Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Carbon Cycle  (Read 200106 times)

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3637
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 633
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #200 on: March 09, 2015, 01:53:29 PM »
There is a mention in this TED Talk by University of Manitoba Professor David Barber about CO2 exchange through sea ice at approximately minute 4:45 - 5:05: [/url]
Also, near the end of the talk he says that we don't know if the Arctic (or Arctic Ocean?) will be a net CO2 source or sink.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3204
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 572
  • Likes Given: 387
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #201 on: March 12, 2015, 06:08:03 PM »
Well, this paper suggests that, whatever the Arctic Ocean becomes, the other major global carbon sinks are weakening: http://www.biogeosciences.net/11/3453/2014/bg-11-3453-2014.pdf

And here's Joe Romm's write up on it, where he notes:

this is one of the most consequential recent findings by climatologists, with significant policy implications

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/12/3632373/carbon-sinks-climate-action/

Quote
uptake rate, kS, “declined over 1959–2012 by a factor of about 1/3, implying that CO2 sinks increased more slowly than excess CO2.”
« Last Edit: March 12, 2015, 06:50:55 PM by wili »
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #203 on: March 25, 2015, 03:47:53 PM »
Laurent posted a link to this paper a couple days ago and I think it has some important new info on the oceanic dissolved organic carbon pool ( DOC )
 The ocean has the largest inorganic carbon pool with ~ 37,000 Gt C of inorganic carbon ( DIC ) and the ocean also contains a large ~ 660 Gt DOC pool. I was always under the opinion that the residence time of these carbon pools was similar to the overturning time of the worlds oceans at 1000-1500 years. This paper  finds however that there is DOC with residence times up to 30,000 years. I would be interested to know what forms of semi-labile carbon form such long lived carbon pools.
 
 
   Abstract
Marine dissolved organic carbon (DOC) is a large (660 Pg C) reactive carbon reservoir that mediates the oceanic microbial food web and interacts with climate on both short and long timescales. Carbon isotopic content provides information on the DOC source via δ13C and age via Δ14C. Bulk isotope measurements suggest a microbially sourced DOC reservoir with two distinct components of differing radiocarbon age. However, such measurements cannot determine internal dynamics and fluxes. Here we analyze serial oxidation experiments to quantify the isotopic diversity of DOC at an oligotrophic site in the central Pacific Ocean. Our results show diversity in both stable and radio isotopes at all depths, confirming DOC cycling hidden within bulk analyses. We confirm the presence of isotopically enriched, modern DOC cocycling with an isotopically depleted older fraction in the upper ocean. However, our results show that up to 30% of the deep DOC reservoir is modern and supported by a 1 Pg/y carbon flux, which is 10 times higher than inferred from bulk isotope measurements. Isotopically depleted material turns over at an apparent time scale of 30,000 y, which is far slower than indicated by bulk isotope measurements. These results are consistent with global DOC measurements and explain both the fluctuations in deep DOC concentration and the anomalous radiocarbon values of DOC in the Southern Ocean. Collectively these results provide an unprecedented view of the ways in which DOC moves through the marine carbon cycle.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/47/16706.abstract

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #204 on: March 26, 2015, 06:01:13 PM »
The linked 2014 reference concludes: "Our results suggest that predicted future increases in ocean temperature will result in reduced CO2 storage by the oceans."

Marsay, C. M. et al. (2014), "Attenuation of sinking particulate organic carbon flux through the mesopelagic ocean", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1415311112

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/4/1089.abstract

Abstract: "The biological carbon pump, which transports particulate organic carbon (POC) from the surface to the deep ocean, plays an important role in regulating atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations. We know very little about geographical variability in the remineralization depth of this sinking material and less about what controls such variability. Here we present previously unpublished profiles of mesopelagic POC flux derived from neutrally buoyant sediment traps deployed in the North Atlantic, from which we calculate the remineralization length scale for each site. Combining these results with corresponding data from the North Pacific, we show that the observed variability in attenuation of vertical POC flux can largely be explained by temperature, with shallower remineralization occurring in warmer waters. This is seemingly inconsistent with conclusions drawn from earlier analyses of deep-sea sediment trap and export flux data, which suggest lowest transfer efficiency at high latitudes. However, the two patterns can be reconciled by considering relatively intense remineralization of a labile fraction of material in warm waters, followed by efficient downward transfer of the remaining refractory fraction, while in cold environments, a larger labile fraction undergoes slower remineralization that continues over a longer length scale. Based on the observed relationship, future increases in ocean temperature will likely lead to shallower remineralization of POC and hence reduced storage of CO2 by the ocean."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #205 on: March 31, 2015, 07:00:49 PM »
Swirling currents deliver phytoplankton carbon to ocean depths
http://phys.org/news/2015-03-swirling-currents-phytoplankton-carbon-ocean.html

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #206 on: April 03, 2015, 04:21:25 PM »
The linked article finds that the prevailing assumption that increased plant exudate activity due to global warming would increase mineral protection of soil carbon is too narrow of a worldview as in reality: "We find that a common root exudate, oxalic acid, promotes carbon loss by liberating organic compounds from protective associations with minerals. By enhancing microbial access to previously mineral-protected compounds, this indirect mechanism accelerated carbon loss more than simply increasing the supply of energetically more favourable substrates."

Marco Keiluweit, Jeremy J. Bougoure, Peter S. Nico, Jennifer Pett-Ridge, Peter K. Weber and Markus Kleber (2015), "Mineral protection of soil carbon counteracted by root exudates", Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/nclimate2580


http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2580.html


Abstract: "Multiple lines of existing evidence suggest that climate change enhances root exudation of organic compounds into soils. Recent experimental studies show that increased exudate inputs may cause a net loss of soil carbon. This stimulation of microbial carbon mineralization (‘priming’) is commonly rationalized by the assumption that exudates provide a readily bioavailable supply of energy for the decomposition of native soil carbon (co-metabolism). Here we show that an alternate mechanism can cause carbon loss of equal or greater magnitude. We find that a common root exudate, oxalic acid, promotes carbon loss by liberating organic compounds from protective associations with minerals. By enhancing microbial access to previously mineral-protected compounds, this indirect mechanism accelerated carbon loss more than simply increasing the supply of energetically more favourable substrates. Our results provide insights into the coupled biotic–abiotic mechanisms underlying the ‘priming’ phenomenon and challenge the assumption that mineral-associated carbon is protected from microbial cycling over millennial timescales."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Ymir

  • New ice
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #207 on: April 04, 2015, 03:47:45 PM »
I've been very slowly making my way through several threads, I'm probably months of reading behind the level of debate frequently occurs on here. I have a question that is pethaps overly simple and this seems the best thread to ask it in. If carbon or the amount of carbon remains in the atmosphere for 500-1000 years and is causing warming for all, or at least a significant amount of time; is reducing emissions actually going to achieve much? Given the amount we have already spewed out? I mean isn't there already enough to heat the atmosphere by a number of degrees C. and won't that increase remain for that 500-1000 years?

Edit- and in that case aren't we fucked, sooner or later, probably sooner?
« Last Edit: April 04, 2015, 03:54:03 PM by Ymir »

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #208 on: April 04, 2015, 10:55:51 PM »
I've been very slowly making my way through several threads, I'm probably months of reading behind the level of debate frequently occurs on here. I have a question that is pethaps overly simple and this seems the best thread to ask it in. If carbon or the amount of carbon remains in the atmosphere for 500-1000 years and is causing warming for all, or at least a significant amount of time; is reducing emissions actually going to achieve much? Given the amount we have already spewed out? I mean isn't there already enough to heat the atmosphere by a number of degrees C. and won't that increase remain for that 500-1000 years?

Edit- and in that case aren't we fucked, sooner or later, probably sooner?

Ymir,

If society can reach zero net emissions (i.e. where society is emitting as much carbon as nature can absorb naturally) then using Negative Emissions Technology, NET [see attached image], as discussed in the linked document (such as reforestation/afforestation) can remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere (assuming that either society gets serious, or collapses to the extent that forests regrow around the world).

http://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/research-programmes/stranded-assets/Stranded%20Carbon%20Assets%20and%20NETs%20-%2006.02.15.pdf

See also:

http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,363.0.html
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Ymir

  • New ice
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #209 on: April 05, 2015, 12:00:48 AM »
Thanks, so making civilisation "carbon neutral" is only a first step? I'm ambivalent about geo engineering, it sounds like a great way to make things worse. I've read too many scientists say its too risky.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #210 on: April 05, 2015, 01:00:23 AM »
Thanks, so making civilisation "carbon neutral" is only a first step? I'm ambivalent about geo engineering, it sounds like a great way to make things worse. I've read too many scientists say its too risky.

Ymir,

There are many different types of geoengineering, and I also do not trust Solar Radiation Management, SAR; which is why I only referred the Negative Emissions Technology, NET, as I assume that you that you are not overly concerned about planting more forests.

Best,
ASLR
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #211 on: April 10, 2015, 08:20:25 AM »
Previously, I posted the following information in the "Arctic Methane Release" thread in the Permafrost folded; however, as jai pointed-out that the paper is about carbon emissions [most likely more about CO2 emissions from the soil (particularly due to heat generated by soil microbes) than methane releases], I decided to re-post this information here in the Carbon Cycle thread:

The linked reference (see also the associated attached image) characterizes the types of soil microbiomes in the permafrost, soil active layer and thermokarst bogs around the world that are becoming more active with increasing global warming.  This is a positive feedback factor that is not fully accounted for the AR5 projections.

J Hultman J, MP Waldrop, R Mackelprang, MM David, J McFarland, S Blazewicz, J Harden, MR Turetsky, AD McGuire, MB Shah, NC VerBerkmoes, L Lee, K Mavrommatis, and JK Jansson (2015), “Multi-Omics of Permafrost, Active Layer, and Thermokarst Bog Soil Microbiomes,” Nature, doi:10.1038/nature14238


http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nature14238.html


Abstract: "Over 20% of Earth’s terrestrial surface is underlain by permafrost with vast stores of carbon that, once thawed, may represent the largest future transfer of carbon from the biosphere to the atmosphere. This process is largely dependent on microbial responses, but we know little about microbial activity in intact, let alone in thawing, permafrost. Molecular approaches have recently revealed the identities and functional gene composition of microorganisms in some permafrost soils and a rapid shift in functional gene composition during short-term thaw experiments. However, the fate of permafrost carbon depends on climatic, hydrological and microbial responses to thaw at decadal scales. Here we use the combination of several molecular ‘omics’ approaches to determine the phylogenetic composition of the microbial communities, including several draft genomes of novel species, their functional potential and activity in soils representing different states of thaw: intact permafrost, seasonally thawed active layer and thermokarst bog. The multi-omics strategy reveals a good correlation of process rates to omics data for dominant processes, such as methanogenesis in the bog, as well as novel survival strategies for potentially active microbes in permafrost."

See also:
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/climate-change-is-causing-arctic-microbes-to-be-more-active-and-increase-the-thawing-of-permafrost-2015-4
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

foolhardycougar

  • New ice
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #212 on: April 14, 2015, 03:12:35 PM »
All living things are made of carbon. Carbon is also a part of the ocean, air, and even rocks. Because the Earth is a dynamic place, carbon does not stay still. It is on the move!In the atmosphere, carbon is attached to some oxygen in a gas called carbon dioxide.Plants use carbon dioxide and sunlight to make their own food and grow. The carbon becomes part of the plant. Plants that die and are buried may turn into fossil fuels made of carbon like coal and oil over millions of years. When humans burn fossil fuels, most of the carbon quickly enters the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and traps heat in the atmosphere. Without it and other greenhouse gases, Earth would be a frozen world. But humans have burned so much fuel that there is about 30% more carbon dioxide in the air today than there was about 150 years ago, and Earth is becoming a warmer place. In fact, ice cores show us that there is now more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than there has been in the last 420,000 years.

bosbas

  • New ice
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #213 on: April 15, 2015, 04:20:37 AM »
Foolhardycougar wrote: " there is about 30% more carbon dioxide in the air today than there was about 150 years ago".
Well, no - there is about 42% more carbon dioxide in the air today than there was about 150 years ago, or, 150 years ago there was 30% less carbon dioxide in the air compared with today.

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #214 on: April 16, 2015, 10:26:44 PM »
Climate driven variability in the Southern Ocean carbonate system
Published 16 April 2015    Science Leave a Comment
Tags: chemistry, globalmodeling, modeling
We investigate seasonal and interannual variability in the Southern Ocean carbonate system using output from a historically forced (1948-2007) ocean general circulation model with embedded biogeochemistry. Atmospheric CO2 is fixed at pre-industrial levels to investigate carbonate system variability in the absence of an anthropogenic CO2 perturbation. We find that nearly one quarter of interannual variability in Southern Ocean Pacific sector surface carbonate ion concentration (CO23-) can be explained by variability in ENSO, with Pacific sector surface CO23- decreasing by 0.43 mmol m−3 per standard deviation decrease in the ENSO 3.4 index. ENSO related variability in vertical advection of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) drives this relationship between ENSO and surface CO23-. We also find that positive phases of the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) are associated with decreased Southern Ocean surface CO23-, an association driven by SAM-related variability in vertical advection of DIC. Despite the influence of SAM on interannual variability in surface CO23-, we find that only 4.5% of the trend in natural Southern Ocean surface CO23- exhibits linear congruence with the trend in wind stress. Given this, we predict that the positive trend in SAM will not have a substantial impact on ocean acidification. Lastly, we find that ENSO alters the wintertime minimum in surface CO23-. Assuming a business-as-usual acidification rate of 0.5 mmol m−3 yr−1, exacerbation of the wintertime minimum during La Niña conditions may advance the date of aragonite undersaturation within the central Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean by as many as 8 years.


Conrad C. J. & Lovenduski N. S., in press. Climate driven variability in the Southern Ocean carbonate system. Journal of Climate. Article (subscription required).

Ymir

  • New ice
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #215 on: April 18, 2015, 11:38:30 PM »
Another question, that may be a bit simplistic: I've read that the last time we were at 400 ppm of CO2 the temperature was 3-4 Celsius warmer and sea level was many metres higher, does that mean that we are inevitably heading to at least those conditions, once the time lag in warming catches up with CO2 levels? I appreciate that it may be considerably more complicated than that and that the amount of CO2 is still in ncreasing each year.

Could I also ask how much warming is locked in? The figures of 1.5 sound ludicrously low to me but my understanding is limited.

Thanks.

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #216 on: April 19, 2015, 06:34:45 AM »
Ymir, Although about half of our carbon emissions are retained in the atmosphere the carbon emissions taken up by terrestrial and oceans sinks that have expanded as our emissions have increased return part of that sequestered carbon back into the atmosphere eventually. With enough time ( < 1000 years ) most of the sequestered carbon is moved back into the atmosphere where a fraction is again sequestered into the terrestrial and ocean sinks. Only a small fraction is sequestered into mineral forms that cycle on tectonic time scales.  So I am trying to say most of the carbon we emit will cycle back on fairly short ( < 1000 year ) timescales and only a small fraction will be sequestered in mineral forms that cycle in timeframes greater than 1000 years. So the carbon we emit will be with us a long time. The greater the amount of carbon we put into these short lived carbon pools the longer the time it will take to sequester that small fraction that can be annually moved into deep ocean sediments. It will take many cycles of plant to air/ ocean and repeat to eventually take up the 500 gigatonnes of carbon we have already emitted. 
 It will take significantly longer if we continue BAU and emit the 2500 gigatonnes carbon in proven fossil fuel reserves.
 The doubling of atmospheric Co2 from 280ppm to 560ppm depending on climate sensitivity 
will result in a temperature increase of 2.6-4.1 degrees C.    
    
   http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-advanced.htm

 Since we obviously aren't going to stop emissions anytime soon picking some point within the next few decades when we do reach doubling will result in about a 3 degree temperature change on average with of course much of that heat concentrated in Arctic regions. If that doubling occurs when the Arctic Sea Ice has already reached summer melt out the climate sensitivity will increase as well as average world temperatures.
 So ballpark locked in 3+ degrees within the span of a human life assuming atmospheric CO2 doubling.
 Since we are currently only about half way to CO2 doubling the 1.2-1.5 degrees currently locked in seems reasonable. To bad we aren't calling it quits however.   

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #217 on: April 19, 2015, 12:39:37 PM »
Ymir - I do ask myself the same question...I don't think anyone has the answer...

First you should not think of CO2 concentrations but of CO2 equivalent concentrations (485 ppm) that is where we are now, but you have to take into account the inertia of the system. Before the French revolution the earth was on a downward trend so the expectation was downward, today it is not anymore downward or flat, we are on an upward trend so the expectation is (even if we stop everything now) upward.

Secondly, the amount of CO2eq in the atmosphere is important but the amount of CO2 dissolved is also important. (We should have a better idea, when the superargos float will deliver some results) We have to consider also all the CO2 eq that we produce and the one that is due to increase (almost unknown) due to the temps increasing and chemical balance.

3°C for equilibrium, may be, but I think it is too low...


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #218 on: April 29, 2015, 04:48:32 PM »
The linked article points to research indicating that with increase plant activity (driven by increase atmospheric CO2 & global warming) that soils will release more CO2 (which was not realized previously).

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/29/3652020/global-soil-week-forum-recap/
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #219 on: April 30, 2015, 09:58:33 PM »
Bacterial Steroids: They Get 'Pumped Up' By CO2 From Dying Phytoplankton
http://www.science20.com/news_articles/bacterial_steroids_they_get_pumped_up_by_co2_from_dying_phytoplankton-155145

Quote
"We typically think of temperature and other physiochemical factors as being critically important in determining the bacterial processing of diatom detritus and how deep it sinks in the ocean, but this work shows that the molecular composition of 'infochemicals' really matters," said Bidle.

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #220 on: May 12, 2015, 10:57:34 AM »
Is 2015 The Year Soil Becomes Climate Change’s Hottest Topic?
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/29/3652020/global-soil-week-forum-recap/

Quote
. A recent report by scientists at Oregon State University, however, found that when chemicals emitted by plant roots interact with minerals in soil, it can cause carbon to break free. This exposes the carbon to decomposition by microbes in the soil, which pass it into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. As the climate warms, the scientists found, more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will stimulate the growth of plants, which will in turn stimulate the production of the root compounds that breakdown carbon and soil minerals.

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #221 on: May 12, 2015, 09:04:56 PM »
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Around 55 million years ago, an abrupt global warming event triggered a highly corrosive deep-water current through the North Atlantic Ocean.  The current's origin puzzled scientists for a decade, but an international team of researchers has now discovered how it formed and the findings may have implications for the carbon dioxide emission sensitivity of today's climate.
            http://news.psu.edu/story/357102/2015/05/11/solving-corrosive-ocean-mystery-reveals-future-climate

The researchers explored the acidification of the ocean that occurred during a period known as the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), when the Earth warmed 9 degree Fahrenheit in response to a rapid rise in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and subsequently one of the largest-ever mass extinctions occurred in the deep ocean.  They report their findings in today's (May 11) issue of Nature Geoscience.

This period closely resembles the scenario of global warming today.

“There has been a longstanding mystery about why ocean acidification caused by rising atmospheric carbon dioxide during the PETM was so much worse in the Atlantic compared to the rest of the world’s oceans,” said lead author Kaitlin Alexander, ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, University of New South Wales, Australia. “Our research suggests the shape of the ocean basins and changes to ocean currents played a key role in this difference. Understanding how this event occurred may help other researchers to better estimate the sensitivity of our climate to increasing carbon dioxide.”

To get their results the researchers recreated the ocean basins and land masses of 55 million years ago in a global climate model.

During that time a ridge on the ocean floor existed between the North and South Atlantic that separated the deep water in the North Atlantic from the rest of the world’s oceans. The ridge was like a giant bathtub on the ocean floor.

The simulations showed this ridge became filled with extremely corrosive water from the Arctic Ocean, which mixed with dense salty water from the Tethys Ocean and sank to the seafloor, where it accumulated. The sediment in this area indicates the water was so corrosive that it dissolved all the calcium carbonate produced by organisms that settled on the ocean floor.

When the Earth warmed as a result of a rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, it eventually warmed this corrosive bottom water. As this water warmed it became less dense and denser water sinking from above replaced it. The corrosive deep water was pushed up and spilled over the edge of the giant “bathtub” and flowed into the South Atlantic.

“That corrosive water spread south through the Atlantic, then east into the Southern Ocean and eventually made its way to the Pacific,” said Tim Bralower, professor of geosciences, Penn State. “The pattern of the event corresponds very closely to what the sediment records tell us. Those records show almost 100 percent dissolution of calcium carbonate in the South Atlantic sediment.”

Determining how the event occurred also has important implications for today’s climate and how it might warm in response to increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
 
If the high amount of acidification in the Atlantic Ocean was an indication of global acidification, then it would suggest enormous amounts of carbon dioxide are necessary to increase temperatures by 9 degrees Fahrenheit. However, these latest findings suggest that other factors made the Atlantic bottom water more corrosive than in other ocean basins.

“We now understand why the dissolution of sediments in the Atlantic Ocean was different from records in other ocean basins,” said Katrin Meissner, associate professor, Climate Change Research Centre, University of New South Wales. “Using all sediments combined we can now estimate that the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere causing a temperature rise of 5°C (9 degrees Fahrenheit), was around the carbon dioxide equivalent of 7,000 to10,000 gigatons of carbon. This is similar to the amount of carbon available in fossil fuel reservoirs today.”

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #222 on: May 15, 2015, 02:25:34 PM »
I don't know if that news was shown here before, that's new to me.
Quote
But a December 2014 study of Pacific oyster and Mediterranean mussel larvae in Nature Climate Change determined that “the earliest larval stages are directly sensitive to saturation state, not carbon dioxide (CO2) or pH” (acidity). So what matters most is how much calcium carbonate is in the ocean water relative to the total amount it could hold.
I am not sure what type of saturation to they speak about, is it Ca2+ ?

Carbon Pollution’s Harm To Sea Life Coming Faster Than Expected
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/05/12/3657571/carbon-pollution-sea-life/

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #223 on: May 15, 2015, 03:10:21 PM »
Laurent, There are two forms of calcium utilized by mollusks ,aragonite and calcite. Because aragonite is the more soluble form it is the " saturation state " of aragonite used for biological studies. Oysters utilize aragonite in the first few days of life and switch to calcite as they grow into maturity. It is in the first few days of life while they are building their shells with aragonite that they are most vulnerable .
Saturation state ( or Omega) values below 1 cause shell dissolution but acquiring the calcium they need gets harder and harder the closer  Omega values approach undersaturation. Pacific oysters in aquaculture facilities begin to die at Omega values of 1.5   



Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #224 on: May 15, 2015, 05:38:13 PM »
Thanks Bruce Steel !
So the Aragonit is CaCO3...and Calcite, CaCO3 too...ok...same compound but different cristals...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragonite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcite

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #225 on: May 16, 2015, 06:01:30 AM »
Laurent, That's right, calcium carbonate is both aragonite and calcite, and also to make it a little more complicated there is also a high magnesium form.  For biological purposes the aragonite form is the one we use when we talk about the" saturation state". I would like to thank you for following the carbon cycle .... And I appreciate your contributions to the terrestrial part of the discussion + + . I feel a little lost in the weeds sometimes but how the earth cycles carbon is  the big game IMO. I love the lessons in meteorology I get on this site , I love the friendly discussions on politics, but how the carbon cycle responds to the stresses we are forcing on it will determine climate sensitivity , and ultimately how hot this planet really gets. Acidification , again in my opinion , will not be as big an impact on hominids as the temperature increases I think we will experience over the next 30-50 years. If somehow the damage of the loss of the arctic sea ice and the albedo consequences don't kick in positive feedbacks that overwhelm our current ff carbon inputs acidification will not interrupt the ocean in unrepairable ways. If however the current carbon sinks fail as we continue to ramp up carbon emissions then ocean acidification will result in a spectacularly large ocean extinction event. So the responsibility for triggering huge damage is ours , testing the outcome of BAU by ignoring how our climate might respond long term... After we damage the carbon sinks is just frigen terrifying . They  can't be revived if carbon feedbacks exceed current anthro contributions. Sorry for the rant, it's been a long day in meetings.What I wanted to say and didn't.     

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2538
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #226 on: June 30, 2015, 10:23:28 AM »
Multicentury changes in ocean and land contributions to the climate-carbon feedback
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1002/2014GB005079/full

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #227 on: July 10, 2015, 04:12:15 PM »
"New research paints an unsettling picture of the future of shellfish in coastal Alaska. The effects of ocean acidification are worsening and could mean the end of hatcheries in the next 25 years if costly mitigation efforts aren’t put in place."

http://www.alaskapublic.org/2015/07/08/ocean-acidification-may-drive-shellfish-hatcheries-out-of-business-by-2040/

With enough money the hatcheries can adapt ( for awhile )but the native shellfish stocks and native shellfish recruitment will slow and then fail for numerous species. The long tail of acidifications effects should stretch out several tens of thousands of years and my yammering on about it for the last ten years hasn't made any difference in the outcome.   The arctic sea ice, the tundra, and then human populations will follow suit. It has been depressing watching .   

