Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Study: Southern Ocean saturated with CO2 (Reuters/CNN)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 03:48 PM
Original message
Study: Southern Ocean saturated with CO2 (Reuters/CNN)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The Southern Ocean around Antarctica is so loaded with carbon dioxide that it can barely absorb any more, so more of the gas will stay in the atmosphere to warm up the planet, scientists reported Thursday.

Human activity is the main culprit, said researcher Corinne Le Quere, who called the finding very alarming.

The phenomenon wasn't expected to be apparent for decades, Le Quere said in a telephone interview from the University of East Anglia in Britain.

"We thought we would be able to detect these only the second half of this century, say 2050 or so," she said. But data from 1981 through 2004 show the sink is already full of carbon dioxide. "So I find this really quite alarming."

The Southern Ocean is one of the world's biggest reservoirs of carbon, known as a carbon sink. When carbon is in a sink -- whether it's an ocean or a forest, both of which can lock up carbon dioxide -- it stays out of the atmosphere and does not contribute to global warming.
***
more: http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/05/17/climate.ocea...

Ruh roh.

Folks, this is bad news. OTOH, maybe this explains why all the other GW phenomena are showing up earlier than expected. At least that would mean the situation, while grim, now had one less unknown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Truthseeker013 Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Looking for Gore-haters...
Bet I won't be finding any for some time to come. Maybe we *do* need a catastrophe for the Idiots On High to get the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. What happens as the Southern Ocean temp rises?
I suspect it will hold LESS CO2, but I am not sure. Can anybody enlighten me?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyingfysh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. colder water can hold more dissolved gases
This is why when you heat water on the stove, you see bubbles form on the sides of the pan. It also explain why cold polar waters have such a high fish population; there is a lot of oxygen in the water. Making that water warmer causes problems for species that depend on the high oxygen content.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. That's what I thought. We're ok until all the ice cubes have melted.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
file83 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-18-07 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Plop, plop, fizz-fizz
I keep imagining a can of pop fizzing over...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Carbon saturates water at......
350 parts per million, indicating there are approximately 4 trillion metric tons of carbon at present. As temps rise, the saturation rate shrinks, and less carbon is absorbed. The resulting phenomena could be a polarization of the micro-density of carbon now present, which could lead to an increased release factor of up to 7%. In other words, unless you are a cockroach, you're screwed!

Ha ha ha! Okay, I am just bullshittin you. I have no earthly idea what I am talking about, but it was fun tryin to make it sound somewhat scientific!

Whatever the consequences are, it can't be good!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm getting so tired of saying "Oh, shit" all the time.
Fuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildhorses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. excellent substitution, i approve
fuckity fuckity fuck fuck fuck

fuck me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Gets repetitive, doesn't it?
I had "Oh, Fuck" as a sig-line for a while. Saved loads of time...
Now I have to type it manually, of course.


Oh, fuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. Recommended sadly. #5
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
9. I wonder if Madonna will write a song about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
10. The Great Dying
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
11. Ladies & Gentlemen, may I present my Nominee for 2007 Word of the Year:
"Oops!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. word of the 21st century?
Edited on Thu May-17-07 05:49 PM by phantom power
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-18-07 06:21 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. And the matching phrase ...
"... much faster than expected."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FatDave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
13. Wait, let me get this straight.
So, even though this happened much sooner than expected, they expected it to happen? So using science, they were able to predict a future event? Then doesn't that prediction go a long way to validate the science?

HOLY FUCK BATMAN! Maybe there is something to this science stuff after all!

Every day I get angrier and angrier. Please, somebody help me focus it constructively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Dec 12th 2017, 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC