Well, I guess that means I had better start posting again on the topic. In fact I have been fighting the battle at another blog lately, with some success I think. (Well, one hopes there is at least one open minded reader of skeptical blogs who I might have influenced.) The blog in question: Jennifer Marohasy. The main target there: Dr Steven Short, who argues against ocean acidification being a cause for concern, but on grounds I have repeatedly challenged in light of reported experiments. He's far from convinced me of the error of my ways, and his labelling of me as a postmodern, Nazi loving imbecile makes me suspect he's not exactly a shining light of reasoned debate.
On the ocean acidification front, there have been a couple of reports of interest recently. One is about a study of some East Pacific coral reefs which are already in low carbonate saturated waters, and how these may be a model for future reefs as saturations levels fall in future. As the "alarmists" would have guessed, these reefs appear to not be well cemented together, and if repeated elsewhere we will presumably have reefs which are more rapidly eroded, and (in likelihood) only able to build fresh coral at a slower rate than before.
As to other effects of acidification, a study on the fertilisation success rates for sea urchins indicates that they are going to find it significantly harder to reproduce in future due to lower ocean pH. The worry is, of course, that no one really knows what other species of sea creatures are going to have reproduction rates affected. There's a hell of a lot of species to test. The implications of a possible widespread effect on reproductive rates has scientists rightly worried:
..Havenhand said. ‘I really hope I’m wrong about the broader implications of our work. However, the available evidence points to the conclusion that at present acidification is the biggest threat to the long-term viability of our ocean ecosystems and especially to key invertebrate species that maintain many of the marine ecosystems on which we rely for food, protection, and recreation.’I didn't see much of the Four Corners story last night on melting Arctic ice, but I could imagine Andrew Bolt's blood pressure rising as he watched it. I did have a look at one of the extended interviews on the Four Corner's website (the one with Ted Scambos), and he looked very calm, cool and reasonable while expressing the reasons for his great concern. (But, I can hear a skeptic cry, he thought the 2008 melt would be worse than it is. It seems to me that the 2008 ice cover is no where near a recovery of such an extent to dismiss the overal trend to melting.)
I find it hard to imagine how climate skeptics can watch such interviews and maintain their conspiratorial view against the whole of greenhouse warming science.
And anyway, as I say, if ocean acidification alone is a big enough worry (and I reckon it is) then you don't have to worry about temperatures and ice melts at all as being justification for action.
Link to previous articles: any new reader via John Quiggin's is welcome to look back over my previous posts on ocean acidification here.
No comments:
Post a Comment