Home › News › County News
Acidification harming sea, expert says
Scientists say impact on oceans could be extensive
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsScientists first believed that because the ocean absorbs about a quarter of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it was a good way to soften the blow from global warming.
But science is now showing that just like the air, the ocean can be greatly affected by global warming, and perhaps even more in the Santa Barbara Channel than other places around the globe.
"We now realize it has serious consequences for our ocean," said Richard Feely, a chemical oceanographer who was part of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which along with Al Gore, won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. "It certainly is a problem that has come up quickly over time, but people are beginning to make the connection now."
Feely spoke Friday in Santa Barbara to the Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary Advisory Council, which voted to start researching, monitoring and educating on the impacts of ocean acidification.
Data show that over the last 50 years, as the levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide increased, so did the level of acidity in the oceans, Feely said. The highest concentrations of the acidic water are in the upper level of the water columns, where the majority of the ocean's species live.
If nothing is done to curb the amount of carbon dioxide that humans produce — by burning fossil fuels for energy — the impact on the ocean could be vast, he said.
Studies show that a higher acidity level in the ocean affects creatures that have shells — lobster, sea urchins, clams — and can lead to them producing weaker, thinner shells as well as hurt their ability to reproduce.
Aside from the obvious impact on fisheries — the California sea urchin fishery, densely concentrated in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, is valued at about $20 million annually — the effects could travel up the food chain.
Salmon, for example, mainly feed on small snails during the wintertime. If the snails are affected, the impact could reach salmon, too, he said. About 20 percent of the protein that people consume worldwide comes from the ocean.
A bill is before the Senate to form a national panel to study ocean acidification.
"This is an issue that represents food resources for a billion people or more," Feely said.
The waters off Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, where a process called "upwelling" brings water from the depths of the sea to the top, could be more affected than other areas because that process would elevate more acidic water to the sea's top layer.
Gretchen Hofmann, a professor at UC Santa Barbara who has been studying the impacts of acidification on purple urchins, said early studies don't paint a good picture.
She has done laboratory research testing how purple urchins would fare even if carbon dioxide emissions were reduced through the use of better technology. Even under that scenario, the urchins' growth and functions were greatly impacted, she said.
However, she said it's possible that other species will learn to be resilient to the change and adapt. Others could just switch feeding habitats or environments.
"I don't think we'll have everything collapse, but this will be difficult," she told the Sanctuary Advisory Council.
Bruce Steele, a Santa Barbara sea urchin diver, said the impacts on urchins are just the start. If global warming continues unchecked, he said, there will a lot more to be concerned with than how one fishery does.
"The cumulative effect of the decisions of the way we live our lives are going to have ramifications for multiple lifetimes on this planet," he said.
Posted by bushy on September 22, 2008 at 4:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh boy there are so many things wrong with this article.
First of all the ocean is alkaline and in no danger of becoming acidic or even PH neutral. That means the statements "levels of acidity, acidic water" etc. are misleading and false. At worst the ocean water may become slightly less alkaline.
Secondly it is at first stated that the highest levels of the so called acidic water are in the upper levels of the water column but then claims that upwelling will bring higher level acidic water from the depths?
This kind of half-c---ed and misleading "science" does no-one any favours.
Posted by goldeneye on September 22, 2008 at 7:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Stop crying wolf! These global warming ninnies are becoming annoying. Their science is nothing more than a nature based faith. They are the mother earth godless left. There leader, Al Gore, is the pied piper of fools.
Posted by lee_eddington on September 22, 2008 at 7:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This article never explains how rising levels of CO2 supposedly produce increased levels of acid in the ocean.
Posted by cassandra2 on September 22, 2008 at 7:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Er . . . . where did you commenters get your degrees and training in science? Or anything else for that matter?
You okay with Darwin? How about Copernicus/Galileo?
The Flat Earth Society would love you.
Posted by kosmoz13 on September 22, 2008 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
godless left is creating the global warming rumor...
so what am I "supposed to believe".
That there is a God and because his son was Jesus, we can drive our SUV's as far and as long as God allows because God gave us oil to drill and use to drive our automobiles. And God wants us to kill Iraqui's because their religion is not ours. We know *WE* are the chosen ones and our religion is the only true GOD. And God would want small town folk in office over us evil city dwellers, may they REPENT their sins!!!! Small town folk would have the old fashioned charm they could use as Foreign Policy, a cup of coffee and a slice of apple pie will disarm those Nukes.
