Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth

California Coastal Waters Rising In Acidity At Alarming Rate, Study Finds (latimes.com) 112

Posted by BeauHD from the connecting-the-dots dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Los Angeles Times: Waters off the California coast are acidifying twice as fast as the global average, scientists found, threatening major fisheries and sounding the alarm that the ocean can absorb only so much more of the world's carbon emissions. A new study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration also made an unexpected connection between acidification and a climate cycle known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation -- the same shifting forces that other scientists say have a played a big role in the higher and faster rates of sea level rise hitting California in recent years. El Nino and La Nina cycles, researchers found, also add stress to these extreme changes in the ocean's chemistry.

This study, published Monday in the journal Nature Geoscience, came up with a creative way to confirm these greater rates of acidification. Researchers collected and analyzed a specific type of shell on the seafloor -- and used these data to reconstruct a 100-year history of acidification along the West Coast. The study analyzed almost 2,000 shells of a tiny animal called foraminifera. Every day, these shells -- about the size of a grain of sand -- rain down onto the seafloor and are eventually covered by sediment. Scientists took core samples from the Santa Barbara basin -- where the seafloor is relatively undisturbed by worms and bottom-feeding fish -- and used the pristine layers of sediment to create a vertical snapshot of the ocean's history. The more acidic the ocean, the more difficult it is for shellfish to build their shells. So using a microscope and other tools, the research team measured the changes in thickness of these shells and were able to estimate the ocean's acidity level during the years that the foraminifera were alive. Using these modern calibrations, the scientists concluded that the waters off the California coast had a 0.21 decline in pH over a 100-year period dating back to 1895 (the lower the pH, the greater the acidity, according to the logarithmic pH scale of 0 to 14). This is more than double the decline -- 0.1 pH -- that scientists estimate the ocean has experienced on average worldwide.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California Coastal Waters Rising In Acidity At Alarming Rate, Study Finds More

California Coastal Waters Rising In Acidity At Alarming Rate, Study Finds

Comments Filter:

  • Deniers in 3...2 ...1 (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Climate change deniers incoming!

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Obviously you're going to face opposition when you constantly spew ridiculous garbage without supporting evidence like some batshit insane AGW nutjob.

    • It's a lot worse that in sounds since to change by one pH unit you have to change the concentration of hydronium (water ion) by ten fold.

      Additionally it's also a lot worse that it sounds for another reason. It's very rare to be regime where the pH is determined by equilibrium of the hydronium ion from the presence of a stong acid. Instead almost in all practical natural cases outside of a chem lab, the pH is held at nearly a fixed point by a buffer. In this case the buffer may actually be the sea shells

  • Hobo urine (Score:4, Funny)

    by PPH ( 736903 ) on Monday December 16, 2019 @11:59PM (#59527272)

    Washed off the streets, through the storm drains and out to sea.

  • I wonder if they remembered the Coal Oil Point seep field [wikipedia.org], just West of Santa Barbara. Crude oil has a pH around 10 [atago.net]. The seep field has dropped its natural output substantially thanks to the Holly drill platform removing pressure on the seep, resulting in a continual reduction in oil in the water - and thus the pH will drop as well (since the alkaline impact of oil is reduced, from less oil).

  • California's anti-nuclear power government is leading them down a path of increased CO2 emissions. Closing their existing nuclear power generation capacity, reliance on intermittent solar and wind, and hydroelectric power getting some misguided opposition, is leading California to rely more on natural gas and coal.

    California needs to embrace nuclear power sooner or later because what they are doing now is only raising energy costs and raising CO2 emissions.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/m... [forbes.com]

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by LynnwoodRooster ( 966895 )
      I 100% agree - and we're in a mad push for some reason to close the Ventura-locale peaker plants which provide over 2 GW of generation for Los Angeles. We should build a dozen nuclear plants, and use the excess power to desalinate all the water we need. But that's "not green" so we'll do wind and solar instead, and end up with more brownouts and blackouts because of a lack of generation capacity.

    • California's anti-nuclear power government is leading them down a path of increased CO2 emissions. Closing their existing nuclear power generation capacity, reliance on intermittent solar and wind, and hydroelectric power getting some misguided opposition, is leading California to rely more on natural gas and coal.

      California needs to embrace nuclear power sooner or later because what they are doing now is only raising energy costs and raising CO2 emissions.

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/m... [forbes.com]

      The data is so clear (energy in California) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] that your propositions simply isn't a matter of opinion, they are blatantly false.

      • I can post links to Wikipedia too. Like this one...
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        I'll highlight a portion for the whole class...

        Without any form of energy storage, after times of high solar generation generating companies must rapidly increase power output around the time of sunset to compensate for the loss of solar generation, a major concern for grid operators where there is rapid growth of photovoltaics.

        The growth of solar PV in California is growing faster than demand, storage, distribution, and other generation sources, can manage. Unless something is done to resolve this then we can all expect blackouts from the grid being driven beyond its capacity to take in this coming over supply of solar power.

        Take Germany as an example of what it likely to happen in California.
        https: [bloomberg.com]

        • So why don't you buy a huge battery. Let them pay you to charge it up with the electricity they can't sell. Then sell it back to them once the sun sets.
          It's not rocket surgery.

          • Why? Because it won't work.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

            Nuclear power would be cheaper. It's not rocket surgery.

            • You can dump power out of a lithium ion battery faster than you can spin up a nuclear reactor.

              • You can dump power out of a lithium ion battery faster than you can spin up a nuclear reactor.

                Repeating the same thing does not change the answer. Nuclear power would be cheaper.

                The rate on which the power can ramp up and down is only relevant if California continues to dig themselves in this hole of over reliance on solar power. Stop digging, and build some nuclear power plants to climb out. Getting some onshore wind, hydro, or geothermal could help too. Just do something to diversify instead of just more solar. Get some diversity in supply and there's no need to worry about how fast they can

              • providing the reactor is not down for maintenance or shut down because its too hot and there's not enough water to cool it

            • Unless something is done to resolve this then we can all expect blackouts from the grid being driven beyond its capacity to take in this coming over supply of solar power.

              You claim this, and your solution to too much solar, is to add even more nuke as well?

              You're going to idle your nuke 80% of the time and just use it for a little bit when the sun goes down? Yea, sure it's going to be cheaper... We know you are a nuclear fanboi but this is just ridiculous.

            • yet another youtube video does not mention the use of home storage (stand alone batteries and EV batteries) and microgrids that will reduce demand on the grid. It will not happen overnight as the detractors seem to expect.

        • Use the energy to pump water *into* hydroelectric lakes, then at night, run the dams. Simple solution.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hey! ( 33014 )

      As opposed to the nuclear plant building boom going on everywhere else in the world.

      No, what you need to get nuclear going is a carbon tax. Make it cap and trade if you want to harness market forces more effectively.

    • Eh, I like nuclear power, and it has a place in reducing fossil fuel consumption. I just think designs need to be updated and safety measures tightened. Plus, I'm not sure a region that is earthquake prone is the best place to build nuclear reactors. (The amount of water needed to keep nuclear reactors cool is staggering, it's why they have to be built by big rivers or the ocean. And building a reactor by the ocean in an earthquake region? It will always be at risk of a spectacular failure, and the costs to

      • Nuclear power does not need to be on an ocean or in an earthquake zone. California already ships in electricity from Palo Verde, a very large nuclear power plant in the Arizona desert. They can build in a similar kind of site, or expand this existing site.

        While I can see room for modernizing nuclear power designs there is no reason to "tighten" safety measures on the already proven exceedingly safe nuclear power plant designs we have now. There is no risk of a "spectacular failure" for a plant like Palo

  • So where is the SO4 and CO2 coming from? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The winds go from west to east. So, is Hawaii dumping that much CO2/SO4 to make seas to the west of California acidic?
    Yes, it must be Hawaii, since it can not possibly be China. Right Caffeinated Bacon?

    So, add in to that the fact that Northern Alaska, and Northwest Canada are the warmest areas in the arctic, and most off in the world, means that Hawaii is doing major destruction. Right Caffeinated Bacon?
  • The trickle is over; wait until they start emptying those barrels!

  • Stop the broken record about climate change. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @06:14AM (#59527820) Homepage

    If you have a local problem like this, it's unlikely to be driven by a global phenomenon. Like the growing "dead zones" in the ocean, this is almost certainly caused by agricultural runoff. That's the reason it's localized around the California coast.

    Somehow, scientists seem to think it necessary to mention climate change and CO2 in conjunction with everything. But a localized phenomenon like this is pretty clearly not being driven by global CO2 levels. Trying to imply that it is discredits the paper, even if the underlying work (measurement of pH levels) is correct.

    • Well, part of the issue is that the acidification is being directly driven by CO2. There may be other causes, but I'm not really seeing what they might be off hand. But your overall point is a valid one and in a perfect world, we would take the time to study further to better understand why the rate has changed so much more than the global average.

    • How can agricultural runoff be causing waters to become more and more acidic? Is California making more cropland?

