From the UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER and the department of doom modeling comes this press release that suggests that somehow Earth would lose all (or most of) it’s oxygen due to global warming. However, it seems the Earth has been through this before and life survived, as this graph from Dr. Vincent Gray shows.:
Global warming disaster could suffocate life on planet Earth, research shows
University of Leicester researchers reveal how Earth’s oxygen could dramatically fall due to change in ocean temperature of just several degrees
Falling oxygen levels caused by global warming could be a greater threat to the survival of life on planet Earth than flooding, according to researchers from the University of Leicester.
A study led by Sergei Petrovskii, Professor in Applied Mathematics from the University of Leicester’s Department of Mathematics, has shown that an increase in the water temperature of the world’s oceans of around six degrees Celsius — which some scientists predict could occur as soon as 2100 — could stop oxygen production by phytoplankton by disrupting the process of photosynthesis.
Professor Petrovskii explained: “Global warming has been a focus of attention of science and politics for about two decades now. A lot has been said about its expected disastrous consequences; perhaps the most notorious is the global flooding that may result from melting of Antarctic ice if the warming exceeds a few degrees compared to the pre-industrial level. However, it now appears that this is probably not the biggest danger that the warming can cause to the humanity.
“About two-thirds of the planet’s total atmospheric oxygen is produced by ocean phytoplankton – and therefore cessation would result in the depletion of atmospheric oxygen on a global scale. This would likely result in the mass mortality of animals and humans.”
The team developed a new model of oxygen production in the ocean that takes into account basic interactions in the plankton community, such as oxygen production in photosynthesis, oxygen consumption because of plankton breathing and zooplankton feeding on phytoplankton.
While mainstream research often focuses on the CO2 cycle, as carbon dioxide is the agent mainly responsible for global warming, few researchers have explored the effects of global warming on oxygen production.
###
The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference will be held in Le Bourget, Paris, from Nov. 30 to Dec. 11. It will be the 21st yearly session of the Conference of the Parties to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 11th session of the Meeting of the Parties to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The conference objective is to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, from all the nations of the world.
The paper ‘Mathematical Modelling of Plankton-Oxygen Dynamics Under the Climate Change’ published in the Bulletin of Mathematical Biology is available here: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11538-015-0126-0
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Err, then this couldn’t have happened (see paragraph 8).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/dinosaurs/12026966/Dinosaur-footprints-reveal-giant-creatures-once-roamed-Scotland.html
Mardler, please remember, because the boys from University of Edinburgh did not, Scotland-then was not where Scotland-now is.
Close to 45 Lat and off the No.Am. plate.
http://www.scotese.com/jurassic.htm
http://www.scotese.com/late1.htm
You have to laugh. In the SAME WEEK we have this report..
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2015/12/1/phytoplankton-love-carbon-dioxide.html
showing that phytoplankton are simply lapping up excess CO2, and then this other report predicting that they will all die from meat exhaustion – surely they would just migrate to higher latitudes?
Or some other species take over that likes warmer water?
This climate conference stuff is amazing. I cant remember anything like it since Nuremberg 1933!
Remind me again what they were saving the planet from again? Back Then?
“die from meat exhaustion ”
That would make the vegetarians very happy.
Hence the picture of Hitler who was a strict vegetarian. 🙂
Ah, Leo…
…it’s a good thing I’m too lazy to learn how to post captions in videos. I could have so much fun with that one, equating the climate alarmist crowd with those 1930’s folks!
Is this wishful thinking, but “a massive hack attack on BoM by Chinese interests”, is now able to be called ‘BoMgate’?
Haha, just pressed the spell check on that word, and it came out as abominate.
http://pindanpost.com/2015/12/02/bom-gate/
The latest from GOP Lamar Smith https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2015/11/30/key-lawmaker-opens-new-front-in-fight-with-government-climate-scientists-saying-they-cherry-picked-data/
I took a look at the abstract, but as I couldn’t find it there I wasn’t bothered to spend $40 getting the whole paper to find out: Just where these two mathematicians got their funding in order to build their model and write the paper? And, had they not managed to pick up a ‘green’ grant, how would they have been otherwise employed?
Plants photpsynthesize even more with warmer oceans. They miss the point that six degrees of warming does not mean what they think. It simply means longer slightly warmer summers and shorter milder wingers. That means a long er growing season for everybody, Where do they think the oxygen will go?
As usual, computer models are only as good as the round file next to them. Models are not science and only do what they are programmed to do.
We know atmospheric content has changed over time, many times without climate change driving it. One event, lots of oxygen, laid iron rich deposits in the bottom of oceans. It will happen again and there is SFA we can do about it!
Really. Well my climate model shows that if we don’t immediately destroy our economies and go back to living in mud huts in the dark and cold and eating twigs the following will happen:
Now, where’s my climate check?
6 degrees/100 years….I wonder how many Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs per second that will take.
That team should have modeled “Gassy Larry” where I work, He has apparently evolved into a new species that can live without oxygen and thrives in a methane environment, or at least that appears to be the case to anyone who dares to enter his office.
I don’t think Larry would be particularly alarmed by the prospect of a world stripped of oxygen. I’m sure there are others out there who, like Larry, have already evolved to survive in a methane environment.
Why oh why are we therefore considering plans to sequester O2 in the form of CO2 permanently into the ground? Obviously no one considers O2 as a pollutant but somehow O2 in it’s CO2 form is the biggest threat to life its-self and needs to be buried at twice the rate of carbon. GK
Maybe he got the equation for photosynthesis wrong (-:
Instead of:
6CO2 + 6H2O ——> C6H12O6 + 6O2
He has:
6CO2 + 6H2O ——> C6H12O6 – 6O2
heh heh! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0
Take all of the computers away from these dolts and see if they can generate the same nonsense with pencil, paper and erasers.
An increase of six degrees C during the next 85 years! How much would the atmosphere warm by 2100 in that scenario? I don’t know, but suspect (guess) it would be a multiple of six degrees. 12? 18?
Who has predicted such a scenario?
This from a professor of Mathematics. It’s another fine example of “if that’s what the equations say, then that’s what is happening”!
Professor of Applied Mathematics. What’s his experience in chemistry, physics, physical chemistry, biochemistry, zoology, microbiology, oceanography or climatology? His study would require a more than passing knowledge of all these disciplines. Or at least collaboration with specialists in all of them, which he apparently has not, or surely one or other of them would have pointed out the problems (and they might also have pointed out the benefits of a bit of data from real-world observations like palaeo-atmospheric composition studies).
Sad commentary on the state of science in the 21st century when stuff like this can get published.
“Real-world data? Who needs that, it’s soooo twentieth-century! We’ve got models now!!”
Yeah but you probably don’t get much grant money by solely writing a lot of Applied Mathematics papers.
Just read the paper and it seems like a pretty good analysis, it does refer to ‘real world data’.
“Therefore, we arrive at the conclusion that sustainable functioning of the plankton–oxygen system is only possible in a certain intermediate range of the oxygen production rate A. Since A is known to be a function of temperature, it suggests that sustainable functioning is only possible in an intermediate range of temperatures. Even if the current state of the system is safe, a sufficiently large warming (roughly estimated as 5–6 ∘C, see Robinson 2000) would inevitably lead to an ecological disaster resulting in a complete depletion of oxygen.”
Goobledegook. They should know through experimentation what the maximum temperature would be to stop the plankton-oxygen production. Why don’t they just give us that number? Then you could apply that to every area of the oceans to see how much warming would it take specifically to that area to cause harm.
On Aconcagua, highest mountain in the Andes, at high camp,~20,000 ft, I tied my tent
ropes to fossilized coral. In the vicinity, there were spires of carbonaceous rock
more than 15′ high.
Some rock simply erodes faster than others.
To this point, it has been my understanding of atmospheric history that the extreme rise
of oxygen was due to the rise in plant life in an extremely high CO2 level.
Lot’s not forget that there is plenty of O2 sequestered in the Earth’s crust.
If I’m not mistaken (often am) there is nothing more abundant on earth than Oxygen. And silicon is next, followed by Aluminium. Just the right proportions to make integrated circuits.
g
g
We have yet to see, let alone obtain any of the iron that is ” IN ” the earth.
We can only get at (currently ) what is ” ON ” the earth; as in crustally.
g
Notsoolnwise
O 46.1 wt %; Si 28.2 wt%; Al 8.23 wt% Fe 5.63 wt%. from CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics.
So Oxygen is way out in front of everything else in mole percent, and Al is more than double the mole percent of iron, and easily beats it on weight percent.
g
george,
Pay no attention to ^that^ site pest. He’s not here to learn, he’s just here to run interference.
Since it won’t happen I can’t be bothered to check, but I strongly suspect that a 6 degree rise in sea temperature would at least offer us the consolation of Leicester sinking beneath those gloriously warmer waves of the North Sea. Sort of natural justice.
So shouldn’t there be ~some~ sort of correlation to temperature or CO2: http://geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif
Ain’t seeing one…
I’m embarrassed to say I got my Chemistry degree from Leicester.
But the Earth has been considerably warmer than it is today for hundreds of millions of years and none of what they predict ever happened. The Earth’s climate has been stable enough over at least the past 500 million years for life to evolve. We are here.
Interesting graph. It shows that oxygen content most recently peaked in the Cretaceous. Looking at other graphs, I see that CO2 was 3 to 4 times higher than now, and the temperature was more than 10C higher. Going back farther, the other obvious peak was about 300 million years ago, when temperature was colder and CO2 about the same as now. Is there a pattern?
A very informative graph – the sharp rise of O2 levels starting from about 350my BP corresponds nicely with the Carboniferous geological period – when terrestrial plants first evolved and then grew like crazy into the Permian (my favourite period), resulting in the creation of massive coal deposits. The end Permian conflagration certainly depleted the plant life (and oxygen levels) towards 230 my BP. The )2 levels subsequently recovered with the plant life, only for climate change to freeze the plants into submission. It would appear that terrestrial plants certainly have had a major effect on global oxygen levels. Would the rise in O2 at about 620 my BP be due to the rise of aerobic bacteria? The moral of the story – if you like oxygen, plant a tree or two, and feed it CO2 so it grows faster.
Can science this bad be used as empirical evidence that the cultists haven’t a clue as to what they are doing? Seriously.
They know exactly what they’re doing, and concern about the environment is a disguise for it.
The “big Picture’ of models is Move the Target. There are an essentially infinite number of phony imminent environmental crises to fabricate and false flag terrorist events to stage on the path to NWO depopulation and control of all resources, and they’re all based on the puppetmasters hiding behind the Club of Rome billboard that reads “the enemy of mankind is man”.
But…but…if Man’s “Carbon Pollution” from CO2 is the problem and CO2 has twice as much Oxygen as it does Carbon then isn’t Man’s CO2 also the solution to this “problem”?
What did their model say would happen to all the land plants? (Grass, trees, stuff like that.)
A quick and rough eye-balling of the chart; if everything came together just right, it could happen in about 300 million years. (based on the graph slopes of what has gone before). I think we need to panic now.