Why CO2 is a worry, revisited

Acid oceans warning

It's nearly a year since the post in which I explained that I could no longer sit on the fence over the issue of rapidly rising CO2 in the atmosphere not just because of whatever level of global warming may result, but (perhaps even more importantly) because of the effects of ocean acidification. These effects, it seemed to me, would be much more easily tested and verified.

This position seems further vindicated by these comments by an Australian scientist (see link at top):

“Analysis of coral cores shows a steady drop in calcification over the last 20 years,” says Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of CoECRS and the University of Queensland. “There’s not much debate about how it happens: put more CO₂ into the air above and it dissolves into the oceans.

“When CO₂ levels in the atmosphere reach about 500 parts per million, you put calcification out of business in the oceans.” (Atmospheric CO₂ levels are presently 385 ppm, up from 305 in 1960.)

“It isn’t just the coral reefs which are affected – a large part of the plankton in the Southern Ocean, the coccolithophorids, are also affected. These drive ocean productivity and are the base of the food web which supports krill, whales, tuna and our fisheries. They also play a vital role in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which could break down.”

Just to remind you, the "do nothing" graph showing how quickly the earth would reach 500 ppm looks like this:



(This appeared with a few other useful charts at my previous post here.)

I would like to hear the sceptical argument against taking ocean acidification seriously, if there is one. I do, however, remain deeply sceptical about a lot of the response to greenhouse gases, especially Kyoto. Alex Robson in the Daily Telegraph recently pointed out again its glaring defects.

Yet, like windpower, many voters will warm to Labor's promises to sign up to it, as it gives that nice warm feeling of doing something. But such fiddling at the edges is probably more of a problem itself if it delays serious thinking about how real results can be achieved.

People may pooh-pooh Bush's recent emphasis on new technology being the primary way forward, but it seems to me he's probably right.