The climate is changing, I guess if you don't believe that than you don't have to worry about gathering emergency food or water. You definitely wouldn't have to worry about learning how to grow your own food in case you run out. You certainly don't need to know how to turn grey water into filtered water. No need to look into a wood burning stove should we ever not have power. You certainly wouldn't need an emergency evacuation plan. Don't prepare for the future of this polluted planet. Just keep signing your praises and you will be saved. Its a self correcting problem really.
Posted by kosmoz13 on September 22, 2008 at 8:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Old Money and old beliefs. It's 2008 y'all. 2010 is not too far away. Time to wake up and stop being such a damn robot consumer. You'll end up like this assh*(e with thirteen cars, what kind of greedy basta*d would own that many automobiles? Or that's right, JOHN MC CAIN.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160091
Posted by kosmoz13 on September 22, 2008 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
13 cars and 7 houses, but he had to use public funding to finance his campaign. Whereas, Obama funded his entire campaign from donations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/us/...
Posted by kosmoz13 on September 22, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh and a good explanation of Ocean Acidification from Wikipedia. Yes I know Wiki isn't the best resource for valid info, but this source has all it's citations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_ac...
Posted by cason on September 22, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Bottom line, if you Bush/Palin terrorist supporting ____s would just look up and notice how nasty the air above our county is. Possibly, your so drugged up on your FDA approved science experiments you can't remember how clean the air above us used to be just ten years ago. Alternatives need to be put in place now, period.
I love Jesus, but Jesus doesn’t' preach war, he preaches peace. I believe he would say to main stream Christianity that you don't believe in him if you follow your own selfish shoes. Remember what Jesus said to the prostitute at the well who has more favor than you temple hangarounds. God seeks those who worship in spirit and truth not those who worship at the mountain and the temples. Remember Jesus said that the man who admits he is a sinner and has nothing to offer other than his whole hearted confession is the man he wants, not the man who tithes regularly and thinks he is justified because of his religious practices. Remember Jesus and take care of this place, and for Christ's sake stop striking out against our neighbors,Iran, Russia, Iraq, U.S.
Posted by bugmenot on September 22, 2008 at 9:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
let the games begin...
Posted by 02eat1 on September 22, 2008 at 9:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It is time to change the focus of the debate. The observable facts (real world temperatures and other natural phenomena) undermine the premise of Anthropgenic Global Warming (AGW)and instead support a premise that global cooling is already underway and may have severe consequences that we should be preparing for.
Read the theory on cooling from Space and Science Research Center (SSRC) at http://www.spaceandscience.net/sitebu.... Read or skim to the bottom for the conclusion.
This is accessible from the SSRC home page which is available at http://www.spaceandscience.net/
This theory is about to be verified by the US agency that is in bed with the alarmist, NASA, in a media event tomorrow as shown here (http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/...). Note the subject of this conference is the validation of the theory presented by the SSRC.
Lastly, it is interesting to note that the defunct Lehmann company was heavily vested in the Carbon Trading scheme, the first of many organizations that may find their fortunes undermined by embracing this failed theory as shown here (http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bi...). CA is likely to be one of these failed organizations unless we wise up.
For the pagens opportunists that are wholly vested in AGW as a means to an end, this is bad news, very bad news. For the rest of us, we need to consider the words of Lord Keynes who said, "when the facts change, I change my mind". The facts do show it is time to ask our government to stop this blather on AWG and instead start planning to mitigate the impacts of the cooling trend.
It starts with studies, such as, if this is similar to the pattern that caused the demise of the Mayan civilization due to prolonged draught, what are the implications for water delivery for the western states in general and CA in particular. From the studies we then can have intelligent planning to mitigate the real threat instead of Chicken Little's proposition that the sky is falling.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am tempted to say that the increased temperature increases the solubility of CO2 in the ocean and that this article is discussing a change in pH not the absolute acidification of the ocean however, I won't waste anyone's time.
No point trying to explain GW to scapegoat, et al. I spend many words quoting National Academy of Science report, giving statistics and scientific references, and the like in a previous blog about a couple of weeks ago and it concluded with scapegoat saying he just does not give a s**t about the next generation. Its a waste of time. They do not want to know.