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #228 on: July 13, 2015, 05:03:07 PM »
The linked reference (with an open access pdf) presents improved findings that between 2000 and 2012 both the natural and the managed tropical rainforest emitted relatively high levels of carbon into the atmosphere:

A Tyukavina et al (2015), "Aboveground carbon loss in natural and managed tropical forests from 2000 to 2012", Environ. Res. Lett. 10 074002, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/7/074002

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/10/7/074002/article
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/10/7/074002/pdf/1748-9326_10_7_074002.pdf

Abstract: "Tropical forests provide global climate regulation ecosystem services and their clearing is a significant source of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and resultant radiative forcing of climate change. However, consensus on pan-tropical forest carbon dynamics is lacking. We present a new estimate that employs recommended good practices to quantify gross tropical forest aboveground carbon (AGC) loss from 2000 to 2012 through the integration of Landsat-derived tree canopy cover, height, intactness and forest cover loss and GLAS-lidar derived forest biomass. An unbiased estimate of forest loss area is produced using a stratified random sample with strata derived from a wall-to-wall 30 m forest cover loss map. Our sample-based results separate the gross loss of forest AGC into losses from natural forests (0.59 PgC yr−1) and losses from managed forests (0.43 PgC yr−1) including plantations, agroforestry systems and subsistence agriculture. Latin America accounts for 43% of gross AGC loss and 54% of natural forest AGC loss, with Brazil experiencing the highest AGC loss for both categories at national scales. We estimate gross tropical forest AGC loss and natural forest loss to account for 11% and 6% of global year 2012 CO2 emissions, respectively. Given recent trends, natural forests will likely constitute an increasingly smaller proportion of tropical forest GHG emissions and of global emissions as fossil fuel consumption increases, with implications for the valuation of co-benefits in tropical forest conservation."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #229 on: July 17, 2015, 11:07:04 PM »

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #230 on: August 17, 2015, 03:57:58 PM »
World’s coral reefs doomed even if COP21 is ‘wildly successful’
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/worlds-coral-reefs-doomed-even-if-cop21-wildly-successful-expert-says-1515710


Coral reefs, as they were 50 years ago, will not be found anywhere on Earth by the middle of the century, an expert has warned. Professor Peter F Sale, from the University of Windsor, Canada, claims the world’s coral reefs cannot be saved – even if the climate change talks in Paris in December (COP21) are “wildly successful”.

Presenting at a Plenary session analysis at the Goldschmidt conference in Prague, Sale said: “Even if Paris is wildly successful, and a treaty is struck, ocean warming and ocean acidification are going to continue beyond the end of this century. This is now serious; I find it very unlikely that coral reefs, as I knew them in the mid-1960s, will still be found anywhere on this planet by mid-century. Instead, we will have algal-dominated, rubble-strewn, slowly eroding limestone benches.


“I see little hope for reefs unless we embark on a more aggressive emissions reduction plan. Aiming for CO2 at 350ppm, or a total warming of around 1C is scientifically defendable, and would give reefs a good chance; a number of coral reef scientists have called for this.” At present, world leaders hope to reach climate change agreements that will lead to global temperatures increasing by no more than 2C by the end of the century.

Ocean acidification is considered a major threat to the world’s coral reefs. Last year scientists from the Carnegie Institution in Washington DC said coral growth rates in Australia’s Great Barrier Reef have fallen by 40% over the last 40 years – a drop they have largely attributed to the absorption of CO2 into the ocean.

Similarly, a more recent study from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany found it will take more than 700 years to reverse ocean acidification to the point of pre-industrial conditions – even with aggressive CO2 removal techniques.

Sale noted, however, that it is not just CO2 emissions that politicians should be concerned about when it comes to “other insults” to the world’s oceans: “We have lost 90% of our commercial fish biomass since the 1940’s, we are polluting coastal waters, and the great majority of marine protected areas are not being protected. Either we agree limits, which means the end of the’ high seas’, or we let large parts of the seas die.

“Knowing what we are doing, do we have the ethical right to eliminate an entire ecosystem from this planet? It’s never been done before. But watching as our actions lead to the loss of all coral reefs on the planet is like removing all rainforests. I don’t believe we have that right”.

John Veron, former chief scientist of the Australian Institute of Marine Science, added: “The extreme gravity of the current predicament is now widely acknowledged by reef and climate scientists. They also accept that only drastic action starting now will prevent wholesale destruction of reefs and other similarly affected ecosystems. Should humanity not be successful in preventing these threats from becoming reality, no amount of management or expenditure will save future generations from the consequences of our failed guardianship.”

Hannah Osborne, International Business Times, 16 August 2015. Article.

Rate this:
      Rate This
« Last Edit: August 17, 2015, 04:03:26 PM by Bruce Steele »

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #231 on: August 17, 2015, 04:23:49 PM »
About one fourth of the CO2 produced by humans each day is being taken up by the oceans, resulting in a chemical reaction leading to a higher acid content in the water. In the long run, this can threaten marine life forms such as corals or shellfish as the acidification reduces the shell and skeleton production. This would affect biodiversity and the intricately interwoven food webs. Thus the CO2 uptake by the oceans is a danger for marine life. 

Therefore hopes have been placed on carbon dioxide removal measures. One option: huge amounts of biomass – for instance fast growing trees such as poplar - consuming CO2 during growth could be burnt in bioenergy plants where the CO2 gets captured and stored underground (CCS). While this technology is not yet proven at an industrial scale and would have to be carefully balanced against land needs for food production, one major intended benefit would be to preserve the oceans from acidification.

“In the deep ocean, the chemical echo will reverberate for thousands of years”

“We did a computer experiment and simulated different rates of CO2 extraction from the atmosphere – one reasonable one, but also a probably unfeasible one of more than 90 billion tons per year, which is more than two times today’s yearly emissions,” says co-author Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, USA, who worked on this issue during a research stay at PIK. The experiment does not account for the availability of technologies for extraction and storage. “Interestingly, it turns out that after business as usual until 2150, even taking such enormous amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere wouldn't help the deep ocean that much – after the acidified water has been transported by large-scale ocean circulation to great depths, it is out of reach for many centuries, no matter how much CO2 is removed from the atmosphere.”

https://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/co2-removal-cannot-save-the-oceans-2013-if-we-pursue-business-as-usual

This study was referenced in the article on doomed coral ecosystems posted above. Important to note BAU till 2150 will cause damage much beyond the current and ongoing coral declines and likely extinctions. So even though we don't currently have the technology to remove GigaTonnes carbon from the atmosphere we are acting and emitting as though we do. 
atmosphere IPCC 

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #232 on: September 02, 2015, 04:03:35 AM »
The linked MIT article discusses the major impact that ocean acidification will have on phytoplankton by 2100 (see extract):

ews.mit.edu/2015/ocean-acidification-phytoplankton-0720

Extract: "In a study published today in the journal Nature Climate Change, the researchers report that increased ocean acidification by 2100 will spur a range of responses in phytoplankton: Some species will die out, while others will flourish, changing the balance of plankton species around the world.

