If anyone is wondering how does more CO2 mean less CO3 when it's the final result of the equation, you have to remember that CO3 plays a role in the buffer system, and along with H+ will give HCO3. That means the more CO2 you add, you will also be losing more CO3 in favor of HCO3. Hope this is helpful.
Yeah I was looking at this scale with my high school chemistry knowledge... Sufficient to say I am confused as to how adding more CO2 magically created more Hydrogen in the equation.
can you clarify a bit more? it's been years since my chemistry classes, I only vaguely remember the equilibrium concentrations and buffer solutions.. In fact I was just wondering why, by adding more CO2 to the water, we just don't get more CO3 to precipitate as aragonite CaCO3 or some other carbonated mineral. EDIT: oh the graph at 3:10 is very helpful
@@LawsonR I haven't noticed your comment the last time I've commented on here, but for those who might be confused about the same thing, he explains it at 0:58. CO2 is going to force the hydrogen out of other compounds, thus creating more H+ in the water.
I’m no expert in forex trading but I’ve made $36,000 with $3,000 investment, because I had good guidance with @Carlos_1uptrades on Instagram. it’s beyond eye opening, with his teachings and trading skills, I’ve had nothing but continued success
Increased carbon dioxide will lead to increased surface temperature which decreases solubility of carbon dioxide on oceans, so I believe we are missing pieces here, and saying CO2 decreases alone are a solution is reductionist, I'd imagine
"This is often termed “ocean acidification” because it describes the process of decreasing pH. Current projections of ocean acidification suggest that the pH of surface ocean waters will continue to decline. However, the term can also lead to confusion when it is wrongly assumed that the oceans will become acidic, when in reality, ocean pH is never expected to fall below 7.0; i.e., the oceans are becoming less basic, but not acidic. Such a phenomenon could only occur in the unlikely event that CO2 emissions reach more than 10,000 Pg C (Caldeira and Wickett, 2005)"
Decreasing pH means the oceans are becoming less basic - that's a fair description. But before the oceans start to become acidic they have to pass through pH 7.0 - which is neutral, as is pure water. Therefore, the oceans are neutralizing which is not the same as acidifying. The term acidification is used because it is more likely to catch the attention of, or alarm the general public. Some may say that this term is used with "good intentions", because they believe that prompt action is required. But it's misleading and an exaggeration.
As regards ocean acidification, it is estimated that the ocean’s global mean surface pH may have declined (i.e., become less alkaline and thus more “acidic”) by -0.07 to -0.08 in the last 200 years - from pH8.12 during pre-industrial times to 8.04 to 8.05 today (Wei et al, 2015). N.B. The decline in pH occurred before 1930. However, and very importantly when you look the data after CO2 emissions began rising precipitously in the 1930s, the oceans have become less “acidic”!!! By way of comparison, from one season to the next, or over the course of less than 6 months, pH levels naturally change by ±0.15 pH units, or twice the overall rate of the last 200 years. On a per-decade scale, the changes are even more pronounced. Oceanic pH values naturally fluctuate up and down by up to 0.6 U within a span of a decade, with an overall range between 7.66 and 8.40. This is decadal rate of pH change is larger than the overall 200-year span (0.07-0.08) by a factor of 8.
Clarification question: In the Bjerrum graph, it depicts Carbonic acid at its peak when oceans are more acidic, and carbonate when oceans are more basic. However if it's an increase in H+ ions that causes oceans to become more acidic, should we get an very acidic ocean when carbonate is at its peak, rather than carbonic acid? I would have thought that lots of carbonate means lots of dissociated H+ ions floating around making the ocean more acidic. I'm sure I'm just missing something here. Thanks, great video!
This is problem cannot be overestimated. I addressed that even though we could hypothetically build orbital solar shades to cool down the planet (implicit ofc solar dimming), this would not prevent ocean acidification, and so CO2 has to be dealt with regardless. So glad I found this channel again after changing accounts, but even more glad to see how large it has grown. 1mill coming soon :D
It's great to see videos like this bringing ocean acidification into the public's eye. Once people are aware of what's happening, they can take action. Communities that support public transport systems, alternative energy sources, and other projects like bike sharing programs provide awesome examples of what can be done to reduce CO2 emissions!
Interesting but I am now boating in lake Huron. As everyone knows acid actually keep aluminum from coroding and because Huron is not sitting in lime stone so the PH has always been just above neutral. Buts this year the aluminum parts of my engine that sit in the water have all corroded so our lakes are getting more basic!
Three relevant points: 1. The pH scale was created in 1909 by Danish chemist S. P. L. Sørensen. We have no idea of the pH of the oceans in 1751. 2. The solubility of CO2 in water is strictly/rigidly controlled by temperature. Cold water holds 5x as much as warm. Our cold oceans (from the last ice age) are saturated with CO2, and are gradually releasing it as they warm. This is the primary cause of rising CO2 levels today. 3. Human activities only account for ~3.6% of the total amount of CO2 released annually.
CO2 is food for plants...the food is increasing but the consumer is being reduced....planting trees is the most basic...most cost effective...most natural and environmental friendly immediate step we can take in the right direction.
If only it were that simple. The majority of co2 deletion and o2 production happens in the ocean, not forests. And with the acidification, those phytoplankton might not survive for. Very long.
After you're done with coral bleaching could you please make a video on infectious diseases.you could talk about history's major pandemics and their causes.Thanks in advance.It's great to have you back!
Then you believe coral has an infinite life span, and unlike all other living things, doesn't have a life cycle? That would hardly pass the truth test ...
He is wrong... Carbon Dioxide In water largely stays as CO2. Only about 1% actually contributes to creation of carbonic acid. Carbon Dioxide will never acidify the oceans, it will be alkaline for quite some time.
@@pareason3847 No Ducky, I'm serious...ocean pH is fine; just look at the enormous thicknesses of calcareous rocks - chalk and limestone - formed from the skeletal remains of tiny ocean creatures when CO2 in the atmosphere was many times higher than today. Such creatures thrived with more CO2 making the oceans slightly less basic....
I have 2 remarks. I have seen this graph in textbooks, but then different. Then CO2 and HCO3 concentrations are equal at pH 6.5 , HCO3 and CO3 are equal at pH10.5. This is also the case if I make the calculus, with the help of Ka (the acid constant). This means your graph is wrong (or do you have another explanation?) Second is this, if the concentration of CO2 increases in the oceanwater, doesn't that mean that the concentration of CO3 also gets larger (equilibriumtheory) ? So where is the problem for the carbonate needing organism? They would thrive!
The pH of the oceans in 1751 was 8.25? How do you know that? The concept of pH wasn't discovered till 1909 and reliable testing till 1924. Trouble is that pH can only be measured in real time. Second, the solubility of CO2 in water decreases as water temp increases. To take his soda stream experiment, chilled water keeps bubbles longer. Third, the experiments you see with sea shells disolving in water don't tell you one thing. They adjust pH down by adding hydrochloric acid. Of course sea life and this chlorine compound don't mix.
And the phrase around 2:30 “as we play these models out into the future” And it looks like it’s the same as me saying “At 1 I was 60cm tall - at 50 I was 1.8m tall. So at 100 I guess I’ll be 3m tall”
The same way we can estimate temps and atmospheric composition thousands and even millions of years back. Ice cores, fossil records and the such. Secondly, yes temperature plays a role but so does pressure. So as pressure rises that helps the carbon stay in solution. Thirdly, you're assuming pH and temp rise at the same rates which they do not. Co2 is entering the ocean faster than temps are raising so your whole theory there isn't debunking much. Also, you have literally 0 proof that the water is cooled so.... Lastly, pH is dependent on number of H+ ions so it doesn't matter what kind of acid you use as long you reach the pH you want to test. Just because high temp slows co2 dissolving into the ocean that doesn't mean the amount in the ocean at that point isn't already causing damage. you can talk about hcl all you want but the fact is Coral is dying and marine shells are weakening already. That's happening now, meaning you cannot deny it.
@@midosabbagh Coral is dying? Hmmm... the Great Barrier Reef is at its highest level of coral cover in 36 years. I think you want to give the data-free alarmism a rest.
