Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Arctic Seas Turn to Acid, Putting Vital Food Chain at Risk
With the world's oceans absorbing six million tonnes of carbon a day, a leading oceanographer warns of eco disaster
Carbon-dioxide emissions are turning the waters of the Arctic Ocean into acid at an unprecedented rate, scientists have discovered. Research carried out in the archipelago of Svalbard has shown in many regions around the north pole seawater is likely to reach corrosive levels within 10 years. The water will then start to dissolve the shells of mussels and other shellfish and cause major disruption to the food chain. By the end of the century, the entire Arctic Ocean will be corrosively acidic.
(Juniors Bildarchiv/Alamy) "This is extremely worrying," Professor Jean-Pierre Gattuso, of France's Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, told an international oceanography conference last week. "We knew that the seas were getting more acidic and this would disrupt the ability of shellfish – like mussels – to grow their shells. But now we realise the situation is much worse. The water will become so acidic it will actually dissolve the shells of living shellfish."
Just as an acid descaler breaks apart limescale inside a kettle, so the shells that protect molluscs and other creatures will be dissolved. "This will affect the whole food chain, including the North Atlantic salmon, which feeds on molluscs," said Gattuso, speaking at a European commission conference, Oceans of Tomorrow, in Barcelona last week. The oceanographer told delegates that the problem of ocean acidification was worse in high latitudes, in the Arctic and around Antarctica, than it was nearer the equator.
"More carbon dioxide can dissolve in cold water than warm," he said. "Hence the problem of acidification is worse in the Arctic than in the tropics, though we have only recently got round to studying the problem in detail."
About a quarter of the carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere by factories, power stations and cars now ends up being absorbed by the oceans. That represents more than six million tonnes of carbon a day.
This carbon dioxide dissolves and is turned into carbonic acid, causing the oceans to become more acidic. "We knew the Arctic would be particularly badly affected when we started our studies but I did not anticipate the extent of the problem," said Gattuso.
His research suggests that 10% of the Arctic Ocean will be corrosively acidic by 2018; 50% by 2050; and 100% ocean by 2100. "Over the whole planet, there will be a threefold increase in the average acidity of the oceans, which is unprecedented during the past 20 million years. That level of acidification will cause immense damage to the ecosystem and the food chain, particularly in the Arctic," he added.
The tiny mollusc Limacina helicina, which is found in Arctic waters, will be particularly vulnerable, he said. The little shellfish is eaten by baleen whales, salmon, herring and various seabirds. Its disappearance would therefore have a major impact on the entire marine food chain. The deep-water coral Lophelia pertusa would also be extremely vulnerable to rising acidity. Reefs in high latitudes are constructed by only one or two types of coral – unlike tropical coral reefs which are built by a large variety of species. The loss of Lophelia pertusa would therefore devastate reefs off Norway and the coast of Scotland, removing underwater shelters that are exploited by dozens of species of fish and other creatures.
"Scientists have proposed all sorts of geo-engineering solutions to global warming," said Gattuso. "For instance, they have proposed spraying the upper atmosphere with aerosol particles that would reduce sunlight reaching the Earth, mitigating the warming caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide.
"But these ideas miss the point. They will still allow carbon dioxide emissions to continue to increase – and thus the oceans to become more and more acidic. There is only one way to stop the devastation the oceans are now facing and that is to limit carbon-dioxide emissions as a matter of urgency."
This was backed by other speakers at the conference. Daniel Conley, of Lund University, Sweden, said that increasing acidity levels, sea-level rises and temperature changes now threatened to bring about irreversible loss of biodiversity in the sea. Christoph Heinze, of Bergen University, Norway, said his studies, part of the EU CarboOcean project, had found that carbon from the atmosphere was being transported into the oceans' deeper waters far more rapidly than expected and was already having a corrosive effect on life forms there.
The oceans' vulnerability to climate change and rising carbon-dioxide levels has also been a key factor in the launching of the EU's Tara Ocean project at Barcelona. The expedition, on the sailing ship Tara, will take three years to circumnavigate the globe, culminating in a voyage through the icy Northwest Passage in Canada, and will make continual and detailed samplings of seawater to study its life forms.
A litre of seawater contains between 1bn and 10bn single-celled organisms called prokaryotes, between 10bn and 100bn viruses and a vast number of more complex, microscopic creatures known as zooplankton, said Chris Bowler, a marine biologist on Tara.
"People think they are just swimming in water when they go for a dip in the sea," he said. "In fact, they are bathing in a plankton soup."
That plankton soup is of crucial importance to the planet, he added. "As much carbon dioxide is absorbed by plankton as is absorbed by tropical rainforests. Its health is therefore of crucial importance to us all."