The researchers also compared phytoplankton’s response not only to ocean acidification, but also to other projected drivers of climate change, such as warming temperatures and lower nutrient supplies. For instance, the team used a numerical model to see how phytoplankton as a whole will migrate significantly, with most populations shifting toward the poles as the planet warms. Based on global simulations, however, they found the most dramatic effects stemmed from ocean acidification.

Stephanie Dutkiewicz, a principal research scientist in MIT’s Center for Global Change Science, says that while scientists have suspected ocean acidification might affect marine populations, the group’s results suggest a much larger upheaval of phytoplankton — and therefore probably the species that feed on them — than previously estimated.

“I’ve always been a total believer in climate change, and I try not to be an alarmist, because it’s not good for anyone,” says Dutkiewicz, who is the paper’s lead author. “But I was actually quite shocked by the results. The fact that there are so many different possible changes, that different phytoplankton respond differently, means there might be some quite traumatic changes in the communities over the course of the 21st century. A whole rearrangement of the communities means something to both the food web further up, but also for things like cycling of carbon.”"
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #233 on: September 03, 2015, 06:50:21 PM »
For those who are interested the following linked PPT provides an overview of the chemistry for some key Earth Systems:

https://www.climatescience.org.au/sites/default/files/QMS512_2015_L6_Chase.pdf
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #234 on: September 08, 2015, 05:34:53 AM »
Skeptical Science has a good O/A overview that is written to stress timeframes of processes involved and in language most of us can understand. Bottom line is the rate of CO2 emissions plays a large role in acidification of surface waters of the earths oceans as the processes of terrestrial delivery of alkalinity are overwhelmed. Net result is increased hydrogen ions ( acidification ) decreased carbonates, rising saturation horizon and thus a smaller volume of the ocean that can absorb organic carbon supplied by primary productivity. Article also describes timeframes  for ocean heat absorption relative to atmospheric forcing and examples of former extinction events due to forcing events similar to current rates of CO2 emissions.

  http://www.skepticalscience.com/you-cant-rush-the-oceans.html

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #235 on: September 09, 2015, 10:25:23 PM »
The linked reference discusses observational based finding about climate sensitivity of shrub growth in the tundra around the Arctic region.  The findings are more complex than previously modeled; which, indicates that climate models should be updated to incorporate the new findings:

Isla H. Myers-Smith, et al. (2015), "Climate sensitivity of shrub growth across the tundra biome", Nature Climate Change, Volume: 5, Pages: 887–891, doi:10.1038/nclimate2697


http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n9/full/nclimate2697.html


Abstract: "Rapid climate warming in the tundra biome has been linked to increasing shrub dominance. Shrub expansion can modify climate by altering surface albedo, energy and water balance, and permafrost, yet the drivers of shrub growth remain poorly understood. Dendroecological data consisting of multi-decadal time series of annual shrub growth provide an underused resource to explore climate–growth relationships. Here, we analyse circumpolar data from 37 Arctic and alpine sites in 9 countries, including 25 species, and ~42,000 annual growth records from 1,821 individuals. Our analyses demonstrate that the sensitivity of shrub growth to climate was: (1) heterogeneous, with European sites showing greater summer temperature sensitivity than North American sites, and (2) higher at sites with greater soil moisture and for taller shrubs (for example, alders and willows) growing at their northern or upper elevational range edges. Across latitude, climate sensitivity of growth was greatest at the boundary between the Low and High Arctic, where permafrost is thawing4 and most of the global permafrost soil carbon pool is stored. The observed variation in climate–shrub growth relationships should be incorporated into Earth system models to improve future projections of climate change impacts across the tundra biome."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #236 on: September 16, 2015, 06:55:09 AM »
I suppose I am more hung up on what acidification is projected to do to various invertebrates and especially sea urchins than most people here but when I see a paper projecting zero settlement within 80 years for a sea urchin species I take note. Purple urchins ( Paracentrodus Lividus )or Mediterranean sea urchins are like most urchins millions of years  in existence and apparently not long for time left.

"   Settlement was delayed by 8 days at pH 7.7 compared to pH 8.1, and no settlement was observed at pH 7.4. Overall, only sublethal effects were observed in larvae exposed to pH 7.7, while pH 7.4 induced both lethal and sublethal effects "

If I can get my g-mail to work I will link the paper but maybe it's just more numbers, one more species headed for extinction, one more million year old species getting rubbed out by manunkind.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #237 on: September 16, 2015, 05:38:39 PM »
maybe it's just more numbers, one more species headed for extinction, one more million year old species getting rubbed out by manunkind.

As the Anthropocene is all about us, we probably shouldn't worry that since 1970 the number of fish and other species in the sea has been more than halved.


http://mashable.com/2015/09/16/marine-population-halved-since-1970/
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #238 on: September 16, 2015, 08:38:17 PM »
ASLR, Neither the link you provide nor the one that makes similar claims that sigmetnow posted provide a shred of scientific evidence about their actual sources. So if you prefer to repeat crap put out by an NGO like WWF who is in the business of selling scare tactics for the benefit of their coffers I suppose me telling you that here on the US west coast we don't have Any overfishing currently taking place because we have regulated most fishing into nonexistence while at the same time importing over 90% of all seafood from countries with fewer or nonexistent fisheries protections. The few fishermen who still ply US waters and have struggled to both protect and enforce the most stringent fishery regulations in the world are thrown under the bus while corporate and NGO's interests cash in at the bank.
 My last post was about the upcoming Extinction of a sea urchin species that everyone is collectively promoting with BAU but there isn't any profit for WWF to fight that battle so they fly around the world, push regulations by expensive lawyers in DC that ultimately outsource the problems and the carbon footprint of their own actions.
 There isn't one fish species in the world you can show me that went extinct due to fishermen. So if everyone wants to get righteous maybe they could walk a mile I my shoes and watch as good efforts get you spit in the face.
 This rant is driven by current regulations that will be putting more of my friends out of business in the near future and not just the garbage printed in the above articles. Hard to watch and always amazing to see two different standards for science on this otherwise excellent forum. If you want fish science I could provide it but maybe pushing buttons makes some people feel good about themselves, nothing personal.     

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #239 on: September 16, 2015, 10:14:13 PM »
ASLR, Neither the link you provide nor the one that makes similar claims that sigmetnow posted provide a shred of scientific evidence about their actual sources. So if you prefer to repeat crap put out by an NGO like WWF who is in the business of selling scare tactics for the benefit of their coffers I suppose me telling you that here on the US west coast we don't have Any overfishing currently taking place because we have regulated most fishing into nonexistence while at the same time importing over 90% of all seafood from countries with fewer or nonexistent fisheries protections. The few fishermen who still ply US waters and have struggled to both protect and enforce the most stringent fishery regulations in the world are thrown under the bus while corporate and NGO's interests cash in at the bank.
 My last post was about the upcoming Extinction of a sea urchin species that everyone is collectively promoting with BAU but there isn't any profit for WWF to fight that battle so they fly around the world, push regulations by expensive lawyers in DC that ultimately outsource the problems and the carbon footprint of their own actions.
 There isn't one fish species in the world you can show me that went extinct due to fishermen. So if everyone wants to get righteous maybe they could walk a mile I my shoes and watch as good efforts get you spit in the face.
 This rant is driven by current regulations that will be putting more of my friends out of business in the near future and not just the garbage printed in the above articles. Hard to watch and always amazing to see two different standards for science on this otherwise excellent forum. If you want fish science I could provide it but maybe pushing buttons makes some people feel good about themselves, nothing personal.   

As the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) study is not peer-reviewed perhaps it is best for me to reserve judgment on this matter until well document research comes out.  While I concur that pushing unsubstantiated research can be counter-productive; I also feel that following a BAU pathway (as the world is still doing today) until we have a 95% confidence level on every aspect of an issue before we take action, will likely lead to a world that your fishing associate's children will not want to live in.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2078
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 116
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #240 on: September 16, 2015, 11:30:21 PM »
Bruce.

it was the introduction of gil netting in the 1980s that swept the deep reefs of the west coast (I think mostly Hmong immigrants) this caused a collapse of the regional ecosystems in northern california.  Further, drought cycles and waterway pollution led to declining fish stocks returning to hatcheries and regional warming compounded with toxic algae bloom created a severe shock to the plankton food web.  This led to a complete brood collapse of auklets from california to oregon in 2014 and resulted in the collapse of the sardine population (and the massive losses in seal rookeries this last spring).

Under a changing environment, bau fishing practices have become unsustainable and human contributions are significant on a global scale.

Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #241 on: September 16, 2015, 11:57:21 PM »
ASLR, You are the last person I would choose to offend. I live two lives perhaps and I am afraid i let the politics of my private life bleed over onto this site earlier today. Fish politics is very rough and
tumble and I am afraid watching as good men who have done an honest and honorable job at regulating their individual fisheries go down to dirty politics makes me hot under the collar. I will later put a link to a new web-page that I have access to but is currently embargoed. There you can read both the controversial papers like the one you linked earlier with a peer reviewed comment section by some of the best fisheries scientists in the world. I don't know how useful it will be in a country that is smitten by the likes of Donald Trump .
 We have to maintain a higher standard however . Not a high bar .

Yes I agree the next couple generations is going to be handed a bag of ....  I will struggle on and try to help avoid contributing to our collective demise. The carbon page and the 40,000 hits it has received is an intellectual attempt at describing some rather harsh inevitable outcomes as well as other even worse outcomes if " the Donald" and his irk hold sway. 

Jai, I don't agree but I don't want to bog down the "carbon cycle page"  If someone thinks we need a fishing page charge on.   

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #242 on: September 17, 2015, 12:28:58 AM »
Bruce,

Actually, I appreciate it when some one critiques my citations, as sometimes I post too fast, and I know that I am not always right.  So no offense taken, and I hope that the fishermen that you interact with stop getting the short end of the stick.  Also, I could not agree more that the election of Donald Trump would be a disaster for fighting climate change.

Best,
ASLR
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

anotheramethyst

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #243 on: September 18, 2015, 02:02:26 AM »
ASLR, You are the last person I would choose to offend. I live two lives perhaps and I am afraid i let the politics of my private life bleed over onto this site earlier today. Fish politics is very rough and
tumble and I am afraid watching as good men who have done an honest and honorable job at regulating their individual fisheries go down to dirty politics makes me hot under the collar. I will later put a link to a new web-page that I have access to but is currently embargoed. There you can read both the controversial papers like the one you linked earlier with a peer reviewed comment section by some of the best fisheries scientists in the world. I don't know how useful it will be in a country that is smitten by the likes of Donald Trump .
 We have to maintain a higher standard however . Not a high bar .

Yes I agree the next couple generations is going to be handed a bag of ....  I will struggle on and try to help avoid contributing to our collective demise. The carbon page and the 40,000 hits it has received is an intellectual attempt at describing some rather harsh inevitable outcomes as well as other even worse outcomes if " the Donald" and his irk hold sway. 

Jai, I don't agree but I don't want to bog down the "carbon cycle page"  If someone thinks we need a fishing page charge on.   

bruce,

i know nothing about fisheries in california, but i know what happened in texas.  there are almost no small scale commercial fishermen anymore.  the fish packing plants are closed.  nearest i can tell, the giant commercial factory fishing boats, far off the coast, that net everything and throw literally tons of bycatch, did contribute to overfishing.  little private commercial fisherman couldn't do that kind of damage in a thousand years, with or without nets.  but that's not all.  nitrogen pollution in the mississippi and rio grande created vast anoxic dead zones.  and the intracoastal waterway, normally 1-4 feet deep, is dredged to allow commercial sea traffic along the texas coast.  the dredging destroys the bay hatchery.  so now the only guys fishing for a living are fishing guides.  any form of federal regulation has been an abysmal failure for the fish.  many people think the factory ships deliberately lobbied to pur the little guys out of business.  they fish far enough off the coast that most communities don't see the real damage, and many people are infuriated that it's so difficult to get a çommercial license, particularly when fishing near the coast still seems abundant.  but even those that had commercial licenses lost the ability to make a profit years ago, and now my mom's seafood restaurant sells farmed tilapia instead of black drum because literally nobody is there to go catch it for her, even though the restaurant is walking distance from the ocean.  the only way to gey local seafood in that restaurant is to catch and fillet it yourself, and bring her fillets, and she will cook it for you.  (the "cook your catch" is still listed on the menu).