Move on to something more productive. Glenn Beck and the Heartland Institute are the prophets followed by the anti- climate change folks.
Posted by bugmenot on September 22, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
maybe that's your problem. you shouldn't be such a realist. ;)
Posted by ReadMyLipsNoNewTaxes on September 22, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It is clear why this 'expert' on climate change is speaking out on this subject...
"...A bill is before the Senate to form a national panel to study ocean acidification..."
As they say, follow the money.
Posted by NowHearThis on September 22, 2008 at 11:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm tired of leftist-liberal scientists concocting lies and studies the fit their self-aggrandizement. The ocean is too big for any one to think global warming is causing changes in the ocean.
The only acid I see occurring on this planet, is on the brain of leftist-liberal global warming climate change pursuers.
Posted by dse_kpa on September 22, 2008 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The right at it again. There IS global warming and anyone not looking at the facts is a fool. It shocks me to see how many people are really in denial. People who write these articles should be applauded.
Posted by THX1138 on September 22, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Whew, it's a good thing we made it through the ice age predicted during the 70's... Actually we're still waiting for that to happen. The GW gang is probably made up of leftovers from that group of so-called experts.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
nowhearthis, whatever, readmylips,
I am sure you realize the two primer scientific organization - National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have asked us to worry about man's role in climate change. These are not some left-wing radicals in Birkenstocks. They are mainstream scientists. Please see links below.
Do you really believe Glenn Beck has more credibility than these organizations? If no, what are you basing your views on?
Posted by caroldammit on September 22, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm puzzled as to what some here find so objectionable about the seeking of knowledge. Is trying to find out what our collective impact on the only human life-supporting planet that we are aware of, and hoping to minimize any possible negative effects, that heinous? I can't even fathom what the thought processes must be when suggesting that scientists are lying about their research and making things up. To what possible end? So they can be mocked and ridiculed by people who...well, like I said-I just don't understand anyone who is against learning and growing.
NowHearThis: Do you really believe that the world's oceans are "too big" for climate change, anthropogenic (I like my new word for the day 02 :o) or not, to have any effect on them? Please consider the effect of a tiny virus on the relatively immense human body.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
whatever, well said and I do appreciate we all believe different things. (Though I hardly believe the weather channel guy has the credibility of the NAS and AAAS).
Now the next question, if you are wrong, and climate change is happening and we have a serious problem with global food supplies and massive weather catastrophies, would we have been prudent not to act?
In other words, if there is a 1% chance of something with a $1,000,000,000,000 consequence, we have to act. This is studied in the field of risk managment. This is why we have all sorts of codes and standards for risk mitigation. Why is this different?
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 12:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nowhearthis said:
"The ocean is too big for any one to think global warming is causing changes in the ocean."
Wow, you have got to be kidding. Have you not been reading about the catastropy in our global fisheries due to man's overfishing? Many fish stock are down 90%. We have decimated large tracks of ocean. I tell my kids not to expect to be able to eat wild tuna or cod when they grow up.
Just look at what we have done in the Asian rainforests. I went to Southern Sumatera where just 20 years ago, there was thick rainforest and now is just thousands of acres of barren land after logging and burning to clear the land for agriculture.
Reports from various collaborated sources say that about 25% of mamals in the world are on a path of extinction. This is a scale not seen in 650 million years.
People are so toe-curlingly ignorant about what is going on in the world its scary.
Posted by lawabider on September 22, 2008 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Most animals through natural processes eliminate the "weak" from their herds and their gene pools -- humans are the ONLY species of animal that protect, provide for and increase their numbers of "defective" -- we have over-populated the planet and are stripping its great resources rapidly -- we also consume garbage on a monumental level all in the name of a dollar... politics and religion are similar in that they are male-dominated, power and money-driven factions designed to control mass populations through our own personal fears -- creating an element of fear in us gives them control... Yes, we are wasteful -- yes, we use too much of our resources -- but are we responsible for a universal affect on the planet?? Only arrogance would say that we are! By the way, the glaciers were melting LONG before humans swam out and walked!!! (sarcasm)
Posted by jdgab on September 22, 2008 at 1:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Anyone who has taken high school chemistry knows (or should know) that water absorbs greater amounts of CO2 as the temperature of the water DROPS! I guess that demonstrates that the ocean is getting cooler if the CO2 content is in fact increasing.
Look it up.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 1:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It took the earth 300 million years to create the fossils remains that became our hydrocarbon resources. We are on track to burn it up in 100 years. It does not take arrogance to believe this will have ramifications. It takes common sense.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
jdgab, I think its more to do with the fact that as the CO2 concentration in the air increases, the amount of it that dissolves in the water also increases.
Posted by jdgab on September 22, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Re: solubility of CO2 in seawater
Here is a web site that is more explicit.
http://www.elmhurst.edu/~chm/vchemboo...
Also take a look at Henry's law which is used to quantify the solubility of gases in solvents. The solubility of a gas in a solvent is directly proportional to the partial pressure of that gas above the solvent. This relationship is written as: P=kc
"where k is a temperature-dependent constant (for example, 769.2 L•atm/mol for dioxygen (O2) in water at 298 K), p is the partial pressure (atm), and c is the concentration of the dissolved gas in the liquid (mol/L)." Atmospheric pressure has pretty much remained constant for mankinds' existence, so the main significant change has alway been temperature.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
jdgab,
You are absolutely right. The partial pressure of CO2 is directly proportional to its concentration. Hence, the higher the concentration of CO2 in the air, the higher the concentration will be in the water as they reach equilibrium. For example, the concentration of benzene in the headspace of a container of gasoline will reach dynamic equilibrium with the concentration of the benzense in the gasoline. If the gasoline has higher benzene, the headspace will have higher benzene. This dynamic equilibrium is in play with CO2 in water and air as well.
Posted by jdgab on September 22, 2008 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Re: solubility of CO2 in seawater.
I guess that I didn't explain the equation properly. The partial pressure of the CO2 is dependent on the atmospheric pressure. When the atmospheric pressure remains constant, the concentration of the gas in the solvent(water) is inversely proportional to the temperature of the system. Therefore, when the temperature rises the concentration of the gas in the water goes down and the concentration of the gas in the atmosphere goes up.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We should leave temperature aside for the moment (since the ocean temperatures have not changed much). As you said, the partial pressure of a mixture of gases is proportional to their concentrations.
As the concentration of CO2 in the atmophere has increased, there is a higher diffusion rate of CO2 from the atmosphere to the water surface. This is increasing the concentration of CO2 in the water. There is a dynamic equilibrium balance that is kept in check by Henry's Law. CO2 concentrations have rised from 280 ppm to 350 ppm in the atmosphere, one would expect the concentration in the water to increase as well.
Let me make my example more clear on benzene. If you take a jar of water and inject benzene in the headspace (air) of that jar, eventuually the concentration of benzene will increase in the water as well. The higher the benzene in the air, the higher it will be in the water until it reaches saturation.
Posted by keem_s on September 22, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey I am doing the best I can at drinking as much carbon dioxide filled Diet Coke as possible, only problem is after downing an entire can the buildup of CO2 reaches critical mass and buuuurp it escapes. Drives Al Gore crazy every time, I love it.
Posted by opi on September 22, 2008 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yes, marketrealist and jdgab,, yes indeed, but you both neglect to include "emulsification" into your equation,
a kindergartener knows that as CO2 reaches 280 ppm to 350 ppm the inverse factor of "emulsification" takes effect ("mikes law") as the levels of CO2 rise equilibrium is achieved by "reverse Osmosis" hence excess CO2 is extracted "elmulsified" and expunged.
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 3:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
keem, I would recommend beer myself. The CO2 generated from yeast is a lot better. Tip one for me. I can't till the evening.
Posted by Auberryparshcake on September 22, 2008 at 3:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I can't get over all the insults, to really learn anything here. Godless leftest???? Prior to George Bush we as a country were not trillions in debt. Period. No taxes were raised or anything;) You go, godless right wing ignoramous'.
Posted by ReadMyLipsNoNewTaxes on September 22, 2008 at 3:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I didn't say there is or isn't global warming.
I am just sick of people trying to make money off of it.
The idiots who drive hybrids for example. Hybrids cause more damage to the environment because of the batteries that are manufactured and destroyed, yet they don't get any better mileage than a turbo diesel.
There are 100s of these examples like this guy saying we should 'put more money towards studying the problem'. Lets use thes same money towards making cleaner burning coal, cleaner cars, etc...
