From the “everybody breathes out poison” department. WUWT reader “Hell_Is_Like_Newark” writes:
The Center for Biological Diversity has issued a petition to get CO2 listed as a toxic substance. CO2 will join the ranks of dioxin, cyanide, etc.
For Immediate Release, June 30, 2015
Legal Petition Urges EPA to Save Sea Life, Regulate CO2 as Toxic Substance
WASHINGTON— With the world’s oceans and sea life facing an unprecedented crisis from ocean acidification, the Center for Biological Diversity and former Environmental Protection Agency scientist Dr. Donn Viviani today formally petitioned the Obama administration to regulate carbon dioxide under the federal Toxic Substances Control Act. The first-of-its-kind petition under the toxics act seeks widespread reduction of CO2 because it contributes to ocean acidification, driving the destruction of coral reefs and threatening nearly every form of sea life, from tiny plankton to fish, whales and sea otters.
“Time’s running out to avoid a mass extinction of wildlife in our oceans,” said Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director at the Center. “It may not look like a toxic chemical, but when there’s too much CO2 in the ocean, it turns seawater corrosive and dissolves the protective shells that marine animals need to survive.”
The oceans absorb more than 22 million tons of CO2 each day, and on average the oceans are 30 percent more acidic now than at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Harm from ocean acidification is already observable: It has killed billions of oyster larvae in the Pacific Northwest; severely dissolved the shells of pteropods, a butterfly-like plankton, off the coast of California; and impaired the growth of corals in Florida and the Caribbean. And with CO2 levels rising, the dangers to our oceans will become more severe.
“We’re asking the EPA to prevent ocean acidification now by regulating CO2 emissions under the same law that helped reduce the chlorofluorocarbons that were causing the ozone hole. We’ve solved big environmental problems before and our petition shows the EPA a path to take bold action and leadership to save our oceans,” Dr. Viviani said.
The petition seeks to regulate CO2 as a chemical substance under the Toxic Substances Control Act, which has been used in the past to regulate harmful chemicals such as PCBs and asbestos. The law requires the EPA to regulate chemicals that present an unreasonable risk to the environment and conduct testing for harmful effects of chemicals that are produced in large quantities. The novel approach of using the Act to regulate CO2 could complement other efforts to reduce the CO2 emissions that are contributing to ocean acidification.
Under the Act the EPA has broad authority to require polluters to reduce emissions, keep records, sequester or take back chemicals produced. There are many industries that are not achieving the greatest CO2 reductions available through energy conservation and existing technology, and EPA action under this landmark law could implement many cost-effective CO2 reductions.
“Future generations will look back and wonder why we didn’t do everything we could to save the world’s oceans,” Sakashita said. “Failure to act is a decision to let our sea life die off and disappear. We can’t let that happen.”
Source: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/ocean-acidification-06-30-2015.html
Note: A couple of commenters made some inappropriate remarks in comments, and a total of three inappropriate comments were removed, and one snipped with a notice due to it being a call to action to contact the writer of the press release. Because of that, I’m closing comments. The contact info published in the original press release has also been removed. Part of the problem had to do with formatting of the original press release, it contained the contact info and phone number right at the top. I reproduced it exactly as it appeared on The Center for Biological Diversity PR page.
For future releases, The Center for Biological Diversity might want to consider using the normally accepted formatting practice of ending the PR with a centered
### or a –30- (as is standard press release convention)
…and put that contact info AFTER those delineators at the end of the PR, which would signal users of the PR that the information contained after those are NOT part of the press release and not to be published.
Apologies to Ms. Sakashita for any inappropriate comments and emails she may have received due to commenter making a call to action – Anthony Watts
Thought they already did that a while back.
Of course CO2 is poisonous,
Didn’t you know?
It’s only a myth
That it makes the plants grow.
We all need to stop breathing,
Listen to what I say,
Then all this man-made nonsense
Would just go away.
http://rhymeafterrhyme.net/mother-nature-is-laughing-shes-having-such-fun/
Don’t forget borate, the orphan buffer. Repeating a comment I made on WUWT, “IPCC on acid. . .”, September 25, 2013:
Neil Jordan September 25, 2013 at 2:00 pm
Re Sabertooth says: September 25, 2013 at 11:43 am
The pH ceiling of 8.3 is explained in Emerson & Hedges Chemical Oceanography, which also explains a pH floor of 7.6, also alkaline:
http://courses.washington.edu/pcc588/readings/EH_IV_CarbSys.pdf
This reference also includes borate buffering in addition to the carbonate and bicarbonate buffering that are customarily used to describe seawater buffering. According to Frankignoulle (1994):
http://www.co2.ulg.ac.be/pub/frankignoulle_1994.pdf
borate buffering accounts for 30% of the global buffering effect in seawater.
That would be hilarious trying to explain to patients.
“Sir were gonna start the inflow of carbon dioxide into your colon.”
“Is it dangerous?”
“Well… Uhh.. It’s a toxic substance..”
O2 makes things burn.
Burning is bad.
Ban O2!
Reminds us how much ‘Biological Diversity’ there would be if there no toxic CO2?
Can you show Mr Briiliant, how water absorb CO2 from atmosphere? Do you know how much polluted water is drained to the sea every day? Do you know plants make food for us using CO2? many more in the email. And, what do you mean by toxic, CO2 or some other chemical? what about O2? increase the concentration of O2 to 25% in the atmosphere or decrease it to less than 14% and experience yourself what happens?
Ocean Acidification sounds downright scary. And for those whose chemistry education ended with their K-Tel Chemistry set, the EPA most seem like such a benevolent guardian. I am reminded of the time I was home brewing a German Lager when my neighbor visited me in my garage. I was just getting my mash started, and I was performing an “acid rest” (an old brewing procedure used on malted barley that was not well modified). As I explained the procedure, me neighbor looked doubtful. For he heard the words acid and acidify an made up his mind that I was brewing some dangerous potion. Needless to say he never accepted my offerings of home brewed German Lager.
I’ve even heard climate skeptics say that while they were very doubtful of AGW, they were very concerned about ocean acidification. I wonder if they would still be as concerned if we used the word alkalize?
This is clearly Barmy !
ahem …..
Aquaculturalists will disagree vehemently.
CO2 is extensively used to promote plant growth.
CO2 System Basics
http://www.drsfostersmith.com/PIC/article.cfm?dept_id=&aid=441
Freshwater Planted Aquarium Care and Maintenance
http://www.liveaquaria.com/PIC/article.cfm?aid=100
CO2 Basics for Aquarium Plants
http://www.fishchannel.com/freshwater-aquariums/planted-tank/co2-basics.aspx
Maybe somebody should send Obama and those
folks on the EPA Committee, a Fish tank or two,
and complete with a CO2 injection kit, Then they
might learn about the real world of CO2 and water
plants, fish, and so on ?
The EPA don’t need no stinkin’ reality!
Will we need toxic waste permits for marathons, 10ks, Olympics and other heavy exercise events? Or even excessive flatulence?
We can use “Farts” as renewable energy !
At a small scale this has been going on in Britain.
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/fart-powered-vw-beetle-tested-in-uk/
At a much larger scale is planned for New York !
National Grid hopes to reap natural gas from the process of waste treatment overseen by New York City’s Department of Environmental Protection in Greenpoint. National Grid’s proposed plan is to harness the gas waste produced by the processing of solid and liquid waste, then sell it back to customers in New York City as natural gas. If all goes to plan, we’ll be buying our own shit back from National Grid by September 2016.
http://www.bkmag.com/2014/09/30/trash-to-gas-is-the-new-farm-to-table-national-grid-banks-on-waste-in-greenpoint/
A hog farm near me has a concrete area around the barn and the barn floor and pad around the barn drains to one of two septic tank like storage tanks. The waste (manure) is washed into one, after settling the water is pumped off. He then lets if “ferment” and runs a gas powered diesel generator for the entire supply of electricity for the barn. Alternates between tanks so that he has a constant source. In the winter, the waste heat from the engine bypasses the radiator and is pumped through the barn for heating.
The old adage, “The dose is the poison” still holds true. Everything is a poison at some dose.
The Center for Biodiversity is basically a scam by Big Transnational Finance/Corporatocracy to bypass the Republican/Democratic system.
Apart from the money coming in from their corporate/NGO sponsors, they get paid to sue the EPA for not regulating something, who loses, then pays court costs back to the Center for Biodiverstiy.
It may be that having fossil fuels makes us the luckiest planet in the galaxy. http://stanericksonsblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-great-filter-fossil-fuels.html
If the oceans were warming as the climate concerned claim, the oceans would be reducing CO2 by out gassing. The climate community is not really concerned by physical reality or rational thinking.
You say CO2 is toxic and destroying the oceans, Miyoko?
I’ve got a cure for that.
You and all your fellow beievers stop breathing out CO2. Problem solved! (Particularly the problem of having to listen to y’all’s drivel.]
I read through the Toxic Substances Control Act, and there is an opening to claim some kind of environmental harm from CO2. However, there is not much specific guidance on handling a chemical like CO2. The existing regulations under TSCA are for known carcinogens with documented health effects, like PCBs, Asbestos, Lead-based Paint, etc.