The iconic California mussel could be among the first casualties of oceans made more acidic by global warming, a new study of the coastal shellfish shows.
But increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that climate scientists attribute to human activity are already showing signs of working their way into the oceans.”Indications from records are that acidity increased by about 30 percent in the last 250 years,” Gaylord said.
Wonderful CO2 tripe! As discussed earlier today, Monterey Bay measurements show no change in pH over the last 15 years.
Below is a Mussel picture I took last month in Santa Barbara. They look like they are doing just fine.
Global warming is more like voodoo than science.
“They grew the larvae in the lab in three kinds of water: that representing present-day acid levels, the levels projected for the end of the century if carbon dioxide emissions continue at today’s rate..”
Unfortunately, they didn’t actually provide any proof that pH levels would reach said levels. Voodoo indeed.
You have to add acids, not CO2, to make salt water acidic.
Mussles have to do the same thing to first dissolve calcium carbonate so they can use it.
Acidic salt water just makes it easier for them………
Survival of mussels in extremely acidic waters on a submarine volcano …
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n5/abs/ngeo500.html
I’ve had this arguement before, at an alarmist site, before I was banned. Here is what I said…
… there is a reason chemists don’t use a percentage scale for pH. It’s meaningless. Pure and simple. The scale is logorithmic, exponential. As in other scales: richter, decibel, stellar magnitude, photographic f-stop, thermodynamic entropy, an understanding can only be mathematically understood if you have an understanding of logorithms.
For instance… a solution of pH[1] has 100,000,000,000,000 times more hydrogen ions (acidity) than a solution of pH[14]. If I had a solution at pH of 8.5 the hydrogen ion content would be 3.2 x 10exp(-9) M. A 30% increase in hydrogen ion content is 4.2 x10exp(-9)M. Converting this to pH becomes… wait for this… 8.4!!!!! Yes you guessed it, nothing to write home about. It doesn’t sound half as threatening as 30% does it!?! Kinda’ makes a mockery of percentage with respect to pH, doesn’t it. Then again as you say yourself and I wholeheartedly agree…it’s “Widely accepted language (here are over 200 articles in Nature that use this language). 7th grade science indeed.” Indeed, indeed sir.
Addendum…. Now I know I’m just an evil oil shill lackey, scientificly moronic, ununderstanding, conspiracy driven republican pontificating the tea party line…. (at least according to ‘CookieMonster’ Jon Cook). So if you dont believe me, unlike the climalological societies of lore, acting as St. Peter at the gates of knowledge… please be my guest and calculate the numbers yourself. Here is the simplest link I could find, even the monkey who outguessed NASA’s hurricane prediction could understand http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryquickreview/a/phreview.htm Thank you Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D.
Thank you for listening to my rant…. Have a nice day! Jeff
Am I wrong?
As a follow-up to a response I mentioned… “As for the pH issue. If you so understand pH and want to communicate (an alarmist acknowledged problem) properly then explain it as a chemist would understand. There is no need to ‘interpret’ information to the public. I am a chemist, and obviously the person who explained pH to you didn’t do a good job. In no way is that your fault. However, it is your fault for propogating this distortion. The public is not stupid, what causes problems is when ‘scientists’ interpret fundamental properties. As I’ve shown you above, percentage is meaningless in a logorithmic world, explain it as such.
Perhaps, like humour, you fail to understand the significance of scale. The public ‘normally’ assume’s a percentage scale rates from 0 to 100. So in the interest of mathematical fairness what percentage increas in acidity would be neccissary to lower the pH from 8.3 (start) to pure, neutral, distilled water?
Want a hint? 2000% Do the math, explain the significance. Then realize you’ve been had.”
I got banned.
LOL Red…..
It’s the same as saying CO2 has increased 40%…….
….that’s 0.01
Hey Jeff! Fellow banned member. ; )
We’re an American banned… we’re coming to your town! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nhUlKYeUoE&feature=related
How can something be made “more acidic” when it’s not acidic in the first place?
How can something that’s non-acidic be made “more acidic”?
This methodology of using three different alkalinity levels for existing mussels is seriously flawed. These mussels have 90 years to adapt to the lower alkalinity levels and part of that adaption is quite likely to include making stronger shells to fit prevailing circumstances.
It should also be noted that pH levels already vary considerably, and within a greater range than is projected by the climate doomsters. In fact it is likely that Monterey Bay itself could have examples where pH matches the levels extrapolated for 2100. And the public might be much better informed if the mussels in these locations were properly examined, don’t you think?
Steve’s earlier post of Monterey Bay pH annual trends shows a drop from 8.1 to 7.75 pH in one year.
8.1 pH = 7.94 x 10^-9 H+ concentration
7.75 pH = 17.8 x 10^-9 H+ concentration
% change in H+ concentration in 2002 in Monterey Bay = 224%
We are constantly told that rapid acidification of the oceans will wipe out species because they cannot quickly adapt.
All ocean species in Monterey Bay must have been wiped out in 2002. The clouds of cadaverine-laced methane would have forced extended evacuations of Monterey Bay and Seaside.
Anyone remember that event in the papers? I didn’t think so.
I don’t know. All those mussels in that Santa Barbara photo look kind of depressed. They’re sensitive New Age mussels. Very stressed out by the latest scientific reports on their future.
Good post, Chris. Is there any data on the annual range within that average? Or the range over the goegraphical area?