Drawing Conclusions

It is becoming more of a challenge to present good quality information to the readers of my articles. Just to highlight the problem of the research involved, here is an example of what I typically find at supposedly reputable websites. I was doing research on the oceans about how they absorb and discharge CO2 for an article that I am writing. But even from such venerable places as the Scripps Institution of Oceanography you find agenda laden information that is clearly meant to skew public thinking about 'global warming'.

I excerpted a couple of paragraphs from an article found on the Scripps' website for those of you who do not scour the web in search of unbiased information. It is amazing the different directions thought can lead when armed with just a few facts.

First, read the excerpted paragraphs from the article found on the Scripps' website. I also encourage you to follow the link provided to read the full article; there is a lot of good and useful information in spite of its agenda orientation. My comments will continue after you read the following from the Scripps' article.

Carbonated Oceans

An overload of carbon dioxide is acidifying seawater, posing a subtle but profound threat to marine invertebrates.

March 2009
By Robert Monroe

"The acidity of the water in Fabry's lab had been ratcheted up to levels that might not be seen until the end of the century, but she and other scientists fear that ongoing acidification of ocean water could be causing a slow-motion destruction of ocean ecosystems now.

The loading of carbon dioxide into oceans is a consequence of fossil fuel use that has only begun to be widely recognized as problematic in the past decade. Its subsequent effects on seawater chemistry have the potential to spread ecological disaster to a variety of industries dependent on the seas."

:: © 2009 Scripps Institution of Oceanography , University of California, San Diego. All Rights Reserved

First, there are facts to bolster the claims that show certain areas of the world's oceans with a decrease in the Ph of the seawater but the data is sketchy at best. Also, he doesn't cite any values, or even if the ocean water is in fact acidic. The acidification process stated is correct with respect for the creation of carbonic acid. But please notice the conclusion drawn by the author with no facts to bolster his assertions.

1.) The CO2 helping to lower the Ph of the oceans is from the burning of fossil fuels. This is pure propaganda. I would like to see the Ouija board that he uses to determine if the molecule of CO2 came from fossil fuel use or other natural processes.

2.) The Fabry's lab statement refers to an experiment where they acidized water in a tank and saw decay of marine shell. What did they expect? The calcium carbonate of the marine shells is an acid neutralizer. It is like taking a Tums to quiet the acid in your stomach. (Tums are also mostly calcium carbonate.)

3.) Man's contribution to the total CO2 is only 3% of the total atmospheric CO2. The Oceans are the gatekeepers for most of the rest of the atmospheric CO2.

Omissions about the sources for atmospheric CO2 are glaringly obvious. Yes, man's burning of fossil fuels accounts for the larger share of man's CO2 guilt. But mankind also takes millions of tons of marine life out of the oceans. That also has a direct bearing on the chemical status of the oceans. Normally, when a marine animal dies, its chemical properties remain in the ocean. But, when harvested for human consumption, those properties are lost to the oceans, and the CO2 from the consumption or decay of these harvested marine animals goes into the atmosphere.

It is important to remember that all of those harvested clams, oysters, lobsters, and other shellfish remains (calcium carbonate) would normally be left in the oceans to help neutralize any acidification of the world's oceans, but these harvested marine animals wind up in landfills.

No, I am not trying to say, "Don’t eat seafood." Just wanting to point out that Mr. Monroe's piece is just another biased piece in a lame attempt to demonize the use of fossil fuels. The exact cause of lower Ph readings of certain areas of the world's oceans is not known. Nor do we have any historical records that tell us whether the process is just a normal function of the oceans. The most significant increase in world atmospheric CO2 is the temperature rise of the oceans. As the ocean temperature increases, its solubility for CO2 decreases and releases more CO2 into the atmosphere. The most recent data suggest that the world's oceans are cooling and if the trend continues, we can expect the CO2 expansion to stop and eventually reverse as solubility for CO2 increases.

Another hair-brained scheme for "saving the world" is the use of ethanol. One of the results of this boondoggle was the loss of tropical forests. The indigenous people of poor tropical countries would harvest the old forests and replace them with palm nut trees for making ethanol. I am all for helping the planet and being a good steward of our resources, but a little thought has to go into unwanted consequences. Careening headlong into poorly planned 'solutions' hurts a lot more than it helps.

Also, as the demand for more lithium to make batteries continues to increase, there is an environmental disaster in the making. I do not want to discourage the use of lithium batteries; I only want some thought going into the project before it becomes another crisis to have to manage with yet another ill-conceived 'quick fix'.

If you are a person who likes to find out anything from the web, do not rely on any single source. Look up contrarian information as well. Your worldview will increase in the process. (Be less narrow minded.)

Cheers,

-Robert-