Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[kahuna1]

PH Levels will have risen 50% ... impossible to stop another 120% PH move ON TOP of the already 50% MOVE ... by 2100.

See I am wrong ... and sadly right. PH is a measure of acidity ...

PH is a logarithmic measure of PH and yep since MODERN irrefutable records, ignoring fossils exist,

So far, ocean pH has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1 since the industrial revolution, and is expected by fall another 0.3 to 0.4 pH units by the end of the century. A drop in pH of 0.1 might not seem like a lot, but the pH scale, like the Richter scale for measuring earthquakes, is logarithmic. For example, pH 4 is ten times more acidic than pH 5 and 100 times (10 times 10) more acidic than pH 6. If we continue to add carbon dioxide at current rates, seawater pH may drop another 120 percent by the end of this century, to 7.8 or 7.7, creating an ocean more acidic than any seen for the past 20 million years or more.
https://ocean.si.edu/ocean-life/invertebrates/ocean-acidification

Nope sadly ... PH 120% FURTHER PH change by end of century and THAT I might add is without any feedback loops which are sadly assured to occur via Arctic Ice removal and Permafrost melt and CH4 frozen Methane seabed issues under the Arctic ice.

We go too far, and well limestone starts to dissolve, releasing Carbon trapped ... but that's post 2200 ... and by then even the most ardent of deniers will be convinced via other effects.

 

[kahuna1]

50% more acid in the oceans?

Got a cite for that @kahuna1 ?

I think the ABOVE covers this infringement ... sorry.

For tens of millions of years, Earth's oceans have maintained a relatively stable acidity level. It's within this steady environment that the rich and varied web of life in today's seas has arisen and flourished. But research shows that this ancient balance is being undone by a recent and rapid drop in surface pH that could have devastating global consequences.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/oceans/critical-issues-ocean-acidification/

Such evidence indicates that current atmospheric carbon dioxideconcentrations and ocean pH levels are at unprecedented for at least the last 800,000 years.

https://www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/ocean-chemistry/ocean-acidification/

Because the pH scale is logarithmic (a change of 1 pH unit represents a tenfold change in acidity), this change represents a 26 percent increase in acidity over roughly 250 years, a rate that is 100 times faster than anything the ocean and its inhabitants have experienced in tens of millions of years.

From above ... source and on a 2002 study ... its now 50% in 2019 .. increase. Welcome to climate denial !!

 

[rederob]

Although I cannot get 50% for AO, the trend is what is relevant, and it's directly linked to increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.

 

[wayneL]

I think the ABOVE covers this infringement ... sorry.

For tens of millions of years, Earth's oceans have maintained a relatively stable acidity level. It's within this steady environment that the rich and varied web of life in today's seas has arisen and flourished. But research shows that this ancient balance is being undone by a recent and rapid drop in surface pH that could have devastating global consequences.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/oceans/critical-issues-ocean-acidification/

Such evidence indicates that current atmospheric carbon dioxideconcentrations and ocean pH levels are at unprecedented for at least the last 800,000 years.

https://www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/ocean-chemistry/ocean-acidification/

Because the pH scale is logarithmic (a change of 1 pH unit represents a tenfold change in acidity), this change represents a 26 percent increase in acidity over roughly 250 years, a rate that is 100 times faster than anything the ocean and its inhabitants have experienced in tens of millions of years.

From above ... source and on a 2002 study ... its now 50% in 2019 .. increase. Welcome to climate denial !!

Forgive me, I am not an expert in this area. My reading indicates that the ocean pH is on the base side, having putatively moved from 8.2 to 8.1.

Can we claim that a substance having become slightly less base, be termed more acidic? On the face of it that seems a little bit disingenuous to me.

But as I said, I'm not an expert and will do more reading on this as time permits

 

[kahuna1]

Yep.

Ocean acidity, like CO2 prior levels debated. CO2 not seriously due to ICE core samples .... Pre a million years ago, despite carbon dating ... still some debate.

An aside.
Ocean acidification samples collected from 1850, of seawater. They, well according to some are irrelevant and to be ignored. FINE.

Some serious ones post 1960 collected are NOT. But some ignore.

Since 1999 even greater efforts show some very serious treads and post 2003 when Argo started, the bouys at sea that sink to 2000 meters and rise measuring both PH and Temp, the evidence is not possible to be questioned. I would mention satellite data since 1981 on the surface temp as well, but that too would be ignored.

What the most recent levels show, other than A PH the ocean has not seen in 800,000 years is a very clear and the post 2003 till 2019 current moves show an exponential INCREASE in the fall of PH and acidity RISE. Much like the recent ...

Exponential RISE in the rate of CO2,
Exponential RISE in the rate of Methane CH4,
Exponential RISE in the rate of sea rise
Exponential RISE in the rate at which Arctic Ice is decreasing in volume ...
Exponential RISE in the rate at the fall in PH and increase in acidity is occurring.

Not able to be seriously questioned, as its being now measured by impartial identical ... satellites or probes ... the issue is the exponential nature of it which, well if you deny even CO2 is an issue, or the rate of say sea rise is now 150% of what it was not so long ago, 50 years ago, or the ACIDITY level of the ocean the same ... 50% different ...

Sorry must correct myself .... RATIONALLY QUESTIONED would be closer to the truth.

All is well.
The flip side, IPCC does capture SOME of this exponential increase, in their Models, BUT A LOT ... is discard and ignored and discounted more for political reasons and what the USA and Canada and Saudi Arabia refusing to sign off on their estimates till its dumbed down. What is released is chilling enough.

I would add, NOT one feedback loop such as Permafrost melting likely in the 2050-2070 period in earnest and releasing 1.8 trillion tons of capture CO2 is in any model. Nor is Arctic frozen ice below the Arctic ice sheet, and an at best estimate is minimum 2 billion tons which the atmosphere will have a cow and best estimate is 100 times more effect than CO2, and top end ... just Arctic methane seabed, NOT the methane from Permafrost which will be at BEST double that, the at worst number is 30 billion tons of it, and since the Atmosphere cant deal with it, at 100 times CO2 impact, the CO2 level and its warming blanket ... not contained ... in any model IPCC due to political nature of it ... lets be optimistic and 2 billion methane via seabed and 4 via Permafrost at 100 times CO2 impact, is a mere 600 billion tons impact of current CO2 emissions of close to 20 years at once .... to worst case ... well ... 50 years 2019 CO2 emissions.

Over a short period, CO2 ppm goes up either say 150 PPM or 375 PPM and by 2060 an at best it will be starting at say 700 PPM ?

Boy its depressing ... knowing if it raised sea levels 20 meters at 410 PPM, I do wonder what time at levels of 1,000 plus PPM CO2 will do or 1,200 PPM and how many more feedback loops occur?

Then again, exponentially all these things are increasing. NOT just breaking 800,000 year or million year records, BUT rising at a FASTER EXPONENTIAL PACE.

But here, on this thread, as with the USA led media, we have denial of even it breaking a new 800,000 year record; let alone the change accelerating at even a faster pace.

In 2018 USA media reported climate change 45% LESS despite the IPCC report and 4 severe climate related events in the USA.

Must go take some happy pills after this !! Or develop some mental condition that steals what remaining IQ i have left, which is not a lot !!

 

[kahuna1]

Forgive me, I am not an expert in this area. My reading indicates that the ocean pH is on the base side, having putatively moved from 8.2 to 8.1.

Can we claim that a substance having become slightly less base, be termed more acidic? On the face of it that seems a little bit disingenuous to me.

Neither am I, and expert,

I did however read the link prior to giving it. It clearly explains HOW and WHAT PH is and its move from 8.2 to 8.1 means, all be it quoting a 2002 data set, NOT ARGO and its 2003-2019 studies and via 3,000 automated buoys in the sea that drop to 2000 metres and measure both temp and PH levels.

I think Smithsonian quotes as of 2002 data a 26% move, to 2019 and now 50%, and Woods hollow is a 55% move in PH levels since 1850-2019.

Both are either 50 or 55% move in PH and acidity since 1850 if you read their stuff. I did provide the links.

