SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics of Energy

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
Maurice Winn
To: Eric who wrote (51080)5/11/2014 10:34:46 AM
From: Hawkmoon1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) of 86355
 
If the ocean's PH was 7 we would be in real trouble.
Eric, Sure we would be..

But we're not even close to that. Ocean PH already varies greatly.

And again (and again.. and again).. CO2 that is dissolved in the oceans is utilized by phytoplanton. But there are 40%+ fewer PP to conduct photosynthesis..

So why would expect any other result than a decrease in ocean PH?

And as you and other have tried to assert, warming oceans absorb LESS CO2, which means they become more alkaline. They are less capable of absorbing the previous amounts of CO2.

You can't have 40% less photosynthesis being conducted and NOT have an impact on the levels of CO2 in the oceans.

I don't know why people like you are so stubbornly against augmenting what is ALREADY a natural process.

Especially when its quite possible that man-made soil conservation efforts (agriculture) have reduced the amount of airborne Iron that is deposited by nearly 25%.

Either way, all we're doing is fertilizing ocean flora.. And there is nothing is bad about creating more food for the fisheries..

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext