral branch.

Yes, it’s relentless and all that. The world’s oceans depend on what’s happening in some aquaculture tanks in Oregon. /sarc

Trying to get past the wailing and gnashing of teeth over some oyster larvae that didn’t make it out of the tanks, we find the source of the issue isn’t new, and was highlighted in a 2009 report at the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association:

http://www.pcsga.org/pub/science/Emergency_Seed_Proposal_Indesign-1.pdf

Emergency Plan to Save Oyster Production on the West Coast

January, 2009

A Collaborative Proposal Prepared by the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association, Whiskey Creek Hatchery, Taylor Hatchery, Pacific Shellfish Institute, Willapa-Grays Harbor Oyster Growers Association, Lummi Indian Tribe Hatchery, U.S. Department of Commerce (NOAA Aquaculture Program), Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NOAA), U.S. Department of Agriculture (ARS and CSREES), Oregon State University, AquaTechnics, Inc., and the Nature Conservancy

The Problem:

For the past three years, water quality conditions in the Pacific Ocean off the Oregon and Washington coasts; and adjacent highly productive estuaries including Puget Sound, Willapa Bay, and Netarts Bay, have severely impacted hatchery production of seed oysters upon which both large and small farms depend. Simultaneously, wild sets of oyster seed that make up the back-bone of the oyster industry in Willapa Bay, the single largest oyster producing region on the West Coast, have been virtually non-existent for the past four years.

These conditions have led to dire economic consequences for two of the four hatchery operators that produce oyster seed for farmers, including the largest producer of oyster larvae on the West Coast, Whiskey Creek Hatchery, which accounts for approximately 75% of all larvae utilized by farmers. The environmental conditions contributing to the lack of wild seed set presents an even more challenging problem.

So yes, there’s a real problem, but the issue that’s bogus is the claimed cause: “…acidic seawater, caused by the ocean absorbing excessive amounts of CO2 from the air…”

Um, no. From the same 2009 report, bolding mine:

Identified water quality/hatchery problems:

Shellfish hatcheries have historically used coarsely filtered but otherwise untreated seawater for larval culture with few problems, and larval shellfish have thrived in water in the Pacific Ocean and coastal estuaries. Upwelling of deep, cold, nutrient-rich water from the continental shelf off the coast of Oregon and Washington is typical during summer months in this region and drives high primary productivity.

Since 2003, however, higher than normal upwelling increased the extent and intensity of intrusions of deep acidic, hypoxic water off the Oregon and Washington coasts, and contributed to the formation of persistent dead zones. These events have resulted in fundamental changes in the character of our coastal bays, which contribute to high larval mortality throughout the entire year.

These fundamental changes in seawater quality influence a host of complex chemical interactions, many of which are not fully understood. However, recent research has identified at least four potential stressors that adversely affect shellfish larvae:

• Larval and juvenile shellfish are highly sensitive to acidic (low pH) seawater because their shells are formed from calcium carbonate, and dissolves when pH is low.

Because this hypoxic and relatively acidic up-welled water is coming from deep basins and is cold (8 – 10 oC), it is saturated with dissolved gases such as carbon dioxide and nitrogen while at the same time being low in oxygen as a result of biological decomposition in the benthic zone. When hatcheries heat this gas-saturated seawater to 25 – 28 oC in order to meet the temperature requirements of young shellfish, the seawater becomes super-saturated. Preliminary experiments indicate that oyster larvae are very sensitive to gas super-saturation under these conditions.

• A third problem for shellfish hatcheries is the recent increase in the prevalence of a pathogenic bacterium (Vibrio tubiashii or Vt) that seems to out-compete other, more benign species in this distorted environment. Vt infections are lethal to shellfish larvae and juveniles. High levels of mortality in shellfish hatcheries and in the wild have been associated with high levels of Vt in 2006, 2007, and intermittently in previous years, such as in 1998 when environmental conditions favored disease outbreaks.

• There is potential for further stress to oyster seed given the difference between water conditions in the hatcheries where larvae are produced, and quality of water found in the remote settings where larvae set onto cultch (“mother shell”) are planted in the natural environment for grow-out.

So, in summary the causes are:

1. Deep water upwelling, bringing colder more CO2 saturated water to the surface is the root cause. Colder water holds more CO2, it is basic chemistry.

That deep benthic ocean water doesn’t interact with the atmosphere, but it is brought to the surface by changes in ocean current patterns such as ENSO and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, which have nothing to do with the small (20 Parts Per Million) global increase in atmospheric CO2 in the last decade.

