[Ibon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', 'I') wonder what it is that is mostly causing this acidity? Perhaps some kinds of acids are less damaging than others??

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ibon', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', 'I') wonder what it is that is mostly causing this acidity? Perhaps some kinds of acids are less damaging than others??

[dohboi]

I think it's more like perhaps a hopeful sign that since this coral has evolved in this area to thrive in acid waters, perhaps some kind of coral can make it in the future acidic waters.

But I think it would probably take trying to intentionally take this kind of coral (and probably at least some of the various species that live around it) and getting it started in other areas. Such attempts are fraught with various perils, of course--you might be introducing some predator or 'weed' into a new area that has no natural controls; and you are likely not going to be able to replicate the unique environment that helped this particular type of coral thrive... But perhaps something like this is the last best hope for the future of corals.

But, yeah. Denialist idiots will say all sorts of things. But they'll do that no matter what anyway. After all, they constantly just make sh!t up out of thin air anyway.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', 'I') think it's more like perhaps a hopeful sign that since this coral has evolved in this area to thrive in acid waters, perhaps some kind of coral can make it in the future acidic waters.

But I think it would probably take trying to intentionally take this kind of coral (and probably at least some of the various species that live around it) and getting it started in other areas. Such attempts are fraught with various perils, of course--you might be introducing some predator or 'weed' into a new area that has no natural controls; and you are likely not going to be able to replicate the unique environment that helped this particular type of coral thrive... But perhaps something like this is the last best hope for the future of corals.

But, yeah. Denialist idiots will say all sorts of things. But they'll do that no matter what anyway. After all, they constantly just make sh!t up out of thin air anyway.

[americandream]

Personally, I think we need to make our minds up about these issues and go for it. If, as we seem to believe that the world is imminently collapsing, then I would suggest pushing that agenda hard. Graeme for example perplexes me. One minute he is all rebellious woefulness at the imminent end of the world and the next, full on with hope and glory. This only serves to confuse and the confused do not act. I am often confused by his posts. But the one thought sticks at the back of my mind, always. The infinite does not go into the finite. Basic arithmetic for dunces.

The early revolutionaries got it right. Find the problem and get on with it.

I will give the denialists credit. They never concede territory, not one inch.

[Newfie]

Talk about confusing! I though you were not in favor of action, just contemplation?

If not, then good, glad for the clarification.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'T')alk about confusing! I though you were not in favor of action, just contemplation?

If not, then good, glad for the clarification.

[Newfie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'T')alk about confusing! I though you were not in favor of action, just contemplation?

If not, then good, glad for the clarification.

[Graeme]

One Quarter of the World's Cartilaginous Fish, Namely Sharks and Rays, Face Imminent Extinction

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')ne quarter of the world's cartilaginous fish, namely sharks and rays, face extinction within the next few decades, according to the first study to systematically and globally assess their fate.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN's) Shark Specialist Group (SSG), co-chaired by Nick Dulvy, a Simon Fraser University (SFU) Canada Research Chair in Marine Biodiversity and Conservation in British Columbia, conducted the study.

It was published ineLife journal today.

Previous studies have documented local overfishing of some populations of sharks and rays. But this is the first one to survey their status through out coastal seas and oceans. It reveals that one-quarter (249) of 1,041 known shark, ray and chimaera species globally fall under three threatened categories on the IUCN Red List.

"We now know that many species of sharks and rays, not just the charismatic white sharks, face extinction across the ice-free seas of the world," says Dulvy. "There are no real sanctuaries for sharks where they are safe from overfishing."
Over two decades, the authors applied the IUCN's Red List categories and criteria to the 1,041 species at 17 workshops involving more than 300 experts.

They incorporated all available information on distribution, catch, abundance, population trends, habitat use, life histories, threats and conservation measures.
Sharks and rays are at substantially higher risk of extinction than many other animals and have the lowest percentage of species considered safe. Using the IUCN Red List, the authors classified 107 species of rays (including skates) and 74 species of sharks as threatened. Just 23 percent of species were labeled as being Least Concern.

[kiwichick]

thanks g

what about fish like tuna and salmon?

i thought they were in a worse position

[SeaGypsy]

Salmon are at least in a few places, protected from overfishing and being a regional fish they seem to do ok with a bit of assistance. Tuna being a truly global set of species, being highly mobile throughout their lifespan, roaming oceans from end to end- damned difficult to get them all. Sharks on the other hand, aside from a few species are generally regional and territorial, rarely protected, relatively easy to catch by hook or by net, have a ridiculously high price tag on their small body parts.

