how much warming from adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere is what we

[Saigon]

Ian C -

The question may not only be the scale of theshift in pH, but where that shift occurs.

Coral reefs are extremely delicate ecosystems, which we know do not adapt well to changes in water temperature or pH.

It can well be that a relatively minor change in pH would worlwide would be the end of coral reefs as we know them. I have dived all over the world, and to me this is just tragic.

 

[SSDD]

Really? So the Great Barrier Reef is NOT dying?

You people seem to have a hard time understanding that corelation is not causation. The problems the great barrier reef is experiencing are due to pollution, runoff, and sedimentation...not acidification due to atmospheric CO2.

It amazes me that you have the gall to post material on the Great Barrier Reef - and somehow forget to mention coral bleaching and the staggering loss of biodiversity.

What is amazing is that you don't know the actual sources of the problems coral reefs are having worldwide. This is a prime example of how you warmists take the air out of the room and derail discussion on important topics in favor of imaginary disaster senarios.

Real work needs to be done regarding pollution, run off and ways to reduce sedimentation which are causing damage to reefs all over the world. No such conversation can happen though because you wackos keep quelling any conversation that doesn't involve reducing a harmless trace gas in the atmosphere...and to boot, you blame every damned thing in the world on it.

 

[IanC]

Saigon- your own link states that 90% of the coral loss is due to to storms and starfish predation. we cannot do anything about storms, perhaps we can do something about the pollution that appears to be adding to the starfish problem. bleaching due to pH and warming is quite likely to turn out to be attributable to some other cause, just like so many other things that have been blamed on CO2.

CO2 is an insignificant factor for coral reefs. the only reason it is given such an inflated position is because it represents 'man's sin' and can be taxed. if you want to scream to high heaven about the runoff that feeds the starfish larvae I will support you. but I will not support demonizing plant food that comes from the energy I need for my family to have a decent lifestyle. go live in a cave if you think that will help but I will hold out for technology to provide a solution. that is, if we can train enough new scientists that arent contaminated with the political correctness and lysenkoism of climate science.

 

[Saigon]

Saigon- your own link states that 90% of the coral loss is due to to storms and starfish predation. we cannot do anything about storms, perhaps we can do something about the pollution that appears to be adding to the starfish problem. bleaching due to pH and warming is quite likely to turn out to be attributable to some other cause, just like so many other things that have been blamed on CO2.

.

The fact that only 10% of coral destruction is due to changes in pH and temperature does not mean it is a minor problem.

Cyclones have always hit coral hard and always will - whereas bleaching is a new problem.

I totally agree about agricultural runoff being a major issue - it is also one that large parts of the world are taking very firm action against.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

Again, you fall into the trap of assuming that if X causes a problem, then Y does not.

Agricultural run off is a massive issue, but one that mankind is already taking strong action against.

No such conversation can happen

How little you know!

The EU began action on this 20 years ago, with regulation of farm run-off and the use of fertilizers and phosphates, and particularly against chicken farming, which is a major source of pollution into the Baltic. Finland funded and built a new water treatment station in St Petersburg for exactly this reason.

However, if we do not take action against rising water temperature and pH, there will likely be no coral reefs left at all in 50 - 100 years.

 

[IanC]

Saigon- your own link states that 90% of the coral loss is due to to storms and starfish predation. we cannot do anything about storms, perhaps we can do something about the pollution that appears to be adding to the starfish problem. bleaching due to pH and warming is quite likely to turn out to be attributable to some other cause, just like so many other things that have been blamed on CO2.

.

The fact that only 10% of coral destruction is due to changes in pH and temperature does not mean it is a minor problem.

Cyclones have always hit coral hard and always will - whereas bleaching is a new problem.

I totally agree about agricultural runoff being a major issue - it is also one that large parts of the world are taking very firm action against.

bleaching may be caused in part by SST warming and a shift in pH. may.

again, the temp and pH change are considerably smaller than the normal natural variation in habitat that these corals live in. I have great doubt that those two factors are causing the bleaching, and I expect that a more direct cause will be found.

 

[gslack]

Saigon- your own link states that 90% of the coral loss is due to to storms and starfish predation. we cannot do anything about storms, perhaps we can do something about the pollution that appears to be adding to the starfish problem. bleaching due to pH and warming is quite likely to turn out to be attributable to some other cause, just like so many other things that have been blamed on CO2.

.

The fact that only 10% of coral destruction is due to changes in pH and temperature does not mean it is a minor problem.

Cyclones have always hit coral hard and always will - whereas bleaching is a new problem.

I totally agree about agricultural runoff being a major issue - it is also one that large parts of the world are taking very firm action against.

The entire premise of ocean acidification by man induced CO2 has already been proven an alarmist claim..

The Ocean Is Not Getting Acidified | Watts Up With That?

Principia Scientific Intl | The Myth of ?Acidification? of Oceans

Analysis of Alarmism: Ocean Acidification

There is just a few that show inaccurate the study was that started this claim. The fact is there is absolutely NO basis behind the claim that man-made CO2 emissions are currently making the oceans more acidic. It's another alarmist myth, they claimed using a very small amount of data and has been disproved time and again..

The only people who perpetuate this claims still are the media and those who have a vested interest in making it a problem...

This is I don't know how many times in the last 3-4 years,I have seen this claim rehashed despite it being common knowledge it was false. Seriously update your freaking info already..

 

[Saigon]

Ian -

I don't think there is a lot of doubt that changes in pHand water temperature can and do cause bleaching. There have been too many instances of this for there to be much doubt.

I do agree that agricultural run-off can contribute to the change in pH, although I think the idea that it does so in places as remote as the Cook Islands seems fairly fantastical. In the case of the Barrier Reef the run-off definitely has an impact, because it also contributes to the overpopulation of this particular starfish that is doing so much damage.

I am not sure what else could impact coral on such a vast geographical scale, and particularly so far from urban or agrcultural land.

There are also other issues to consider which relate to CO2 and pH around coral reefs -

When exposed to higher CO2 levels, corals and other reef-building organisms – such as coralline algae – produce their calcium carbonate skeletons at a slower rate. It is the calcium carbonate from these skeletons that forms the reef framework and provides habitat in one of the most biodiverse environments on earth. Slower calcification in these species threatens the ability of the reef itself to maintain integrity as a complex habitat into the future.

Other diverse responses to ocean acidification have been observed, including an increase in algal growth, the impairment of the neurological function in reef fish and reduced coral recruitment success. Importantly, the studies that showed these impacts were based on global-scale ocean chemistry predictions, not the extreme changes now expected to occur in shallow reef systems.

Jumps in ocean acidity put coral in more peril

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I do agree that agricultural run-off can contribute to the change in pH, although I think the idea that it does so in places as remote as the Cook Islands seems fairly fantastical.

Well if it seems fantastical, it can't be true. Every good scientist knows that.

 

[Saigon]

OohPooh -

Well, do you think agricultural run-off could be having a localised impact on pH in the Cook Islands?

If so - where is it running off from?

 

[gslack]

Ian -

I don't think there is a lot of doubt that changes in pHand water temperature can and do cause bleaching. There have been too many instances of this for there to be much doubt.

I do agree that agricultural run-off can contribute to the change in pH, although I think the idea that it does so in places as remote as the Cook Islands seems fairly fantastical. In the case of the Barrier Reef the run-off definitely has an impact, because it also contributes to the overpopulation of this particular starfish that is doing so much damage.

I am not sure what else could impact coral on such a vast geographical scale, and particularly so far from urban or agrcultural land.

There are also other issues to consider which relate to CO2 and pH around coral reefs -

When exposed to higher CO2 levels, corals and other reef-building organisms – such as coralline algae – produce their calcium carbonate skeletons at a slower rate. It is the calcium carbonate from these skeletons that forms the reef framework and provides habitat in one of the most biodiverse environments on earth. Slower calcification in these species threatens the ability of the reef itself to maintain integrity as a complex habitat into the future.

Other diverse responses to ocean acidification have been observed, including an increase in algal growth, the impairment of the neurological function in reef fish and reduced coral recruitment success. Importantly, the studies that showed these impacts were based on global-scale ocean chemistry predictions, not the extreme changes now expected to occur in shallow reef systems.

Jumps in ocean acidity put coral in more peril

Just going to ignore the facts and post your blog articles as truth anyway...

Okay you keep spreading your myths and I will keep telling the truth...

The Ocean Is Not Getting Acidified | Watts Up With That?

Principia Scientific Intl | The Myth of ?Acidification? of Oceans

Analysis of Alarmism: Ocean Acidification

You can ignore the links, and ignore the truth, but others will see it.. STOP SPREADING BS!

 

[SSDD]

The fact that only 10% of coral destruction is due to changes in pH and temperature does not mean it is a minor problem.

There isn't even any hard evidence that 10% or even 1% is due to changes in pH due to atmospheric CO2. Any changes in pH are more likely due to fertilizer runoff and chemical pollution. It is a problem but you are so wrapped up in your cult that you aren't able to see where the problem is coming from.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

Again, you fall into the trap of assuming that if X causes a problem, then Y does not.

So long as the oceans are known to be outgassing CO2, then CO2 is not the problem.

 

[SSDD]

OohPooh -

Well, do you think agricultural run-off could be having a localised impact on pH in the Cook Islands?

If so - where is it running off from?

Ever hear of ocean currents? Take a look at a map of the major currents in the Pacific.
It doesn't take a genius to see where runoff may be coming from. Why don't you try using your brain once in a while rather than having your typical chicken little kneejerk reaction?

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

Again, you fall into the trap of assuming that if X causes a problem, then Y does not.

So long as the oceans are known to be outgassing CO2, then CO2 is not the problem.

Right.

Another scientific "fact" that you understand, and not a single other person on earth does.

I'm sure you don't believe that anymore than you believe there is no such thing as backradiation.

 

[Saigon]

Ever hear of ocean currents? Take a look at a map of the major currents in the Pacific.
It doesn't take a genius to see where runoff may be coming from. Why don't you try using your brain once in a while rather than having your typical chicken little kneejerk reaction?

I'll ask again - where does the run off in the Cook Islands comes from?

We know there are ocean currents - but which current and from where?

 

[SSDD]

Right.

Another scientific "fact" that you understand, and not a single other person on earth does.

I'm sure you don't believe that anymore than you believe there is no such thing as backradiation.

Describe how "acidification" might be happening while the ocean is outgassing more CO2 than it is taking up. what sort of chemistry might be responsible for such a miracle?

 

[SSDD]

Ever hear of ocean currents? Take a look at a map of the major currents in the Pacific.
It doesn't take a genius to see where runoff may be coming from. Why don't you try using your brain once in a while rather than having your typical chicken little kneejerk reaction?

I'll ask again - where does the run off in the Cook Islands comes from?

We know there are ocean currents - but which current and from where?

The west coast of the US, South America, Australia, and Asia. In addition to having no critical thinking skills, are you also unable to read a simple map? Arent you able to see that there is a convergence of currents passing right across the coook islands from all of those coasts?

 

[Dot Com]

Jon Bezerk -

I think what the best scientists in the world tell us is probably quite real enough.

Water is not poisonous, and is in fact essential to our survival. But drink enough of it fast enough, and we die.

We know that trace elements can influence climate, because we have seen this with the increase (and now decrease) in the ozone hole. Deniers seem to often forget that.

What is critical here is obviously not the fact that CO2 exists as a trace gas, but that the dramatic increase in its quantity alters the very fine balance of the atmopshere.

^ that. For some reason Deniers are hell bent on waiting or ignoring the entire record. By then its too late as was mentioned earlier we are experiencing climes do to actions from 30 yrs ago

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

I'll ask again - which ocean current, and where does the run off come from?

And yes, I know you have never heard of the Cook Islands and do not know where they are. The problem is - I do know where they are, and I know the ocean currents in the region.

The point I am tryin to get through to you here is that it runoff occurs in California, it is highly improbable that it would sail across the ocean in a giant block, and then hit beaches of Nukualofa, isn't it?

Arent you able to see that there is a convergence of currents passing right across the coook islands from all of those coasts?

I am not able to see that because there is no convergence, and you do not know where the Cook Islands are.