2. Heating of the water to make it suitable for tank aquaculture. They get the soda pop bottle on a warm day effect. The oyster larvae don’t like that. No surprise there.

3. A periodic pathogenic bacterium Vibrio tubiashii which seems to follow ocean patterns. What happened in 1998? Oh yeah, the biggest El Niño in modern times.

4. Stress with relocation into a different water environment. Anybody who has ever bought tropical fish, especially salt water fish, knows this problem.

It seems “…acidic seawater, caused by the ocean absorbing excessive amounts of CO2 from the air…” isn’t in this report.

Let’s have a look at the current ocean surface temperatures around Oregon:

It seems Oregon is smack dab in the middle of a double whammy right now of La Niña and cold phase of the PDO. Recall that in 2008, just before the “Emergency report” was prepared by the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association there was also a deep La Niña in the Pacific. What did it look like then? Have a look:

Yep, colder. No surprise there.

For completeness I should note there’s a mention of “global warming induced ocean acidification” in the report, but it is ancillary and not listed as a direct cause of the current oyster aquaculture crisis in Oregon.

These adverse environmental conditions – low pH, gas super-saturation, high Vt infections, and the associated complex effects on seawater chemistry – constitute a “perfect storm” for Pacific Northwest shellfish hatcheries and growers that depend on natural set oyster seed, bringing the industry to the brink of collapse. It is not understood how these, and likely other, stressors interact, but it is clear that these factors are somehow combining to decimate shellfish larvae and juveniles. To further illustrate the seriousness of the situation, oceanographers such as Dr. Richard Feely, world-renowned NOAA expert on ocean acidification and global warming, predicts that oceanic conditions will not improve in the near term, potentially rendering shellfish hatcheries inoperable. This, combined with lack of wild seed set, will lead to the collapse of the oyster industry unless mitigation measures are developed and implemented immediately.

Feely’s opinion in this WWF document on ocean acidification seems to be a centered around the weasel word “could”, and concerns the future, rather than the present:

“…ocean acidification could affect some of the most fundamental biological and chemical processes of the sea in coming decades.”

So apparently, the Yale 360 headline claim of Massive Oyster Die-offs Show Ocean Acidification Has Arrived doesn’t agree with the position of the NOAA scientist on the issue.

I wonder though, why a World Wildlife Fund document exists on a NOAA server:

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/thecircle0410.pdf

Given all the tarnish that WWF has put on IPCC in scandal after scandal, I wonder if the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (where Feely works) has also been similarly compromised by deep pocket eco-activism.

And of course the whole Yale 360 article by Elizabeth Grossman is bogus, not only for the fact that the changes in CO2 in the water at Whiskey Creek are driven by changes in ENSO, PDO, and cold water upwelling, but also because what happens in treated aquaculture tanks is not the ocean.

Green might be a good color, but it is also the color of bogus science claims affected by activism these days.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
116 Comments
SSam
November 22, 2011 1:04 am

Not Oregon… I know. But I am curious.
How much SO2 and CO2 does it take to make a sizable plume of sea water to have a pH of 5.45?
I would offer your a link, but IGN likes to keep info about their ongoing Canary Islands subsea eruption to themselves. Can’t have too many prying eyes ya know.

EternalOptimist
November 22, 2011 1:37 am

I think the Grossman claims are all accurate, but then editor took all her good work and mangled it up with a catchy headline
thats the latest excuse isn’t it ?

John Marshall
November 22, 2011 1:54 am

Sea water pH levels are monitored, though not everywhere, and the lowest found in surface waters is 7.7pH which is NOT acidic but alkaline. (the CO2 science web site has a complete summary). when atmospheric CO2 levels were many thousands of ppmv corals grew at a faster rate than today and there were many of thriving species of mollusc alive as well.
Southampton University experiments into ocean acidification did not go as modeled until hydrochloric acid was introduced into the tanks then the sea shells started to dissolve–ergo, experiment successful!!!
Growing molluscs in tanks is notoriously difficult because pathogens normally removed or killed in the wild are not so run riot. Claiming that a failed growth experiment has failed due to CO2 is not only poor science it is stupid.

DirkH
November 22, 2011 1:55 am

Michael says:
November 21, 2011 at 2:33 pm
“Interesting article but it ignores the portion of the story discussing what is occuring outside of oyster nursery situations:
“[…] scientists have been measuring alarmingly corrosive water along the Pacific coast.””
Slightly more neutral water is alarmingly corrosive? You know what this means? It means that English majors don’t get taught chemistry. And you shouldn’t get information about chemistry from English majors even if they write books with “molecules” in the title. Who knows what she thinks a molecule is.
This is too funny. The warmist propagandists don’t understand their own Orwellian word creations (“acidification” for “getting less alcalic”); then go on to posit complete bullcrap. Make her an IPCC lead author! She works for us!
She writes:
“Acidic water sometimes kills oyster larvae outright, so that they fail to survive past the egg stage. ”
Un-be-lievable! “Acidic water” – and she shows a diagram with pH in the 8 range! She does absolutely not know what she is talking about; she’s a warmist superstar!!!