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #244 on: September 18, 2015, 09:42:54 AM »
    http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/fisheries_eco/status_of_fisheries/archive/2013/second/map_overfished_stocks_cy_q2_2013.pdf
Here is a map of overfished stocks but the four on the West coast are closed to all take by fishing area closures. We don't really control bluefin take because it is international and thus largely beyond our control                                                                                                                                                        Of the 199 fish stocks managed by NOAA that are exclusively managed domestically (i.e. Those we have control over) there are ~ 35 still overfished and about 40 in rebuilding plans. A rebuilding plan requires stocks to be returned to levels above ~ 60% of virgin biomass before relaxing precautionary protections that exceed MSY +( maximum sustainable yield plus a buffer ). The 199 stocks represent about 85% of volume of all sport and commercial species.

 http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/fisheries_eco/status_of_fisheries/fssi.html

Many of those fisheries have been "privatized " and all of them are subject to sales to the highest bidder which of late means foreign buyers are willing to pay more than domestic markets. We import over 90% of all seafood largely because the U.S. buys a lot of shrimp.

On the west coast huge areas are closed to all fishing that can impact an overfished stock in rebuilding so of the 127 rockfish stocks the chance that fishing might impact the 3 or 4 in rebuilding means many have rebuilt to 100% of virgin biomass but are still effectively closed.

There is also a lot of fishing gear that has been made illegal to use because interactions with whales or turtles is socially prohibitive even if it isn't threatening the mammals or turtles populations. So there is currently no economic way to catch certain fish and we import those fish from countries that don't control gear types or mammal/ turtle interactions.
Amethyst
I really wish if everyone wants to talk fish we make a dedicated page but your post was to polite to ignore.   
« Last Edit: September 18, 2015, 09:57:59 AM by Bruce Steele »

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #245 on: September 24, 2015, 06:10:08 PM »
Maybe the platinum catalyst and hydrogen peroxide fuel make these a bit impractical as a solution to ocean acidification but it is interesting to see a micro machine that converts dissolved CO2 into calcium carbonate. It would be interesting to see a film version of them zipping around in a tank of seawater.

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/5437/tiny-motors-rev-tackle-rising-carbon-dioxide-levels

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #246 on: September 27, 2015, 04:05:19 PM »
For those of you that might be interested in a Webinar I will be moderating that features Alan Barton and George Waldbusser in a discussion of an industry / science collaboration on ocean acidification
and the oyster industry , please join us. ! You will need to preregister at the site below. Once registered you can download their bio's and a couple research papers . Alan was the person who made the connection between offshore winds, upwelling and oyster spat collapse events at the Oregon oyster hatchery ( Whiskey Creek ) where he was working on solving reoccurring oyster mortality events. Seems obvious with twenty twenty hindsight but at the time it was quite an insight and represents the first documented occurrence that ties ocean acidification to mortality events.

 https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/8078930335183560449

Webinar is scheduled for 12:00 noon Monday Sept. 28. Pacific daylight time. You will need to preregister before the start time.

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2078
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 116
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #247 on: September 28, 2015, 05:58:11 PM »
Bruce,

Perhaps you can also inquire about his understanding of the cause of the rookery failure of Cassin Auklets in 2014.  Indication was that abnormal sea surface temperatures and the lack of upwelling/offshore winds produced this food web collapse.  Auklets feed exclusively on plankton.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/01/150123-seabirds-mass-die-off-auklet-california-animals-environment/
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18963
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #248 on: September 29, 2015, 11:16:06 PM »
The linked research present almost 15-years' worth of observations of data indicating that phytoplankton numbers are declining; which represents a positive feedback for global warming:

Cecile S. Rousseaux and Watson W. Gregg (2015), "Recent decadal trends in global phytoplankton composition", Global Biogeochemical Cycles, DOI: 10.1002/2015GB005139


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GB005139/abstract

Abstract: "Identifying major trends in biogeochemical composition of the oceans is essential to improve our understanding of biological responses to climate forcing. Using the NASA Ocean Biogeochemical Model (NOBM) combined with ocean color remote sensing data assimilation, we assessed the trends in phytoplankton composition (diatoms, cyanobacteria, coccolithophores and chlorophytes) at a global scale for the period 1998–2012. We related these trends in phytoplankton to physical conditions (surface temperature, surface photosynthetically available radiation [PAR] and mixed layer depth [MLD]) and nutrients (iron, silicate and nitrate). We found a significant global decline in diatoms (−1.22% y−1, P<0.05). This trend was associated with a significant (P<0.05) shallowing of the MLD (−0.20% y−1), a significant increase in PAR (0.09% y−1) and a significant decline in nitrate (−0.38% y−1). The global decline in diatoms was mostly attributed to their decline in the North Pacific (−1.00% y−1, P<0.05) where the MLD shallowed significantly and resulted in a decline in all three nutrients (P<0.05). None of the other phytoplankton groups exhibited a significant change globally, but regionally there were considerable significant trends. A decline in nutrients in the northernmost latitudes coincided with a significant decline in diatoms (North Pacific, −1.00% y−1) and chlorophytes (North Atlantic, −9.70% y−1). In the northern mid-latitudes (North Central Pacific and Atlantic) where nutrients were more scarce, a decline in nutrients was associated with a decline in smaller phytoplankton: cyanobacteria declined significantly in the North Central Pacific (−0.72% y−1) and Atlantic (−1.56% y−1) and coccolithophores declined significantly in the North Central Atlantic (−2.06% y−1). These trends represent the diversity and complexity of mechanisms that drives phytoplankton communities to adapt to variable conditions of nutrients, light, and mixed layer depth. These results provide a first insight into the existence of trends in phytoplankton composition over the maturing satellite ocean color era and illustrate how changes in the conditions of the oceans in the last ~15 years may have affected them."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1857
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Carbon Cycle
« Reply #249 on: September 30, 2015, 12:29:32 AM »
I forget where I saw this article( someone may have already posted it) but it is of import in understanding the carbon cycle. Most of the previous quantification of surface to depth carbon transport was based upon sediment traps that catch detritus as it rains down from the surface. This study shows an additional transport of lipids by Copepods  as they migrate to depths of ~ one mile in an annual winter hibernation. The lipids( and carbon contained therein ) act as food stores for winter but as the copepods utilize these food stores they respire CO2 at depth . This respired CO2 may equal the amount previously documented that results from bacterial decomposition of the organic detritus previously documented by sediment trap data.

 http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/study-shows-plankton-play-big-role-in-carbon-cycle.html