I have a correction/disagreement with the second part of the video (involving shells and carbonate) If the ocean was getting more acidic by direclty adding H ions in the form of an strong acid (ex. HCl), then it is very clear that the carbonate system would shift, and CO3 would get consumed and less available for shell formation. Similarly, this video makes the audience believe that over time, CO3 in the ocean decreases because of the pH is going down (acidic). However in our case, the ocean is getting more acidic by a CO2 input that reacts with water to form carbonic acid H2CO3. This H2CO3 dissolves to form more H ions, and in the process is also forming more bicarbonate (HCO3) and carbonate (CO3). So *the CO3 concentration does not technically decrease*, (if anything increases). Its concentration gets smaller only relative to the other carbonate species (H2CO3 and HCO3, which are now much much higher than before). The bottom line is, a shell in our acidified ocean is not techincally exposed to less CO3, but instead exposed to an excess of hydrogen ions and a H2CO3-dominated medium that pressures the shell into dissolving quicker to match its medium.
Something related the kinetic of the process and also pressure and water temperature in the water column should be discussed, but this cannot be 7 minutes video..
Hi! your videos get me through every science subject I need to go through and to even enjoy it more! Impacts of the animal industry in relation to global warming and ocean acidification would be a great topic to speak about. Sharing ideas on how to lower our impact through our actions relating it to the science would promote great awareness to all of your watchers! Thanks for you great work!!
thanx for this explanation, very spot on. My father always tell me the same story. In his youth, in Uruguay, he use to collect gigantics sea shells from very remote beaches. The beaches were full of these things. Nowadays there are none. You're very lucky if you get one of a centimeter long. Acidification could be the reason? Thanx for the video.
No, it's not acidification because the oceans are alkaline. The lack of these large shells is due to people collecting them, both along the shore and by divers in deeper water.
Why don't they drop ground basalt into the oceans. That would have dissolved co2 form bicarbonate, which is the main limiting factor how much co2 the oceans can absorb. Also taking care of ocean acidity. Of course that makes more sense after we stop burning fuels which is the fastest way to stop co2. Not sure if it's feasible and how much would be needed. I just realized that probably means just fertilizing the ocean with iron would be mainly for cloud cover generation via dsm (which would have immediate impacts though), rather than for sequestering much more carbon: plankton shells would bind the dissolved carbon, but it won't change the ocean acidity balance or draw more co2 from the atmosphere, for that you need bicarbs from basalt.
Question: There has been shellfish in the ocean in geological times where the CO2 level in the atmosphere was in the order of 1000+ ppm. Why is it a problem now?
Because it's happening to fast for life to adjust, it hasn't even been 1 million years that should be minimum time to adjust. But still not even 1,000 years. Not 500 years in just 200 years this has become such a major drastic problem and things are only getting worse by the second.
@@dallassimmons9254 Thank you for your answer. I understand the argument. But I can not find any scientific studies that gives merit to that argument. The only studies that i know off is with CO2 concentrations in the region of 1000's ppm CO2. And by the time we reach that level we should have alternative soloutions to fossil fuel.
@Dallas Simmons. "Too fast for life to adjust". This is nonsense ! Life is able to adjust very rapidly when it has to and we are all aware of this. We know that rats have repeatedly evolved resistance to anti-coagulants and mice are doing the same. Crop pests evolve resistance to new insecticides in a decade or less. Weeds in our gardens and fields have evolved resistance to dozens of herbicides. Microbes are evolving resistance to antibiotics so fast we can't produce new ones quickly enough. In places which are heavily fished, fish have become smaller, breed earlier and escape through the mesh of the net. Sure, we don't want smaller fish, but nature has acted rapidly. Nature doesn't need 1 million years to adjust, that's what they thought back in the 1850's.
@@ZaphodBeeb1 the only reason microbes can adapt so fast is because of their insane Rate of replication. The more often a species replicates, the more often it mutates. Larger species arent so lucky.
I'v been wondering about this topic for while, my mind literally exploded when I saw the graph. IT EXPLAINED ALMOST EVERYTHING. One thing that is annoying me though, you forgot the H2 for the Carbonic Acid in the graph (on the green line)
Just watched a video on sun dimming spraying sulfur particles in the upper atmosphere. That should help the acidic problem. Also,, what is the ph of the ocean around the White Cliffs of Dover, can’t find that one
First we have no past record of ocean pH, so that 0.1 decrease is hypothetical Secundo, a small oceanic region with a low pH (7.7) provide 20% of all fishes in the world, the Humboldt Current
Thank you once again Paul! I got a question regarding alkalinity and metabolism/immune regulation (as you mention with the fish). I see of lot of people jumping on the bandwagon that eating food with the "right" pH is good for our health. Claims that this can cure cancer and such seems very far stretched but do you have any knowledge if pH in food is related to our health as is it with fish? This might be too much of a dietitian-thing but maybe you know something about it. Thanks a lot, I love your video's!
Dear mr.anderson are you familiar with sat subject biology E/M tests.could you make a video about the differences between AP bio and sat biology E/M.And are you planning on making some videos focusing on this test
what about the ocean respiration from the point of view of chemical and biological processes and how they interact together to create a balance on the gases in the ocean and the atmosphere
I would like you to read and respond to the book Speed and Violence on climate change. He addresses many factors in climate change. It seems so much more complicated than decreasing carbon dioxide levels. Pearce talks about methane clathrates, glacial cracks, etc. He says that we are at the 10,000 year mark since the last ice age, ice ages usually occur every 100,000 years but we are at the tipping point now.
I don't understand, if the shellfish are taking more carbonate out of the water to build shells, shouldn't that also mean more hydrogen ions are released, as there is less carbonate for them to bond with to form bicarbonate? It seems like more shellfish = more hydrogen ions, which then means less carbonate, and then less successful shellfish?
The whole system is reversible in its stages and is therefore an effective buffer. It will become more and more difficult for the pH to fall. AT 3.40 the presenter says that the bicarbonate level will increase as the carbonate falls. But that increases the pH because the bicarbonate requires an H+. It's self correcting. However, it was misleading to say that the bicarbonate was increasing, because the Bjerrum plot he is using shows the bicarbonate to be levelling off. If the pH goes lower than 7 (acid territory) the bicarbonate decreases as it reverses back to CO2, which would be driven off. So the pH would rise again. The oceans are not going to become acid. The initial experiment of blasting CO2 into distilled water is irrelevant and alarmist.
I watched a video about this issue and how it effects the development of a single species of Mollusk and when I realized that this video was not "concerned" with "what we can do to avoid future catastrophe" and are "Documenting Present Day Observations" and that it's "Happening Now"......all this knowledge becomes "useless" when we fail to "use it "....in time.
Could anyone answer me on why he says the free hydrogen will be competing with shellfish and forming more bicarbonate at 3:50. Doesn't he mean there is gonna be competition for the carbonate supply? Because of how shell fish need to form calciumcarbonate and bicarbonate needs carbonate to form.
Corals evolved when CO2 levels in the atmosphere were much higher than today, and life teems around deep ocean subsea vents, where the water actually is 'acidic'.
Does anyone have a link to the video where he talks about coral kicking out their algae? I'm covering this in an assignment so would be really useful, thanks!
hey .. videos you make are very informative ..Can you make a video over global warming and its unequal impact on earth's atmosphere biosphere lithosphere
But I have a simple question, as we all know that ocean is going to be more acidic day by day but at the same, we believe that ocean has alkaline properties as SALTY water
Simple issue. When water gets warmer it LOSES CO2. When it gets colder it holds MORE CO2. And since warming should cause increased CO2 release from the ocean for a loss and an increase in the air, it seems it would make the water LESS acidic. Warming cannot be enhanced by CO2 release into the atmosphere from the ocean and increase acidification which would require taking in CO2. Decide. Is the ocean getting more or less CO2. One or the other. Because the saturation point of how much the ocean can hold decreases with every degree of warming. Last, the ph of the oceans routinely varies from ph 7.8 to 8.2 which is alkaline, not acidic. We are well within the normal range or variance at ph 8.1. There is no indication that it is leaving this range. I mean even purified water is 7.0 and that is not acidic either. You know fresh water is much lower ph or using their terms, more "ACID", and it is not killing off or dissolving fresh water shelled animals or mullusks. Acidity is normally considered at around 6.0 or below and we are nowhere near that. The SCIENCE does not make sense.
Why decrease carbon dioxide? You are tying the two together when all we need to do is put some baking soda in the ocean and raise the pH back to pre industrial levels.
I worked in a water lab and the pH of water is pH 7 when it comes out of the deionizer but let it stand for about 30 minutes and it is pH of 6.23 and still going down. I have been told it levels out at 5.8pH. The average pH Sea water is pH of 8.1 to 8.3 which is basic. not acidic!