However, only 1% of the life forms found in the sea have been properly identified and studied, said Bowler. "The aim of the Tara project is to correct some of that ignorance and identify many more of these organisms while we still have the chance. Issues like ocean acidification, rising sea levels and global warming will not be concerns at the back of our minds. They will be a key focus for the work that we do while we are on our expedition."
The toll by 2100
■ The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change forecast in 2007 that sea levels would rise by 20cm to 60cm by 2100 thanks to global warming caused by man-made carbon-dioxide emissions. This is now thought to be an underestimate, however, with most scientific bodies warning that sea levels could rise by a metre or even higher. Major inundations of vulnerable regions such as Bangladesh would ensue.
■ The planet will be hotter by 3C by 2100, most scientists now expect, though rises of 4.5C to 5C could be experienced. Deserts will spread and heatwaves will become more prevalent. Ice-caps will melt and cyclones are also likely to be triggered.
■ Weather patterns across the globe will become more unstable, numbers of devastating storms will increase dramatically while snow will disappear from all but the highest mountains.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


62 Comments so far
Show AllIt is time for some major geo-engineering projects. They probably wont work and they will likely create even bigger problems, but it is quite obvious that the rich people in the world will not give up their ipods and their humvees and their sushi, and their flights to las vegas, so only very drastic measures will have any chance of suceess.
Oct 24 is a special day around the globe: We will celebrate the number 350
It is 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide that we want to achieve by the year 2050. We have currently about 387 and we have to get DOWN. It all stated with the industrial age and we had 280 or so parts per million before the industrial age started this current crisis.
Tehre will be demonstrations all over the globe on Oct 24. The idea is to send photos of all the events to the website www.350.org and they will publish the photos.
he idea is to stimulate discussion at the Copenhagen climate change conference 6 weeks after Oct 24.
Please make an event-- go to www.350.org
Thanks guys for suggesting public transportation, vegetarian living, family planning and lets go out and really observe the wonderful nature that we have right now!
Get those politicians to move on public transport and wind and solar energy - yes even nuclear.
Apocalypse Now! The sooner the blight on this planet called humanity goes while taking with it the fewest number of other species possible the better.
The kind of thinking that "humans are a blight on this planet" is ecology’s fringe equivalent of Christian and Islamic fundamentalist conceptions of "the end times," and we should avoid it at all costs. These are the sorts of people that give ecological reform a bad name. Their way of thinking produces no solutions to our problems and will lead us to the very sort of apocalypse that they purport to fear, as some sort of judgment for humanity's sins.
I am not afraid.
The only sins are against ourselves. It is possible to sin against a stone. It's not a judgment against us, only karma. I don't believe in cause and effect. Every thing or event has thousands of causes beginning with Lucy and the birth of the Sun.
Let us be practical. If we're going to find a solution to the quandary of carbon dioxide emissions, it will in all likelihood come in the form of a new technology from the industrialized countries that themselves have the highest CO2 emissions. There has been some very encouraging work done by Professor Klaus Lackner at Columbia University on carbon capture devices: these machines basically suck up atmosphere and, using what he calls "ultramafic rocks," separate the carbon from the air and sequester it as a solid mass, that can then be stored underground. If we could put a million of these on stable ridges near the arctic circle, they would absorb 10 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere each year. Read the original report yourself: Fraser Goff and Klaus S. Lackner, “Carbon Dioxide Sequestering Using Ultramafic Rocks.” Environmental Geoscience, 5, No. 3, 1998, pp. 89-101. This is just one example of a promising new technology--perhaps not so new anymore: although Lackner came up with the idea in 1998, it was not successfully demonstrated until 2004, see http://www.grtaircapture.com/. If the United States and the rest of the G8 contributed more money to research and development of these kinds of technologies, instead of paying for our militarization of the planet, I am confident we would find a solution to this problem in under five years. Let us all turn our minds to this dilemma, and see what novel solutions occur to us.
Trees might work, too.
Exactly. Technology masks the problem, while nature solves it. In a world filled again with CO2-eating trees, we automatically get closer to homeostasis because there's room for fewer CO2-generating humans.
Killing the trees to make room for more humans, and then creating technology to hold at arm's length (for awhile) one piece of the resultant problem is what landed us in the gyppo in the first place. We need to see technology as a finger in the dike, not a solution.
I thought at least people in my field (civil engineering) thought AGW was serious if for no other reason that addressing it (public transit, wind turbines, hydropower, nuclear) employs a lot of civil engineers. But right now, it looks like I'm wrong:
http://tinyurl.com/yc3khed
And these are supposed to be educated people.
The European that said US attitudes toward AGW were "paleolithic" or some such word wasn't kidding.
And you gotta love how 3 out of the 4 possible choices are anti-AGW.
Yeah, that too.
So, effectively, among civil engineers (most with mmasters degrees or higher), it's running 3 denialists to every member of the AGW reality community.
Which just goes to show that many professionals outside the field of climate are meta-ignorant on the subject.