[dinopello]

NY Times: Ocean Life Faces Mass Extinction, Broad Study Says

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') team of scientists, in a groundbreaking analysis of data from hundreds of sources, has concluded that humans are on the verge of causing unprecedented damage to the oceans and the animals living in them.

“We may be sitting on a precipice of a major extinction event,” said Douglas J. McCauley, an ecologist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and an author of the new research, which was published on Thursday in the journal Science.

[onlooker]

I think in this back and forth debate about the degree of damage being inflicted upon the Earth, we all should keep in mind we are speaking of degrees, damage is ongoing this last study that Dinopello referenced is just one from several that I am aware of which truly paint a bleak picture of the viability of the oceans in the future. What is indisputable is the trajectory of damage and degradation occurring in ocean and land ecosystems. The trajectory is of increasing damage and disruption. The exasperation everyone on Earth should feel is what are we waiting for to act vigorously -a mass dieoff event. I guess so but of HUMANS because the Holocene extinction according to some scientists has been ongoing and gaining momentum since 10000 years ago. By the way Holocene refers to induced by human activity.

[dissident]

The processes are cumulative and self-reinforcing. This is something that most casual human observers who drink the techno-topian koolaid do not get.

The oceans are a major sink for CO2 via the growth of plankton and its subsequent death and sedimentation to the seabed. A lot of the CO2 is re-released via bacterial remineralization but:

1) it stays dissolved in the water column and does not merely bubble back up to the surface.

2) A significant fraction gets sequestered in the sediments and is removed from the system so to speak. This "diagenesis" is complex and includes release of CH4 from the deeper sediment layers. But there is a slow carbon sink.

Warming of the oceans leads to conditions where the "detritus rain" remineralization and CO2 release occur over a shallower depth. Bacterial chemistry is sensitive to temperature. So we have more CO2 near the surface that can be released back into the atmosphere, less carbon sequestration into the seabed and increased acidity of the biologically active surface ocean layer. The increased acidity causes the breakdown of CaCO3, which is typically not consumed by bacteria and sediments to the seafloor if it does not dissolve en route. The acidity amplifies the temperature signal.

It is the height of arrogance and obnoxious stupidity for all sorts of amateur self declared "experts" on climate who don't have a clue about the physics to run around and act as if their opinions on the science matter. Perhaps dogs and cats can join the debate as well.

[dohboi]

"Warming of the oceans leads to conditions where the "detritus rain" remineralization and CO2 release occur over a shallower depth. Bacterial chemistry is sensitive to temperature. So we have more CO2 near the surface that can be released back into the atmosphere, less carbon sequestration into the seabed and increased acidity of the biologically active surface ocean layer. The increased acidity causes the breakdown of CaCO3, which is typically not consumed by bacteria and sediments to the seafloor if it does not dissolve en route. The acidity amplifies the temperature signal."

Thanks. This is an important part of the carbon cycle that I'm still trying to learn the subtleties of. Can you provide any links that you have found to be most useful in explaining it? Any such help would be appreciated.

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', '&')quot;Warming of the oceans leads to conditions where the "detritus rain" remineralization and CO2 release occur over a shallower depth. Bacterial chemistry is sensitive to temperature. So we have more CO2 near the surface that can be released back into the atmosphere, less carbon sequestration into the seabed and increased acidity of the biologically active surface ocean layer. The increased acidity causes the breakdown of CaCO3, which is typically not consumed by bacteria and sediments to the seafloor if it does not dissolve en route. The acidity amplifies the temperature signal."

Thanks. This is an important part of the carbon cycle that I'm still trying to learn the subtleties of. Can you provide any links that you have found to be most useful in explaining it? Any such help would be appreciated.

[onlooker]

Thanks Dissident for that short primer about the cumulative effects of CO2 causing acidification over the long term. It is especially ominous in so much as from what I understand Extinction Level events have occurred due in no small part to increased CO2 levels and acidification. I provide link here to a explanation of how experts believe all this may have played out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anoxic_event
a key passage is this "In this way, an oceanic anoxic event can be viewed as the Earth’s response to the injection of excess carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hydrosphere." A very toxic and nasty chemical then is the catalyst for a mass extinction namely Hydrogen Sulfide, here is link with explanation of this nasty chemical. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 063957.htm

[dissident]

I forgot to list an important detail. The particulate sedimentation flux is a rapid process compared to the slow transport by the ocean circulation. The sedimentation velocity is in 10s of meters per day and it does not take centuries for the carbon to be transported to the deep. So the surface warming has a "short circuit" impact on the oceans via the detritus rain. Changes in this biological pump system will manifest themselves on short timescales.

In these threads we have been mostly focused on discussing systems that will take a long time to respond, including the Greenland ice sheet and permafrost/clathrates.