THEY both estimate by 2100, what took 169 years from the year 1850 ... to move 50% in term of PH will move 100% if not 120% by 2100. That is a mere 81 years verses 169 years looking BACK. Half the TIME ... DOUBLE the PH move.

Again clearly stated on their site, and studies of current trends and rates via ARGO.

have fun

 

[wayneL]

This may seem a bit of a pedantic point but I think it's quite important.

Let's suppose we have some sodium hydroxide with a ph of 14, and we mixed in some sodium carbonate with the pH of 10 or something like that.

Both are strongly base, but by mixing the sodium bicarbonate in with the sodium hydroxide we will have significantly reduced the pH from 14, but we'll still have a really quite strongly basic mixture, somewhere around 12 on the face of it. ( that is assuming that we don't blow our faces off by not knowing what the hell we're doing).

Can we really say that we have made that mixture more acidic? Really?

 

[kahuna1]

Not pedantic ...

Its fair enough ...

Please read the SITE .... the data and ...


Because the pH scale is logarithmic (a change of 1 pH unit represents a tenfold change in acidity), this change represents a 26 percent increase in acidity over roughly 250 years, a rate that is 100 times faster than anything the ocean and its inhabitants have experienced in tens of millions of years.
https://www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/ocean-chemistry/ocean-acidification/


Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is the world's leading, independent non-profit organization dedicated to ocean research, exploration, and education.

I tend NOT to question the planets leading institution on simple PH and acidity levels.

CO2 which we emit at close to 40 billion tons per year via human activity, it ends up in the OCEAN for more than 60% of it, if not 70% of it.It tends to do wonderful things adding carbon to various types of rocks and the chemical nightmare.

Once dissolved in seawater, CO2 reacts with water, H2O, to form carbonic acid, H2CO3: CO2 + H2O ↔ H2CO3. Carbonic acid dissolves rapidly to form H+ ions (an acid) and bicarbonate, HCO3-(a base). Seawater is naturally saturated with another base, carbonate ion (CO3−2) that acts like an antacid to neutralize the H+, forming more bicarbonate. The net reaction looks like this: CO2 + H2O + CO3−2→ 2HCO3-

As carbonate ion gets depleted, seawater becomes undersaturated with respect to two calcium carbonate minerals vital for shell-building, aragonite and calcite. Scientific models suggest that the oceans are becoming undersaturated with respect to aragonite at the poles, where the cold and dense waters most readily absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide. The Southern Ocean is expected to become undersaturated with respect to aragonite by 2050, and the problem could extend into the subarctic Pacific Ocean by 2100..

It is mere chemistry how and where the CO2 ends up and causes the change. NOT open to debate or even interpretation as if we do it a billion times, the experiment, the outcome will not alter. The volume we EMIT and add is not either in question, the total. BLOODY big acid kit we have going on, but that's post 2100 and likely 2150 where it really hits.

OOH depressing ... But lets escape to the Hollow Earth with the Lizard people !!

If only that conspiracy theory was TRUE !!

 

[wayneL]

I'm not disputing the science, I don't know enough about the same, but I am disputing the language.

If the ocean has moved from 8.2 to 8.1 it has become less basic by 0.1. That means that pH can move another 1.1 before we even get to Neutral, not acid, neutral.

The term "acidification" then, just seems alarmist to me,

 

[cynic]

"Less alkaline" just doesn't have the same alarming ring to it!

 

[kahuna1]

Alarmist ? the word ACIDIFICATION ? Your kidding ?

Well ... if it goes much further, even near neutral; let alone acidic and dissolving shells instantly or over an hour, a change to what will be 2150 PH levels and Crabs will not be able to FORM shells easily if at all. Again. Factual and if you read further.

Alarmist ? A crab, without a shell ?

Ocean acidification
Ocean acidification is the ongoing decrease in the pH of the Earth's oceans, caused by the uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

acidification to be exact, and pedantic is "The action or process of making or becoming acidic.:

This process, is measured, by changes in PH levels.

Calling it alarming ? Seriously ?

It is what it is called !! The PH level is either rising or falling, becoming more acidic, NOT ACID .... but ACIDIC ... at the extreme end of the scale, acids YES but before you get even mildly acidic, put a copper coin in Coke overnight and then get back to me tomorrow about how a poor crab will feel in 2150.

