Plimer's oceans (and why salmon matter more than you think)

When it first came out, I was led to believe by a radio interview that Ian Plimer's "Heaven + Earth" did not address ocean acidification in detail.

It turns out that was a mistake. Someone at Marohasy's blog, where I occasionally enter the fray, pointed out that Plimer had a section of about 8 pages (from memory) on the topic.

Over the weekend, I was in Adelaide (travelogue post to come) and was able to browse quickly through Plimer's book in the Museum of South Australia bookshop. (!) Indeed, he does address the topic, but from my quick look, I am certain that a very thorough Fisking of that section could easily be done by anyone who has actually read things such as the Royal Society 2005 paper.

However, there's no way I am forking out $40 for the privilege of doing that.

If anyone knows how I could get my hands of those pages from the book, I would be happy to hear from you.

[Now for my attempt to be "fair and balanced", just like my favourite TV news network. (Well, I do like quite a lot of it.) It is definitely the case that popular media reporting of ocean acidification is increasingly using terms which suggest that the ocean will actually become acid in future. This is completely misleading and inaccurate, but it gives Plimer a straw man to complain about. (By the way, I could see from my quick browse of his book that Plimer spends a lot of time repeating what he briefly says in that link, namely, that the oceans can't go acidic. Yes, Ian, we know that.)

The scientific concern has never been that humans burning carbon can turn the oceans' .pH from the alkaline side of the scale into acid. Rather, the reduced alkalinity alone has sufficient effect on the ocean's carbonate chemistry to have effects on its ecology. There's no way the ocean is going to go completely sterile, but the worry is that pretty damned big changes are underway, as has happened in the past.*

I can understand Plimer and the skeptics being annoyed at the way the media is reporting it, but by the same token, it is disingenuous of him to spend time arguing how the oceans cannot "turn into acid" when that was never the issue.]

* I heard for the first time, in a recent nature documentary on the ABC about the salmon breeding cycle in North America, about how the massive number of salmon that die far inland after spawning are now believed to provide a lot of the nitrogen that the huge conifers there need to grow. So, it would seem a reasonable assumption that, if future acidification reduces salmon food and decreases that population, the coastal forests of North America are going to suffer in the long run too. It's a good example of why it is prudent not to just take the attitude that the ocean ecology will sort itself out and we don't have to worry about it.