Greg Holmes
November 22, 2011 2:15 am

EXCELLENT DISSECTION OF THE REPORT! Many thanks.

malcolm
November 22, 2011 2:50 am

The weird thing is if you look at the scale for dissolved CO2 on the WWF graph (the only graph in the whole magazine, on page 11), the concentration is projected to FALL from -11 to -22 micromole per Kg. Does anyone have a pointer to the original graph before it got redrawn for the media release, because as it is it seems nonsense to me.
I recommend this book about badly done media graphs, from 1959. Still in print, as the situation hasn’t got any better: http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321958131&sr=8-1
(I note that page 8 shows a photograph of a power station emiting clouds of greenhouse gas in Westphalia. OK, water vapour IS a greenhouse gas, but I think this was just the consequences of a lazy picture editor not realising what actually comes out of cooling towers.)

tallbloke
November 22, 2011 3:10 am

Sorry for OT comment, this is very important:
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/breaking-news-foia-2011-has-arrived/
Downloaded and virus checked – clean

Dave Springer
November 22, 2011 3:53 am

“I wonder though, why a World Wildlife Fund document exists on a NOAA server:
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/thecircle0410.pdf
Why not? There’s no law against it is there? It’s not like a Jim Hansen ethics violation where a government employee is raking in big bucks in gifts, fees, prizes, and travel expenses for himself and family members with outside speaking engagements and anti-industrial advocacy directly related to his work for the government.
Gratuitous knee-jerk reactions to non-profit organizations like the WWF which, like most non-profit organizations, have at least some legitimate concerns and staff who aren’t evil, is no more than preaching to the choir. It might feel good to do it but it is counter-productive to presenting an image as an objective science-oriented observer and just makes you look like a reactionary bigot much like those you oppose only with an opposite agenda.
If that’s the image you want then by all means go for it but if you want to set yourself apart from the ideologic crusaders then less knee-jerk cookie cutter boring predictable denigration of organizations with goals you don’t agree with is in order.

Dave Springer
November 22, 2011 4:08 am

tallbloke says:
November 22, 2011 at 3:10 am
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/breaking-news-foia-2011-has-arrived/
180 megs of climategate emails, zipped. Must be the whole enchilada this time:
http://files.sinwt.ru/download.php?file=25FOIA2011.zip
Less than a hunnert downloads as of this comment. Be the first kid on your block to get it. Sucker must be a gigabyte or more unzipped. Room for many many easter eggs. Happy hunting!

mizimi
November 22, 2011 4:10 am

Dirk H: says:
She writes:
“Acidic water sometimes kills oyster larvae outright, so that they fail to survive past the egg stage. ”
Last time I looked at reproductive processes larvae popped out of eggs, not the other way round.
But hey, let’s not be too pedantic here, it’s only another disinformation piece for the Believers.

Richard Lyman
November 22, 2011 4:11 am

Slightly OT. I am surprised no one picked up on this one. Perhaps things are worse than we thought? http://www.nydailynews.com/news/global-warming-open-floodgates-york-city-article-1.980462

November 22, 2011 4:24 am

Dave Springer says:
“I wonder though, why a World Wildlife Fund document exists on a NOAA server…”
Why not? There’s no law against it is there?

It’s sort of like a N.A.M.B.L.A. document being found on a Boy Scouts server.

tallbloke
November 22, 2011 4:39 am

The debate is getting lively over at tallbloke towers. All assistance welcome.
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/breaking-news-foia-2011-has-arrived/#comment-9470

Steve Keohane
November 22, 2011 5:13 am

Al Gore’s Holy Hologram says:November 21, 2011 at 1:24 pm
Another chemophobic anti-science homeopath quack doctor

You may be touching on something I have yet to see being brought up WRT CO2. What if it is homeopathic? Thus any atmospheric molecule that once was in a volume of atmosphere that once was in contact with a CO2 molecule would be prone to holding more heat. What we are dealing with here is simply the placebo effect. If we could get the atmosphere to believe that the homeopathic CO2 didn’t really work, then everything would be okay.

DirkH
November 22, 2011 5:33 am

Dave Springer says:
November 22, 2011 at 3:53 am
“Gratuitous knee-jerk reactions to non-profit organizations like the WWF which”
The WWF has infiltrated the IPCC; and stands to profit big big time from the REDD schemes, something that might have slipped by your attention; so the description “Gratuitous knee-jerk reactions” somehow fails to stick. They are not some aloof idealistic group. They have a solid economic interest in a worldwide carbon trading scheme that is quite different from wanting to save the world or some endangered critter.

mfreer
November 22, 2011 5:57 am

Umm you did read the whole article, right? Her article says the same thing as the PCSGA 2009 report, but with more details.
From Grossman’s article:

When seasonal wind patterns change in spring, north winds create upwellings of deep and more acidic seawater off the Pacific Northwest coast. These waters — with their lowered pH and lack of available calcium carbonate in the form of what’s called aragonite — are what have been killing the oyster larvae
and
Because of the way seawater circulates around the world, the deep water now washing ashore in Oregon and Washington is actually 30 to 50 years old and absorbed its CO2 long before the fall of the Berlin Wall. This time lag is important because oceans absorb about 50 percent of the CO2 released by burning fossil fuels, emissions that have been rising dramatically in recent decades. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ocean acidity has increased approximately 30 percent since the Industrial Revolution, and if we continue our current rate of carbon emissions, global oceans could be 150 percent more acidic by the end of the century than they have been for 20 million years.

Dixon
November 22, 2011 6:00 am

what’s the isotopic signature of all that CO2 coming from cold upwelling water?

Pamela Gray
November 22, 2011 6:19 am

She appears to state that natural levels of deep water CO2 are currently killing the oysters. And from that her hypothesis is stated regarding future deep water upwelling CO2 kills as being anthropogenic. There are so many ways her stretch, leap, jump, knee jerk alarming hypothesis cannot be supported, it would take too much of my morning coffee time to start.
I was under the thumb of a meat and potatoes professor when I attempted my first research hypothesis. He nearly drove me crazy with his demands of gold-standard methods. I think he would have lobotomized this twit.

Robbie
November 22, 2011 6:55 am

“…..as ENSO and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, which have nothing to do with the small (20 Parts Per Million) global increase in atmospheric CO2 in the last decade.”
And now you are making a heck of a mistake there. We all know that the oceans dissolve more CO2 than the atmosphere does. So the amount of dissolved CO2 in the ocean is much much higher than the 20 ppm in the last decade.
“There is about fifty times as much carbon dissolved in the sea water of the oceans in the form of CO2 and carbonic acid, bicarbonate and carbonate ions as exists in the atmosphere.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide

mizimi
November 22, 2011 7:37 am

Robbie:
your (Wiki’s) figures are somewhat out. Rough estimates give about 700 petagrams of CO2 in the atmosphere, 37500 Pgrams DISSOLVED in the oceans (yes, 50x as much) BUT 30,000,000 Pgrams locked up as sediment, and an unknown amount as clathrates.

November 22, 2011 8:21 am

The usual result of taking a femto-event and extrapolating it to the macrosphere.
Wonder if they’ve tried depicting it as a hockey stick yet?

beng
November 22, 2011 8:34 am

****
CRS, Dr.P.H. says:
November 21, 2011 at 10:31 pm
I hate to be the poop, but….oceanic acidification seems to be the only provable consequence of carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere. I’m a biologist, not a climate scientist. The data for acidification in the uppermost boundary of the oceans (“euphotic zone”) is observed and significant, and the risk could be to oceanic photosynthetic processes, which provide the majority of our oxygen.
*****
So, lemme get this straight. You’re saying that an increase of a trace gas, CO2, from .0003 to .0004 of the atmosphere over ~100 yrs is enough to significantly affect the ocean’s pH? Really?

November 22, 2011 9:11 am

mfreer, “Umm you did read the whole article, right?”
Wait, are you saying that there is more to this story than Mr. Watts wrote? This may not be the final nail in the CCAGW coffin?

November 22, 2011 9:15 am

Richard Lyman says:
November 22, 2011 at 4:11 am
Slightly OT. I am surprised no one picked up on this one. Perhaps things are worse than we thought? http://www.nydailynews.com/news/global-warming-open-floodgates-york-city-article-1.980462
==========================================
….. but are those red herrings swimming in the NY subway system ??
OK, back to the main event.

Rob Crawford
November 22, 2011 9:21 am

“Isn’t ocean water alkaline? The PH of the oceans is around 8.So why do we use the term acidification?”
Because “ocean neutralization” sounds benign, and it’s all about the scare factor.