Ocean acidification and mass extinction
Human CO2 emissions blamed for dangerously acidic seas
March 2009
Climate scientists warn of mass extinction
Carbon emissions creating acidic oceans not seen since dinosaurs
Chemical change placing 'unprecedented' pressure on marine life and could cause widespread extinctions, warn scientists
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/mar/10/carbon-emissions-oceans-copenhagen
Research by scientists at Bristol University points to a rapid acidification of the oceans, threatening to create conditions not seen on Earth since the era of the dinosaurs. This acidification is caused by human CO2 emissions, dissolving in the oceans and turning the seas acidic with alarming speed. The CO2 belched from chimneys and exhausts is causing a chemical change that is subjecting marine life to unprecedented pressure, raising the spectre of widespread extinctions.
The study presented by Bristol University scientists at a special three-day summit of climate scientists in Copenhagen, updates the science of global warming and adds further pressure upon politicians to take effective action on carbon emissions.
The findings forecast "dangerous" levels of ocean acidification, with severe consequences for organisms called marine calcifiers, which form chalky shells. "We find the future rate of surface ocean acidification and environmental pressure on marine calcifiers very likely unprecedented in the past 65 million years." The situation in the deep sea is of even greater concern, the scientists go on to say.
The Bristol scientists compare the current rapid acidification with a giant prehistoric release of greenhouse gas, which is known to have caused the widespread extinction of deep water species. In the summary, the scientists argue: "Because the rates of acidification between past and future are comparable, and [because] there was widespread extinction of benthic [lowest living] organisms, one must conclude that a similar level of extinction is more likely than not in the future."
Ocean acidification from CO2 has been a growing concern in recent years, but tends to receive less attention than carbon emissions into the atmosphere. The problems are, of course, connected, with human activity behind them both.
The Bristol study predicts the consequences of acidic waters by looking at past events. The scientists argue that future deep sea acidification must be limited to 0.2 pH units for the worst effects to be avoided.
Ocean acidification is an increasingly central concern. Ken Caldeira, from the Carnegie Institution in California, anticipates profound changes in the oceans in the coming decades. His warning is stark: "If we do not cut carbon dioxide emissions deeply, and soon, the consequences of ocean acidification will stand out against the broad reaches of geologic time.
"Those consequences will remain embedded in the geologic record as testimony from a civilisation that had the wisdom to develop high technology but did not develop the wisdom to use it wisely."
Techno-fixers like Stewart Brand and Mark Lynas are currently receiving a lot of attention for their notion of humankind as the ‘God species’. In truth, they say next to nothing on human intelligence, and are conspicuously silent on moral intelligence. Instead, the overwhelming emphasis is upon nuclear power, GM food, biotechnology and geoengineering. In other words, technology in independence from thought and culture. The capacity of the instrumental means available to human beings is not in doubt. The big question mark is against the capacity of human beings to set their technical intelligence within a greater humane and ecological intelligence. Like Captain Ahab in endless pursuit of the whale, we can pit our intelligence against Nature and say, "All my means are sane, my motives and object mad."
As a result of deifying our technics, we achieve not flourishing within the web of life, but the ‘empire of man’ over nature, bringing about a mass extinction, of which, no doubt, we ourselves will be a part. That destructive insanity will be our contribution to history of the planet, leaving a permanent record testifying to a species that had the intelligence to develop a technological capacity powerful enough to create a new geologic age, the Anthropocene, but which failed to develop sufficient wisdom to ensure that that age could sustain itself and flourish.
That is not an argument against technology but a demand that we live up to our creative potential and assume moral responsibility for our technical ingenuity. That, surely, is what evolution is about, gaining conscious control of forces that enslave us to some natural or social or systemic necessity. None of this is written in our genes. Indeed, far from human beings being impelled by their genes, many of the genetic patterns in the world today have been produced by social and cultural transformations. Each development in technics, from stone tools onwards, entails an evolutionary shift and generates biological consequences that endure for thousands of years. This is how the climate crisis should be presented, as an invitation to the human species to move up to another level in its evolution, using its intelligence and know how for something better than economic profit, state control and military power. These are the objectives of a small and undeveloped people. Our new productive forces contain the potential for a society at ease with itself and with Nature, a society of planetary health and human flourishing.
Turner – The Golden Bough
Human beings stand out amongst other species for two unique attributes: the ability to know the past and the ability to plan the future. Hindsight and foresight are remarkable talents that ensure that our prospects transcend imperatives and determinisms of all kinds, biological and economic.
There is nothing in the predictions made by scientists that is inevitable. It all depends on whether we heed the warnings, take the advice, incorporate it into our praxis and change directions in a way that enables our future thriving. Only if we fail to act do the predictions become inevitabilities.
According to some scientists, marine life in the Arctic and Antarctic is already being affected by acidification.
A number of studies published since the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that carbon emissions are rising faster than the IPCC expected and that the current greenhouse gas targets may not be enough to prevent catastrophic temperature rise. There is increasing doubt amongst scientists that the objective of limiting average global temperature rise to 2C is at all realistic.
The conclusions are clear – it is time for governments to govern, politicians to act and people to change their behaviour.
Katherine Richardson, a marine biologist at the University of Copenhagen, is explicit in her view that scientific research should be published and publicised as part of "a deliberate attempt to influence policy". Those who would consider this a politicisation of science are conflating – probably deliberately – two different things. The science stands and falls on its own merits as science. But there comes a point when governments need to act on the evidence that scientists put before them. For Katherine Richardson, scientists are increasingly concerned that politicians have still to grasp the seriousness of the situation, this despite a seemingly endless succession of well-researched studies warning of the increasing danger of eco-catastrophe. Compared to the stellar work completed by scientists, the failure of political will and public imagination is simply pathetic. It is time for millions of individuals around the world to live up to their billing as members of homo sapiens.
The brains trust – communicative rationality at work, the politics of deliberation and decision-making.
David Attenborough’s call for political leadership is being heeded. This is the delegation I would send to the next Earth summit. They can’t do any worse than the politicians and the lawyers.