Carbon credits are another thing that is idiotic, I could go on an on...
I'm synical, but the 'business of green' is growning and it is a joke. Gore is the CEO of the company and look at how he lives his life! A 20,000 square foot house, flying around in private jets, etc....
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
readmylips, I appreciate everything you said.
I don't drive a hybrid. My Toyota Corolla gets 38 mpg.
While I don't like clean coal (its an oxymoron), I do agree with your suggestion of cleaner burning cars with higher mpg.
Carbon credits are terrible. I think we should have a BTU tax and be done with it. The higher the amount of energy you use, the more you pay. The funds could go to build a mass transit system, build more compact cities, etc.
No one, neither Gore nor Bush, need huge homes. We should encourage smaller fuel efficient homes. Cut back on our environmental footprint.
See, you are a hardcore radical environmentalist.
One question though. You don't believe in people making money on green issues. Are you a socialist as well? Fine by me either way. Just curious.
Posted by ReadMyLipsNoNewTaxes on September 22, 2008 at 4:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
My 1991 VW diesel pickup truck gets about 45mpg, as far as a hardcore radical environmentalist. Hardly, I ride dirt bikes.
I have no problem with people investing in green technology. I just don't want my tax dollars funding it. A socialist has the government 'invest' money a libertarian thinks the market will find a solution without government intervention.
I should have made myself clear in my first post. I am against GOVERMENT (IE **MY** tax dollars) funding this research.
Posted by kosmoz13 on September 22, 2008 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"a *kindergartener* knows that as CO2 reaches 280 ppm to 350 ppm the inverse factor of "emulsification" takes effect ("mikes law") as the levels of CO2 rise equilibrium is achieved by "reverse Osmosis" hence excess CO2 is extracted "elmulsified" and expunged."
: ) this one made me chuckle.
We do need more education about the natural laws of physics in our elementary schools, kindergarten would be a great place to begin. Where are they teaching this lesson in kindergarten? I'll enroll them next semester!
Posted by marketrealist on September 22, 2008 at 5:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Excuse me cause its to hard to keep labels straight.
One might even say that $1 trillion to bail out Wall Street would be communist nationalization of private business but of course, these are hardcore capitalists who just need some help after profiteering. Is it socialism for the rich? Or no, a socialist govt would want more regulations, which the McCain/Palin team does not believe in.
There is one thing we all have in common, if there are problems, us poor workers at the bottom of the feeding chain pay for it. The top 1% get their tax breaks and have their money invested in Brazil.
Posted by JWFOXNEWS on September 22, 2008 at 8 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All you right wing nut cakes keep drinking that kool aide by the 55 gallon drum.
Posted by horsespinner on September 22, 2008 at 9:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
good those urchins have been eating all of the kelp. At last something besides me is after the urchins. I have though about this for awhile, nothing but divers kill urchins. Those buggers have been laying our reefs to waste. Long live the CO2. This may actually work. About time
Posted by handyhood on September 22, 2008 at 9:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!!!
Posted by caroldammit on September 23, 2008 at 7:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Scape! You're a poet! I love it!!! :o)
I have to say tho, that I only need look outside my office door (no windows :o( ) to see how much mankind has altered the natural world with concrete and construction. Sure, if we radically changed our manufactured lifesyles tomorrow, nature would spring right back in a few thousand years. Here's hoping that we never pass the point of no return.
TO AUTUMN
"Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness,
Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun;
Conspiring with him how to load and bless
With fruit the vines that round the thatch-eaves run;"
-J. Keats
Posted by moorparkman2000 on September 23, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
CO2 + H2O ---> H2CO3
Now multiply that by 120949835792438570394857023948570345
Posted by ReadMyLipsNoNewTaxes on September 24, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I thought C02 + H2O = C3PO
Posted by gramagracie on September 24, 2008 at 9:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Scapegoat you always come up with the greates, simplest truth..love it! People please realize that we are a very small country, who share the oceans, with other countries. These other countries have no care in the world about "GLOBAL WARMING". They think we are kooks. I live in the desert..it is hot here...fall is upon on and it is cooling to 100 degrees. Your dirty cloud above your head is because there are so many people living in a small area, let's put a control over population explosion..yeah that's the key...less people...less need for all the things that are poisoning our "country". (I am being sarcastic, for those of you who don't get it.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 45 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.