Reality is, what it is. Being alarmist describing a process, of becoming more acidic is NOT claiming its going to be bloody acid next week. NOR next century.

Stephen Hawking, his view, prior to his death was eventual acid storms and earth much like Venus. Not sure if the have published his works yet, but he was not being alarmist and smarter than me he was. many many times smarter.

If the process were RISING PH levels, becoming more ALKALINE I am not sure, but I think rising Alkalinity is that alarming ?

Not going to debate English or so I thought.

Alkalinification ? Making something more Alkaline, IS NOT ... that ... but its something called ....
basification
(ˌbeɪsɪfɪˈkeɪʃən)
n
the process of making something alkaline

Use that next climate change denial meeting and claim the ocean is under basification and not rising PH levels called Acidification.

Win the door prize with that quip !!

Door prize being a loss of 50 IQ points for being there in the first place.

 

[Wysiwyg]

How soon will the "Extinction Rebellion" mob establish notoriety in Australia? The Australian mob will need to do some outdoors activities such as sleeping on the road.

Or playing dead.

 

[rederob]

Use that next climate change denial meeting and claim the ocean is under basification and not rising PH levels called Acidification.

Common trap when not careful, but it's a declining pH level which leads to acidification.

Next, what is an "alarmist"?
So often used but never explained as a valid concept in science.
In forums it appears to be used by people who simply do not know anything about their subject, so they become victims of their own abuse of science. As in, if I add some water to a glass of vinegar, the mixture is still acidic, but the process was called basification. And that sounds "alarmist"?
Sounds more like comedy.
This thread is full of it.

 

[IFocus]

Worked in chemical manufacturing for the last 30 odd years (instrumentation / electrical) measuring most things analytical including pH.

The terms used are no different than what you see discussed.

In general terms acidic / neutral / alkaline are the states with neutral rarely getting a mention.

Regardless of the pH measured it would be normal to discuss the direction to not from i.e. more alkaline or more acidic.

I would expect acidification to be the correct description and hadn't given it a thought whether it was "alarmist" I guess use what ever you need to confirm your bias.

As mentioned its a log scale and worries me far more that CC "alarmist" temperatures warming changing rain fall patterns it will be the end game for humans.

But as a good mate of mine points out the earth will carry on happily with out us

 

[wayneL]

Worked in chemical manufacturing for the last 30 odd years (instrumentation / electrical) measuring most things analytical including pH.

The terms used are no different than what you see discussed.

In general terms acidic / neutral / alkaline are the states with neutral rarely getting a mention.

Regardless of the pH measured it would be normal to discuss the direction to not from i.e. more alkaline or more acidic.

I would expect acidification to be the correct description and hadn't given it a thought whether it was "alarmist" I guess use what ever you need to confirm your bias.

As mentioned its a log scale and worries me far more that CC "alarmist" temperatures warming changing rain fall patterns it will be the end game for humans.

But as a good mate of mine points out the earth will carry on happily with out us

Like I said, am in no way au fait on this.

So... If we took some sodium hydroxide with a ph of 14 and added just enough sodium carbonate, itself a base, to raise the solution to 13, are we to describe that process as acidification? Even though no acidic substances at all were added?

Likewise if we have some hydrochloric acid to which we add some acetic acid to increase the ph, are we said to be alkalizing (basifying?) that solution?

 

[rederob]

So... If we took some sodium hydroxide with a ph of 14 and added just enough sodium carbonate, itself a base, to raise the solution to 13, are we to describe that process as acidification? Even though no acidic substances at all were added?

Acidity is determined on the basis of hydrogen ion concentration.
Any mixing of solutions which raises the initial hydrogen ion concentration is acidification.
This is a process outcome descriptor and is independent of the input descriptors. That's because different concentration levels of sodium hydroxide and sodium carbonate could be mixed to reduce the initial hydrogen ion concentration.

Likewise if we have some hydrochloric acid to which we add some acetic acid to increase the ph, are we said to be alkalizing (basifying?) that solution?

If the mixture results in a solution with more hydroxide ions than hydrogen ions then basification occurs.

