martin pecheux martin.pecheux at free.fr
Tue Jan 10 15:38:05 EST 2012

at summer maximum.

Dear Julian, and all of you,

Pecheux, 1993, 1997, 2002 in www.ReefBase.org, Barton and Casey, 2005, Coral Reefs, Abstract in ReefBase, Antony et al. and Ove Hoegh-Guldberg 2008. "Ocean acidification causes bleaching…..", PNAS, 107, 17442-6.

Rise to 500 ppm CO2 will be equivalent to 2.8°C stress.
And Pecheux and Strasser, in prep., and next ICRS.

Put all under liquid nitrogen.

Dr. Martin Pêcheux
IPCC Expert Reviewer  WG I (Science of Climate Change), WG II (Impact, Adaptation and Vulnerability) www.ipcc.ch. Coming IPBES (Intergovernemental Plateform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services)
Institut des Grands Foraminifères Symbiotiques
16, rue de la Fontaine de l'Espérance, 92160 Antony, France
martin.pecheux at free.fr, soon www.martin-pecheux.fr, +33 (0)9 532 433 74

Perihelion, the instant when the Earth is closest to Sun is in 2012  the "Jupiter" (Donnerstag, what in english ?) 5th January, at 0h 31 min 50 sec UT (in 2013, the 2 Jan at 4h 37 min 34 sec UT). Champagne. This date is also slowly be retarded, and it will be the first time since 40 000 years that it is a 5th January.This makes the natural glacial/interglacial CO2 cycles, more than with distance than season. 

If we take good measures NOW, it will be like the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Event *, warming and some faunal changes, if we do nothing, it will be like the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary, end of dinosaurs and many others, and if we still do nothing, it will be like the Permo-Trias, 95% species cut, and an almost devoid Earth.
* rather sure that it will already be overtake. It was about +4°C, but rise on 10-20 000 years.

Le 10 janv. 2012 à 16:44, Julian @ Reef Check a écrit :

> Dear all
> Forgive a non-scientist for making a perhaps rather naive observation, but
> are we in danger of ignoring the short term problems and focusing too much
> on the long term? While I don't doubt that ocean acidification will have an
> impact on coral reefs over the long term (20-50 years), I suggest that maybe
> it is a bit of a red herring in the face of impacts that are affecting reefs
> on a short term basis (next 5 years), and thereby the communities that need
> healthy coral reefs today. A paper written about the impact of fish bombing
> on reefs around Sabah, East Malaysia, back in the late 90's calculated that
> (at the then current rate of incidence) fish bombing would destroy 130% of
> Sabah's reefs by 2020 (the date at which Malaysia hopes to achieve developed
> nation status). And since you can't actually destroy 130% of something, then
> by implication by 2020 there won't be much left in the way of healthy reefs
> in Sabah.
> So if there won't be much reef left to be affected by ocean acidification,
> which is a problem in the 20-50 year timescale, is it not logical that we
> should spend at least some time focusing on the shorter term threats, like
> fish bombing, as well as trying to address the longer term threats, like
> acidification?
> Regards
> Julian Hyde
> General Manager
> Reef Check Malaysia Bhd
> 03 2161 5948
> www.reefcheck.org.my
> Follow us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/rcmalaysia
> "The bottom line of the Millenium Assessment findings is that human actions
> are depleting Earth's natural capital, putting such strain on the
> environment that the ability of the planet's ecosystems to sustain future
> generations can no longer be taken for granted."
> -----Original Message-----
> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Ulf Erlingsson
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 January, 2012 10:19 PM
> To: Steve Mussman; Coral Listserver Listserver
> Cc: Eugene Shinn
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Don't be such a scientist
> Steve,
> Argument #2 in the link you gave is invalid and the similitude with climate
> / weather is flawed. At any rate the planet is facing serious problems and
> IMHO it is very irresponsible to cry wolf over something that is so
> self-serving as this for the scientists involved.
> Respectfully,
> Ulf Erlingsson
> On 2012-01-09, at 15:49, Steve Mussman wrote:
>> Gene,
>> With all due respect there are sources and there are . . . . sources.
>> I'm not a scientist, but I know enough to question sources of information.
>> I can find sites that claim that cigarette smoking is beneficial, but 
>> that doesn't mean that one should give credence to this perspective.
>> Proclaiming rising atmospheric CO2 levels and current rates of ocean 
>> acidification to be a good thing is reprehensible in my view. 
>> Here is a alternate perspective that deserves serious consideration 
>> based on the credibility of the author and the list of sources cited.
>> http://www.skepticalscience.com/ocean-acid.html
>>  Respectfully yours,   
>>   Steve Mussman      
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Eugene Shinn <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
>>> Sent: Jan 9, 2012 10:39 AM
>>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>> Subject: [Coral-List] Don't be such a scientist
>>> I missed the 60 minutes program because I was at sea when it aired. I 
>>> nevertheless wonder if they discussed any of the scientific issues 
>>> presented in the WSJ (below). or the lengthy technical presentation 
>>> at   http://co2science.org/subject/o/acidificationphenom.php.  Gene
>>>>> Source:  WSJ
>>>>> [SPPI Note:  More in-depth papers on this issue can be found at the 
>>>>> SPPI website:
>>>>> C02 Science's Ocean Acidification Database
>>>>> Quantifying the Effects of Ocean Acidification on Marine Organisms
>>>>> Effects of Ocean Acidification on Marine Ecosystems
>>>>> Answers to a Fisherman's Testimony about Ocean Acidification
>>>>> EPA's Role in Protecting Ocean Health Should Focus on the 
>>>>> "Here-and-Now" Threats
>>>>> See also CO2 Science website for reviewed papers on the topic
>>>>> ***************************
>>>>> WSJ text beings here:
>>>>> Coral reefs around the world are suffering badly from overfishing 
>>>>> and various forms of pollution. Yet many experts argue that the 
>>>>> greatest threat to them is the acidification of the oceans from the 
>>>>> dissolving of man-made carbon dioxide emissions.
>>>>> The effect of acidification, according to J.E.N. Veron, an 
>>>>> Australian coral scientist, will be "nothing less than 
>>>>> catastrophic.... What were once thriving coral gardens that 
>>>>> supported the greatest biodiversity of the marine realm will become 
>>>>> red-black bacterial slime, and they will stay that way."
>>>>> Humans have placed marine life under pressure, but the chief 
>>>>> culprits are overfishing and pollution.
>>>>> This is a common view. The Natural Resources Defense Council has 
>>>>> called ocean acidification "the scariest environmental problem 
>>>>> you've never heard of." Sigourney Weaver, who narrated a film about 
>>>>> the issue, said that "the scientists are freaked out." The head of 
>>>>> the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration calls it global 
>>>>> warming's "equally evil twin."
>>>>> But do the scientific data support such alarm? Last month 
>>>>> scientists at San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography and 
>>>>> other authors published a study showing how much the pH level 
>>>>> (measuring alkalinity versus acidity) varies naturally between 
>>>>> parts of the ocean and at different times of the day, month and 
>>>>> year.
>>>>> "On both a monthly and annual scale, even the most stable open 
>>>>> ocean sites see pH changes many times larger than the annual rate 
>>>>> of acidification," say the authors of the study, adding that 
>>>>> because good instruments to measure ocean pH have only recently 
>>>>> been deployed, "this variation has been under-appreciated." Over 
>>>>> coral reefs, the pH decline between dusk and dawn is almost half as 
>>>>> much as the decrease in average pH expected over the next 100 
>>>>> years. The noise is greater than the signal.
>>>>> Another recent study, by scientists from the U.K., Hawaii and 
>>>>> Massachusetts, concluded that "marine and freshwater assemblages 
>>>>> have always experienced variable pH conditions," and that "in many 
>>>>> freshwater lakes, pH changes that are orders of magnitude greater 
>>>>> than those projected for the 22nd-century oceans can occur over 
>>>>> periods of hours."
>>>>> This adds to other hints that the ocean-acidification problem may 
>>>>> have been exaggerated. For a start, the ocean is alkaline and in no 
>>>>> danger of becoming acid (despite headlines like that from Reuters 
>>>>> in 2009: "Climate Change Turning Seas Acid"). If the average pH of 
>>>>> the ocean drops to 7.8 from 8.1 by 2100 as predicted, it will still 
>>>>> be well above seven, the neutral point where alkalinity becomes 
>>>>> acidity.
>>>>> The central concern is that lower pH will make it harder for 
>>>>> corals, clams and other "calcifier" creatures to make calcium 
>>>>> carbonate skeletons and shells. Yet this concern also may be 
>>>>> overstated. Off Papua New Guinea and the Italian island of Ischia, 
>>>>> where natural carbon-dioxide bubbles from volcanic vents make the 
>>>>> sea less alkaline, and off the Yucatan, where underwater springs 
>>>>> make seawater actually acidic, studies have shown that at least 
>>>>> some kinds of calcifiers still thrive-at least as far down as pH 
>>>>> 7.8.
>>>>> In a recent experiment in the Mediterranean, reported in Nature 
>>>>> Climate Change, corals and mollusks were transplanted to lower pH 
>>>>> sites, where they proved "able to calcify and grow at even faster 
>>>>> than normal rates when exposed to the high [carbon-dioxide] levels 
>>>>> projected for the next 300 years." In any case, freshwater mussels 
>>>>> thrive in Scottish rivers, where the pH is as low as five.
>>>>> Laboratory experiments find that more marine creatures thrive than 
>>>>> suffer when carbon dioxide lowers the pH level to 7.8. This is 
>>>>> because the carbon dioxide dissolves mainly as bicarbonate, which 
>>>>> many calcifiers use as raw material for carbonate.
>>>>> Human beings have indeed placed marine ecosystems under terrible 
>>>>> pressure, but the chief culprits are overfishing and pollution. By 
>>>>> comparison, a very slow reduction in the alkalinity of the oceans, 
>>>>> well within the range of natural variation, is a modest threat, and 
>>>>> it certainly does not merit apocalyptic headlines.
>>>>> ******************************
>>> -- 
>>> No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
>>> ------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
>>> E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
>>> University of South Florida
>>> College of Marine Science Room 221A
>>> 140 Seventh Avenue South
>>> St. Petersburg, FL 33701
>>> <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
>>> Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- 
>>> -----------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Coral-List mailing list
>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>> _______________________________________________
>> Coral-List mailing list
>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

More information about the Coral-List mailing list