http://reagecon.com/pdf/technicalpapers/...
Temperature also affects pH
https://www.google.com/search?q=temperat...
I think the ocean is becoming moderately more acidic but since it is so far on the other end, it is probably more accurate to say less alkaline but it would be hard to push a cause with "reduced alkalinity." Acidification just has that good visual that you might melt if you fall into the ocean.
It is a pretty complex issue. The ocean has places that are cold and CO2 will easily dissolve and places where it is warm and CO2 has a net emission from the ocean. The ocean pH isn't determined solely by CO2 and it presumably has some significant buffers.
My first thought about a warming ocean is that it would tend to precipitate more carbonates (approx 1/200th of that from human emissions). I would think it would be hard to determine over the world, but it would be a very interesting study to try to get a good handle on how much carbonate is precipitating compared to 100 or 1000 years ago.
What you have hit on is one of the proofs that CO2 is driving the current warming. You are absolutely correct that during periods of natural warming, the oceans are an important positive feedback. That is one of the key processes that cause ice ages to come and go.
But right now we have the oceans absorbing CO2 as they warm. This is not a prediction, it is currently observed; it is happening and it never happens during periods of natural warming. And the oceans and atmosphere almost never gain carbon at the same time; that can happen naturally only through great and prolonged vulcanization which is not happening now.
The oceans are acidifying now as they warm specifically because there is so much CO2 in the atmosphere. We know that because 1) it is predicted by physics and 2) carbon is increasing most rapidly at the surface.
"Therefore it seems that either the prediction for increases in acidity of the ocean OR the feedback of CO2 is wrong."
That's an idea. It really doesn't have the strength of a theory, but just for giggles, let's call it a theory.
What you do then is see whether the observations fit the theory, to either add strength, or disqualify it.
We do see that there is more CO2 in both the atmosphere, and in the water.
We do see ocean acidification.
We do see that the atmosphere and oceans are warmer.
SO, the observations don't fit the theory, which means that either the theory is wrong, or there is something wrong with the observations.
In this case, the observations have been carried out over several decades, so the obvious conclusion is that the theory is incorrect.
Your chemistry is missing something important – the production of hydrogen ions.
When carbon dissolves in water it produces bicarbonate ions AND hydrogen ions, the bicarbonate ions break down into carbonate ions.
The increase in hydrogen ions is of much more significance than the formation of carbonic acid and it’s this that is primarily responsible for acidification.
Air temps have increased by about 0.8°C but the oceans have warmed by only about 0.1°C, this is partly because the mass of the oceans is far greater than that of the atmosphere (1.4x10^21kg as opposed to just 5.3x10^18kg) and because the volumetric heat capacity is much greater (approx 0.001J/cm3/K for air and 4.000J/cm3/K for water, the value of K can be taken as 288 for both air and ocean).
The oceans contain a million times more heat energy than the atmosphere and therefore it takes far more energy to warm the oceans than it does the atmosphere.
Ocean temps haven’t changed by much and therefore neither has the total heat/energy capacity. What has changed significantly is the H+ ion concentration, this is up 30% against pre-industrial levels and as a consequence pH levels have dropped from an average of 8.25 to 8.14.
The oceans more absorb CO2 because the concentration in the air is up 50%. The slight warming of the ocean is not enough to compensate.
So no, we still have evidence for GW.
Hmm I think no one here has ever used a PH meter (I have) they are notoriously inaccurate and constantly need recalibration, to be able to reliably measure PH to decimal places is a fallacy, it cant be done.
The oceans PH varies from place to place quite a lot, and in some places PH can vary with the time of day (planktonic action) to hear the statment that PH levels have dropped from 8.25 to 8.14 since pre industrial times just makes me laugh.
If you understand the CO2/carbonate chemistry system and air-sea gas transfer then you understand it is completely consistent for the oceans to become more acidic and have the total dissolved inorganic carbon concentration decrease. But if you want to think there is a problem, then no amount of carefully reasoned exposition of facts would ever convince you otherwise. However, if you want to avoid looking like a fool, go back to the first sentence, crack a book (I recommend Stumm and Morgan, Aquatic Chemistry), and learn something.
No, the absorption into sea water is not 100% and is only at a higher level because CO2 in the atmosphere is at a higher level. One does not displace the other.
No doubt it takes many years of PhD dissertation research to reach the breakthrough conclusion that if you don't understand something then it must be a Marxist hoax.
Try looking up the phrase ceteris paribus.
Or learning science instead of trying to make up fibs about it.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Feature...
lot of confusion regarding
CO2 + H2O -> H2CO3 Carbonic Acid
H2CO3 ? H + HCO3 Bicarbonate ion
HCO3- ? H + CO3 Carbonate ion
According to the warmer's predictions global warming will heat up the ocean and warmer water holds less CO2. This would be one of their major forms of feedback. But if the oceans are holding less CO2, then this would necessarily mean that they would become less acidic.
Therefore it seems that either the prediction for increases in acidity of the ocean OR the feedback of CO2 is wrong.