 

[kahuna1]

Use that next climate change denial meeting and claim the ocean is under basification and not rising PH levels called Acidification.

Win the door prize with that quip !!

Door prize being a loss of 50 IQ points for being there in the first place.

I think YOU missed the word QUIP ...

this thread 500 posts has been ... well conspiracy theories and QUIPS or so I thought.

ICE is increasing in the Arctic when its in fact retreating .....
CO2 is from Volcanoes when the nearest relevant one to Cape Grim is 16,000 KM away ...

Temperatures are Falling ... when satellites are impartial and clearly show RISES ...

So my Quip ...
a clever or witty remark or comment
a sharp, sarcastic remark
a witty or funny observation

Or better still .... a clever usually taunting remark

Was to speak of Acidification and that is I agree FALLING PH levels as I clearly set out .... but turn it around and claim rising PH levels.

Not a mistake ... a quip to the climate deniers next meeting for the door prize.

Sadly not a good joke but relevant to this thread and discussion.

It is with regret I have been awarded the door prize and LOST 50 IQ points for the QUIP ... and now have a negative IQ ...

For NOT picking up it was a quip .... but yep seeing the error ... well done. A quip is a quip.

Not sadly a good joke.

 

[kahuna1]

It is I think like the tide .... the climate debate, trying to stop the sheer stupidity of some views.

When science is ignored and we have today .... the Liberal National Party ...

Mr Rennick last month accused the weather bureau of "rewriting weather records to fit in with the global warming agenda!"
"Our public servants are out of control," he said on Facebook.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04...erard-rennick-bom-climate-conspiracy/11036404

What relevance the BOM has to say NASA satellites that measure the global temperatures is absurd ... let lone the Europeans with two shiny NEW satellite that measure a whole host of things ... the BOM is well irrelevant ..

Even Better ...

Identical idiotic dogma ... and NOT a joke or PUN or QUIP ...

Pauline Hanson quoted a top 10 of idiotic conspiracy theory myths on the climate .... and believes them ALL ...
Pauline Hanson says humans are not behind the causes of climate change ...

the same shifts in climate that caused the extinction of dinosaurs are behind changes the world is experiencing today.

I thought a meteor the size of Mount Everest traveling at 20 times the speed of a bullet started the last extinction event ... and the BLOODY big hole and vaporized fossil remains .... caused the start of that event, but stuff me ...
"If climate change is happening it is not because man is causing it to happen."

Lizard people ? Or did a bloody big rock hit we all missed ?

volcanic eruptions and oceans caused more carbon emissions than man-made pollution.

Sadly, the Facebook myth ... on volcanoes is still alive and well ... and since Oceans ABSORB 60-70% f the CO2 and produce over 50% of the oxygen ... what a bloody idiot she is !!

She did go on and on ... talking about Queensland and ignored the sad fact the great barrier reef is 25% of the size it was in 1985 due to BLEACHING of coral which is ... temperature related and now seen in 100% of the 3000 Reefs. She seems to have missed that ...

https://www.news.com.au/national/br...e/news-story/c6e1e36be5fd9b3f7d324b52bfaa79aa

A spokesperson thought Pauline was under attack and ... well the Utube of his comments referring to a TV show ... and how Orange haired people are attacked and NOT evil is ... perplexing.

Such is the state of the climate change issue.
Here is her spokesperson gibbering on about south park ... Well worth a watch ...



I sadly found the Utube more amusing than reality.

this one on the Myths she touched upon along with the Liberal Party make me feel, concerned ...

here is the U tube ...



To hit every single MYTH ... and believe some weird conspiracy theory, is hard ... but heck its Pauline and surprising the Liberals to come out and do the same rather than the covert way they usually do.


Take care

 

[rederob]

For NOT picking up it was a quip ....

I didn't miss the quip, but it was achieved on terminological role reversal and needn't have included any reference to a directional trend of pH levels, which ended up turning the sentence into a nonsense. Not that I could be accused of pedantry here.

 

[wayneL]

I can only get through about a quarter of your posts @kahuna1 before they become impossible to read, due to rolling eye syndrome.

It's a shame, because the approximately 5% of the time you actually have a point, is probably missed.