August 22nd 2009

  Buy Issue 2810

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY: Terrorism comes to Sydney

EDITORIAL: Is the financial crisis receding?

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS: Heavy-handed China shows its true colours

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Rudd Government bid to take over hospitals

QUEENSLAND: Anna Bligh's Labor Government on the skids

NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Regional consultation needed on new Murray-Darling plan

RURAL AFFAIRS: Dairy and irrigation industries hit hard

ENVIRONMENT: Analysis of alarmism: ocean acidification

CLIMATE: Climate change devastation: apocalypse now

HUMAN RIGHTS: Grievance industry shows exponential growth

OPINION: How Australian authors fare in the free market

GOVERNMENT: Public service independence undermined by politicians

OPINION: Forced repatriations from Austria in 1945

AS THE WORLD TURNS: Teenagers rescued from suicide training camps; Demographic time-bomb transforming Europe; Shocking decline of British schools; Bismarck on politics

CINEMA: Portrait of the starship captain as a young hoon - Star Trek


Books promotion page

Analysis of alarmism: ocean acidification

by Dr Tim Ball

News Weekly, August 22, 2009
Eminent Canadian climatologist Dr Tim Ball warns that the next environmental scare associated with human-induced carbon dioxide emissions is ocean acidification.

As public awareness grows that human-caused warming is false, so the extent and degree of attempts to scare the public increase. The scare preference is for remote geographic areas such as the Arctic or Antarctic or complex obscure topics ideally with global implications, which the public knows little about. The latest scare story is ocean acidification, which combines these traits with the advantage of a word with negative connotations and used before in acid rain.

Like all scares, it is based on total acceptance that an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is a problem. The claim, in this case, is that it is causing temperature increase, but also changing the chemistry of the oceans. Like all the scares, it is pure speculation after you accept the false claim that CO2 is causing temperature increase.

To counteract suggestions that they are overstating the threat, they use a form of the precautionary principle, which holds that we must act anyway. So the problem exists; it is just a matter of the extent of the impact.

Yet the full impact of ocean acidification and how these impacts may propagate through marine ecosystems and affect fisheries remain largely unknown.

What is ocean acidification?

Oceans absorb or release CO2, primarily determined by the amount in the atmosphere and the water temperature. The argument is that, regardless of what the air temperature does, an increased amount of CO2 in the atmosphere due to human activity guarantees more going into the oceans. This change results in a change in water chemistry reflected in one measure, the pH.

A solution has a pH level that is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity. The pH scale ranges from 0 to 14, and a measure of 7 is neutral. The scale is created relative to standard solutions and agreed on internationally. Above 7 the solution is more alkaline, and below 7 it is more acid. The oceans are considered to have a pH of 8.2 with a variance of 0.3, so it is an alkaline solution.

The claim of ocean acidification is based on estimates and computer models; these use the very question-able pre-industrial atmospheric level of CO2 to calculate an increase of about 0.1 pH units.

Of course, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) attributes the CO2 increase to human production, which is wrong because the global carbon cycle is very vague about sources, storage and length of time in each condition. For example, the margin of error in the estimate of CO2 from the oceans each year is greater than the total human contribution.

The idea that a 0.1 pH unit increase is significant is ludicrous when the estimate has a range of 0.3 units.

There is a subtle but important point here because words are part of the scare component. Even if you accept the claimed change is not acidification, it is proper to say the solution is becoming less alkaline, but that doesn't sound threatening. More problematic is the validity of the measures.
TABLE 2: Source: Liu et al. (2009)
'Instability of seawater pH in the South China
Sea during the mid-late Holocene: evidence
from boron isotopic composition of corals.'

Although pH in seawater has been measured for many decades, a reliable long-term trend of ocean water pH cannot be established due to data quality issues, in particular the lack of strict and stable calibration procedures and standards. Moreover, seawater pH is very sensitive to temperature, and temperature is not always recorded or measured at sufficient accuracy to constrain the pH measurement.

Even if CO2 increases to 560 ppm by 2050, as the IPCC predict, this would only result in a 0.2 unit reduction of pH. This is still within the error of the estimate of global average.

What is the real threat?

So what is threatened by this reduced alkalinity? Most marine life, if you read all the stories. But scare stories need one issue that people view positively. Coral fits the bill well because the underwater scenes of colour and diversity of life mesmerise us all.

According to the experts, ocean acidification may render most regions of the ocean inhospitable to coral reefs by 2050, if atmospheric CO2 levels continue to increase. It could lead to substantial changes in commercial fish-stocks, threatening food security for millions of people as well as the multi-billion dollar fishing industry.

Dramatic change

Scares require dramatic change beyond any previously recorded. For instance: "Ocean acidification is more rapid than ever in the history of the earth and, if you look at the pCO2 [partial pressure of carbon dioxide] levels we have reached now, you have to go back 35 million years in time to find the equivalents."

Scares also require an impending critical point beyond which remedial action is useless. This so-called "tipping point" is currently estimated to allow a drop of about 0.2 pH units, a value that could be reached in as soon as 30 years.

It is no surprise the author of these outrageous and incorrect remarks is chair of the EuroClimate program Scientific Committee (Science Daily, May 24, 2009).
TABLE 1: Source: Temperature after C.R. Scotese,

CO2 after R.A. Bernier

A plot of CO2 levels over the last 600 million years shows current levels are very low at 385 ppm (see Table 1).

The only period in 600 million years when CO2 levels were equal to the present was over 300 million years ago. Since that time, CO2 levels averaged 1000 to 1200 ppm or 3 to 4 times current levels.

How did the plant and animal life survive those levels? It makes a mockery of the claim that even a doubling of atmospheric CO2 is a problem.

More recent measures of pH levels show how current levels and claimed changes are well within natural variability. A reconstruction of pH levels for the South China Seas by Liu et al (2009) illustrates the point (see Table 2).

The light of understanding

Marie Curie, one of the greatest scientists of all time, said, "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." Gradually, more and more evidence shows the hypothesis that human CO2 is causing warming or climate change, is false.

Fear is subsiding as more people including many scientists understand and are speaking out. A surprising one recently was Tom Tripp, a member and lead author of the IPCC since 2004. At the July 2009 Utah Farm Bureau Convention, he said that there is so much natural variability in weather that it makes a scientifically valid conclusion about man-made global warming difficult.

Specifically he said, "It may well be, but we're not scientifically there yet." That contradicts the message from the reports he helped to author. It also disavows the claim that the science is settled.

The outrage is that alarmists continue to present a message of certainty. However, just in case you are wavering, the sky is definitely falling, and they will continue to produce outrageous unsubstantiated scares to prove it.

Dr Tim Ball is a renowned environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. Dr Ball employs his extensive background in climatology and other fields as an advisor to the International Climate Science Coalition, Friends of Science and the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

This article was first published in the Canadian Free Press, July 20, 2009.

It is reprinted here with permission.

All you need to know about
the wider impact of transgenderism on society.
TRANSGENDER: one shade of grey, 353pp, $39.99

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

FOREIGN AFFAIRS Coronavirus: China must answer hard questions

HUMAN RIGHTS A Magnitsky-style law for Australia?

COVER STORY Wildfires: Lessons from the past not yet learnt

COVER STORY Coronavirus: China must answer hard questions

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Bushfires: Never let a good crisis go to waste

CANBERRA OBSERVED Submarine build gives us a sinking feeling

GENDER POLITICS In trans Newspeak, parental consent is a 'hurdle'

© Copyright 2017
Last Modified:
April 4, 2018, 6:45 pm