Hoisted with their own petard fighting a lawsuit
Story submitted by Eric Worrall
The EPA is fighting a desperate battle to sink a green lawsuit, a lawsuit which is substantially based on the EPA’s own climate narrative.
The Lawsuit, launched by the Center for Biological Diversity, seeks to impose enhanced clean water act protection upon the Pacific Coast. The suit argues that protection is necessary because, according to the EPA’s own climate narrative, ocean acidification is severely damaging the marine ecosystem.
According to the CBD;
“The CBD points out that the EPA has acknowledged that ocean acidification has killed billions of oyster larvae in the Pacific Northwest but still would not classify the waters as imperilled.”
http://www.law360.com/articles/568751/epa-seeks-to-sink-green-group-s-ocean-acidification-suit
The EPA’s response is that there is insufficient evidence to support an endangerment finding – an apparent contradiction of their own previous climate narrative.
“There were no in situ field studies documenting adverse effects on the health of aquatic life populations in either state,” the EPA’s motion says. “Nor was there any other information documenting effects on indigenous populations of aquatic life in state waters indicating stressors attributable to ocean acidification. The only information available regarding aquatic life in ambient waters under natural conditions was inconclusive.”
If I have understood this ridiculous situation correctly, the EPA is now in a position in which it may have to admit in court that some of its previous official statements about ocean acidification were not supported by available evidence.
Of course, if the EPA loses the case, an even more farcical situation may arise – the EPA’s failure may open the floodgate for compensation lawsuits against the US government, from people who claim their livelihoods are being damaged by ocean acidification, due to the EPA’s failure to protect the environment from CO2 “pollution”.
Shawn from High River August 25, 2014 at 11:03 am
Ha ha! EPA painted themselves in a corner,so to speak.
——————————-
That’d place them in the Cloward and Piven corner.
Why do you think the EPA or Obama would care about rising energy costs or increased government?
This would surly put these bedfellows in the same bed and add to the destruction of freedom and liberty.
At some point you gotta believe evil has long replaced ignorance.
Reblogged this on Two Heads are Better Than One and commented:
Whoops….
Is this where all the heat is hiding?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2734573/Mystery-glow-Pacific-Ocean-Pilots-left-baffled-strange-orange-red-lights-spotted-dead-night.html?login#readerCommentsCommand-message-field
@ur momisugly “Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive”.
Heh. Lucia’s [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucia_Liljegren] comment over at Climate Audit comes to mind:
“We are seeing tons and tons and tons of “how to communicate” documents, but none seem to point out the obvious: We need to stop being caught lying. Oh… here’s a strategy to stop being caught: Don’t lie in the first place!”
PS: Like the new format, guys!
That’s odd. No mention of Plutonium 239 or Cesium 134 or Cesium 137 or Uranium 238 or any of the other 1,200 toxic radionucleids pouring out of Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear disaster at over 400 tons per day in the petabecquerel per litre range. Those damned Ph meters always have had horrible rad detectors in them.
Alarmists claim CO2 absorbed by the ocean forms carbonic acid that decreased the pH of seawater by 0.1 since the pre-industrial era. This is called ocean acidification. A student of college chemistry can easily debunk this theory.
The chemical equations involved are:
CO2 + H20 H2CO3
H2CO3 H+ + OH-
pH is claimed to have decreased from 8.2 to 8.1. The equation in molar concentration is:
10^-8.2 + X = 10^-8.1
Where X is the increase in H+ in moles/liter. Solving for X, we get X = 1.6 x 10^-9 mol/L
This is the value we need to prove the claim. If we don’t reach this H+ concentration, the theory is falsified.
The dissolved CO2 in seawater is 90 ppm. The CO2 converted to carbonic acid and dissociated to H+ is 10^-8.1 mol/L. This is the same as the molar concentration of H+ since one mole of CO2 is needed to produce one mole of H+ Convert this to ppm, we get 3.5 x 10^-10 ppm. Hence the ratio of CO2 converted to carbonic acid and CO2 dissolved in seawater is 3.9 x 10^-12
Next we find the amount of man-made CO2 that went to the ocean since 1750. Total anthropogenic emissions since that time is put at 10^15 kg, of which 26% went to the sea or 3 x 10^14 kg. Multiply this by the ratio of CO2 converted to carbonic acid, we get 1,218 kg or 27,680 moles of H2CO3 and H+
Total mass of the ocean excluding dissolved minerals and gases is 1.3 x 10^21 kg. Since CO2 is believed to be dissolved in the top 500 m of the sea, total water volume of that layer is 1.5 x 10^20 L. Now we have the molar concentration of H+ from man-made CO2. Just divide the number of moles with the volume of water = 10^-16 mol/L
The moment of truth. Man-made carbonic acid is 7 orders of magnitude short of the required value of 10^-9 mol/L to ‘acidify’ the ocean. As Adam and Jamie say, the myth is BUSTED.
Sorry the arrows did not appear. Here again the correct chemical equations. Equal sign means double arrow or reversible reaction.
CO2 + H20 = H2CO3
H2CO3 = H+ + HCO3-
I made a conversion error. Here are the correct figures.
Ratio of carbonic acid to dissolved CO2 = 3.9 x 10^-6
H+ from carbonic acid = 1.8 x 10^-10 mol/L
Same conclusion. Anthropogenic CO2 not enough to ‘acidify’ ocean.