    • Turns out that when a basic variable of the environment is adjusted wildly, it has far reaching effects. CA is greatly affected due to the size of the state, but increased acidification affects the entire west coast, ranging from the Baja peninsula all the way up north of Brittish Columbia. Agriculture runoff is just one factor of this issue.
      Source: [nih.gov] (emphasis mine)

      ... While it had long been assumed that ocean alkalinity would provide the buffering capacity required to keep ocean pH levels stable through time, we now know that the rate at which CO2 is entering world oceans is too rapid for it to be buffered against [5,6]. As a consequence, CO2 entering the oceans is reducing the availability of carbonate ions and reducing pH, which is largely controlled by the ratio of carbonic acid to carbonate ions in seawater. This process also occurs in regions that experience low oxygen conditions, but at a greatly accelerated rate. ...

      Despite the strong coupling of hypoxia and acidification via respiration, there is a series of processes that likely make acidification more common and persistent in many coastal zones, both today and in the future. Beyond respiration, there is a series of coastal processes that promote acidification and high CO2 conditions but have minor effects on DO levels, including the discharge of acidified riverine water, acid deposition, sea ice melting and the lower alkalinity of coastal zones that results in a lower buffering capacity against acidification compared with ocean regimes. Furthermore, the differential diffusion and solubility of DO and CO2 cause oxygen levels in seawater to come to equilibrium with prevailing atmospheric conditions more rapidly than CO2 [18]. As a consequence, when deeper waters that are low in pH and DO are advected to the surface via upwelling, the signature of acidification can be persistent [7] even to the detriment of marine life [19], whereas oxygen levels are commonly more normal. Similarly, when the water column of temperate, coastal hypoxic zones cools and destratifies, whole water columns become normoxic, but low pH conditions can persist for several weeks [10]. An additional factor that likely enhances acid production (lower pH) during times when DO levels are increasing is the oxidation of anaerobic metabolites. The reduced constituents (e.g. NH4+, HS, Fe2+, Mn2+) that build up in surface sediments during hypoxia oxidize seasonally when systems re-oxygenate [20]. These oxidation reactions produce strong acids that titrate alkalinity and lower pH [15]. For all of these reasons, acidification is likely more persistent than hypoxia in coastal zones

      Any part of that can be disputed, so feel free. Just realize opinion is not a substitute for facts.

  • The last time I checked sea water is not acid at all, it is basic (pH values clearly above 7, somewhere between 7.5 and 8.4). So it might become a bit close to neutral, but this is obviously not the message prefered by climate alarmists

  • Sea water is naturally basic, so it can neutralise acids. This is used in the open-loop exhaust scrubbers used by most large ships that have been converted to meet atmospheric sulphur emission rules from 2020 ( http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCen... [imo.org] ) while still using high-sulphur fuel (the cheapest heavy fuel oil). Systems like this: https://www.wartsila.com/marin... [wartsila.com]

    But they are dumping a lot of hot, acid water contaminated with various other aromatic hydrocarbons and so on:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/... [independent.co.uk]

    How

    • Doing some back of the envelope calculations, a typical system generates ~ 10,000 M^3 (or 10^4 of waste water/day. Considering that a typical bay would be 10km by 10km and the depth of the water being used at ~10 Meters, you're looking at 10^9 cubic meters of water being used to mix in. So each day 0.001% of the will be used by the open water scrubber. Throw in currents, wind, tides and water tends to be well mixed and recycled in most areas, even near harbors. Since there aren't a lot of ships using open
  • The Assidiocy of California has been rising for decades but they haven't done a thing about that. Sad thing is the contamination is now spreading rapidly to neighboring states.

    • The most populated state is a preview of where the nation is headed as the population rises; duh!

      They have the most people because of the nice weather and biggest economy. Housing will ALWAYS be a huge problem because demand to live in CA will always outstrip what you can supply. Cheaper housing = more people move to CA. It will push the limits of what people can live with.

      The pollution will be greater even with higher regulations because there is more of everything! Relative costs will be higher because

      • Smart people also choose to ignore plate tectonics as well apparently. Enjoy being smart in your less expensive California (which must be in Atlantis part 2 because its imaginary!)
  • Can't convince me of anything scientific.

  • There are as stated in TFA some assumptions made in the estimate. Therefore there is a degree of accuracy in the results. So what is it?

    Modelling is an approximation so why is the public never informed about the estimated accuracy of a model?

    On the plus side it looks like all the data is available so you can replicate the results (maybe) and see how accurate it is yourself.

  • Watch this, decide for yourself who is lying to you:

    Acid Oceans, Osteoporosis of the Sea, and the CO2 Monster - Dr. Willie Soon

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

Slashdot Top Deals

"It's the best thing since professional golfers on 'ludes." -- Rick Obidiah

Close