Jim Steele
Coral build reefs by producing limestone, or calcium carbonate. The great diversity of shell building mollusks, like clams and oysters, also build their shells out of calcium carbonate. So, scientists assumed that these organisms just pulled carbonate ions from the surrounding sea water and joined it with abundant calcium ions to make reefs and shells, a process referred to as “calcification”. Thus, many scientists then expressed their heart-felt concerns that more CO2 will reduce the ocean’s carbonate ions and thus stress coral reef building and mollusk shell building.
Indeed, the increasing absorption of human produced carbon dioxide by the oceans can very slightly lower pH. In other words, more CO2 increases the oceans’ concentration of H+ ions. It is also unassailable science that when CO2 enters the water, it interacts with water molecules to produce both H+ ions and bicarbonate ions. However, those H+ ions can then interact with carbonate ions and convert them to also form bicarbonate ions and reduce the pool of available carbonate ions. So, NOAA and hundreds of internet websites falsely told the world that “Ocean acidification slows the rate at which coral reefs generate calcium carbonate, thus slowing the growth of coral skeletons.”
However, climate scientists were apparently very ignorant regards the physiology of reef building and shell making. In order for charged ions to pass through an organism’s lipid membranes and enter its calcification chambers, a specialized channel or transporter is required. But for over a decade now, the search for carbonate transporters has failed to find any such transporters in any of these organisms. However, abundant bicarbonate transporters (green rectangles) have been found and deemed important for making reefs and shells.
From an evolutionary perspective, using the more abundant bi-carbonate ions is extremely logical. The higher amounts of carbon dioxide in the ancient atmosphere would lower ocean pH when mollusks and coral first evolved millions of years ago. That argues using scarcer carbonate ions would be very risky but using much more abundant bi-carbonate ions would supply the stability to evolve. Furthermore, all those organisms had long had the ability to absorb bicarbonate ions and transform it internally into carbonate ions for shell making and reef building by simply pumping out hydrogen ions. When CO2 enters the oceans, over 90% of it converts to bicarbonate ions whether the oceans’ pH is acidic at pH 6 or basic at pH 9. In contrast, carbonate ions virtually do not exist when ocean pH approaches pH 6. (Graphic A.)
The world can only hope that NOAA and all those alarmist websites will soon admit that improved science has revealed the error of their ways, and they will now come clean and tell the public that CO2 has not threatened reef builders and shell builders. In fact, they should report that more CO2 generates more bicarbonate ions which are the building blocks of shells and reefs.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Source of Charts
Long-Term Monitoring Program – Annual Summary Report of Coral Reef Condition 2020/21 | AIMS
“”In fact, they should””
But they won’t…
Which comes first? The pH or the chemical reaction?
The pH is the result of a chemical reaction, not the driver.
Buffers “use up” (tie up?) the H and OH without changing pH.
The buffers would need to be exhausted before the pH would change.
And, at the risk of sounding like a quote from Jurassic Park, the presence of “life” makes a huge difference.
Without “life” a seashell wears down and/or corrodes (If it would ever have formed to begin with.). With “life”, the critter repairs itself and reproduces.
Has science ever been able to isolate “life” from it’s … container and put it in a test tube?
We have a lot to learn!
It is a well known fact that coral have been dying since the 1960s but in Australia scuba diving conservatives have gradually been replacing the dead coral with weighted plastic replicas.
The “coral scientists” fly over the GBR in planes, and from the air it seems like the coral are healthy. No one actually goes in the water, at least not scientists. A flyover is easier. Then they publish fancy charts claiming the coral coverage is great. They don’t mention that most of the GBR coral is made of plastic. And the fact that the plastic cora are funded by Big Oil
This comment is serious
not satire
ROTFLMAO!
The plastic corals will very quickly be overgrown with micro algae.
While it may seem unethical for Australian conservatives to replace dead coral with plastic coral, this was done in response to a leftist dirty trick
Leftist Australians breed parrotfish in home fish tanks. They then place these fish near GBR coral at night … which they eat, The resulting damage to the coral is blamed on CO2, just like every other problem in the world.
The Australian conservatives are merely replacing the coral the leftist parrotfish ate. NOTE: These fish get very annoyed by the plastic coral.
THIS COMMENT IS SERIOUS,
NOT SATIRE
Where is your data???? As you always say “Data free predictions (or claims) are not science”
“are not science”
Nor is blatant child-minded gibberish… which dickie excels in .
‘Climate Scientists’ duped themselves into believing that rising CO2 will harm Coral and Mollusks to get more grants and promotions.
Most climate research papers commence with an error when authors assert that “pH is the negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion concentration.” The correct, foundational definition is “pH is the negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion activity”.
Some consequences of this are in a short essay too long for WordPress here. Please see my link.
Jim Steele has written of effects similar to my understanding and experience. His article is recommended for saving and remembering.
Geoff S
https://www.geoffstuff.com/phactivity.docx
The real problem isn’t “climate science” but the beliefs wrongly internalized by activists and policy wonks. Like Polar Bears, birds, and butterflies – –
corals and mollusk have been used to advance an agenda based on an incorrect premise that has become the CO2/AGW axiom. So established, it is not acceptable to question its truthfulness.
Coral is mostly calcium carbonate. Made from calcium, oxygen and carbon dioxide.
CaCO3 = Ca+ CO2 + O
Adding CO2 makes the natutal production of Coral easier. Like adding CO2 makes it easier for nature to build plants.
Long story short: they really wanted to believe it, so even the most obviously impossible became possible.
This new understanding of coral skeleton formation can only make sense if one more thing is true: that seawater is not in direct contact with the growing skeleton, as has been commonly assumed. In fact, recent studies of the coral calcifying fluid found that it contains slightly higher concentrations of calcium and three times more bicarbonate ions than seawater does, supporting the idea that the growing skeleton is indeed isolated from seawater.
Instead, the researchers propose a model where the corals pump calcium and carbonate ions from seawater through coral tissue, which concentrates those minerals near the skeleton. Importantly, this control allows corals to regulate their internal ion concentrations, even as oceans acidify due to rising carbon dioxide levels.
“Up until this work, people had assumed that there was contact between seawater and the growing skeleton. We demonstrated that the skeleton is completely separate from seawater, and this has immediate consequences”.
https://news.wisc.edu/a-better-understanding-of-coral-skeleton-growth-suggests-ways-to-restore-reefs/
For people growing coral in home fish tanks, the recommended temperature and pH ranges are wide enough to suggest small changes in ocean temperature and/or pH will be harmless. A cyclone / hurricane could cause some serious damage.
Recommended temperature
From 76 to 83 degrees. The biggest advantage to running higher temperatures is increased metabolic rates which can increase coral growth which is something most of us find desirable.
Recommended pH
While short periods of low pH are relatively harmless, prolonged periods of low pH will hinder growth and lead to tank failure. Corals grow best between 8 and 8.4; however, it is common and harmless to have the pH drop as low as 7.8 at night.
I have seen this personally. High-hats and cleaner shrimp are alleged to be very sensitive to water parameters. Yet, we caught them inside Boca inlet (about 5 miles from Mar-a-Lago). Inlets have freshwater intrusion and strong temperature changes on the tides. Guess they were wrong.
Maybe the next President will fire all of NOAA’s executives and demand science from the remaining employees instead of allowing them to cultivate opinions and agendas.
An excellent graphic and article Dr. Steele!