What happens to organisms over time if the ph level is more base? Does more base levels of ph help the organisms thrive or does this also cause living organisms to die? Some conclusions can't be determine unless the other side of the coin is explored!
Most organisms prefer an environment with a ph of 7.Small changes in this value can be regulated by the organism using a buffer system.But a big shift will kill the organism,as most of the enzymes in our body require a specific ph to function. I hope you found this a bit helpful
Ok so "the more of this H+ we have in a solution, the lower the ph is going to be and it's going to be more acidic." It looks like when we have carbonate there is two hydrogen ions in the solution so wouldn't that mean that when the water is acidic you would have more carbonate and not less? I know that this is wrong but i don't understand why, could someone please explain. I just want to make sure that i understand it.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 89 | คู่เอก "ยอดไอคิว vs คิริลล์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Z3vYkHJ_5Ig/mqdefault.jpg)
You just explained the chemistry part of Ocean Acidification in a way I understand and will actually remember. Please never stop teaching.
If anyone is wondering how does more CO2 mean less CO3 when it's the final result of the equation, you have to remember that CO3 plays a role in the buffer system, and along with H+ will give HCO3.
That means the more CO2 you add, you will also be losing more CO3 in favor of HCO3.
Hope this is helpful.
Yeah I was looking at this scale with my high school chemistry knowledge... Sufficient to say I am confused as to how adding more CO2 magically created more Hydrogen in the equation.
Thanks man
@@Dr.Langnase You're welcome!
can you clarify a bit more? it's been years since my chemistry classes, I only vaguely remember the equilibrium concentrations and buffer solutions..
In fact I was just wondering why, by adding more CO2 to the water, we just don't get more CO3 to precipitate as aragonite CaCO3 or some other carbonated mineral.
EDIT: oh the graph at 3:10 is very helpful
@@LawsonR I haven't noticed your comment the last time I've commented on here, but for those who might be confused about the same thing, he explains it at 0:58.
CO2 is going to force the hydrogen out of other compounds, thus creating more H+ in the water.
The master is back and making videos!
I love your Math videos!!!!
I’m no expert in forex trading but I’ve made $36,000 with $3,000 investment, because I had good guidance with @Carlos_1uptrades on Instagram. it’s beyond eye opening, with his teachings and trading skills, I’ve had nothing but continued success
This is the best explanation of the carbonate bicarbonate balance being shifted by carbon dioxide that I have ever seen.
Thanks,
Chris
Increased carbon dioxide will lead to increased surface temperature which decreases solubility of carbon dioxide on oceans, so I believe we are missing pieces here, and saying CO2 decreases alone are a solution is reductionist, I'd imagine
I had that thought too! But the decrease in absorption isn’t significant enough to absolve the problem
"This is often termed “ocean acidification” because it describes the process of decreasing pH. Current projections of ocean acidification suggest that the pH of surface ocean waters will continue to decline. However, the term can also lead to confusion when it is wrongly assumed that the oceans will become acidic, when in reality, ocean pH is never expected to fall below 7.0; i.e., the oceans are becoming less basic, but not acidic. Such a phenomenon could only occur in the unlikely event that CO2 emissions reach more than 10,000 Pg C (Caldeira and Wickett, 2005)"
That's good. I think I understand. "Less Basic" is the phrase, not the word "acidic."
Decreasing pH means the oceans are becoming less basic - that's a fair description. But before the oceans start to become acidic they have to pass through pH 7.0 - which is neutral, as is pure water. Therefore, the oceans are neutralizing which is not the same as acidifying. The term acidification is used because it is more likely to catch the attention of, or alarm the general public. Some may say that this term is used with "good intentions", because they believe that prompt action is required. But it's misleading and an exaggeration.
@@ZaphodBeeb1 It's very simple- the seas are alkaline. They will never become acidic.
@@ZaphodBeeb1 Marine life is happy with a Ph of between 6.5 ( acidic ) up to a pH of 9 ( alkaline ).
@Richard. Is that from the Caldeira and Wickett 2005 paper or another ?
this was extermly heplful, I bleached my eyes 237 years ago this really helped me see again
Me too🤣
me too🤣
So pumped you just came out with this. I just taught my ocean acidification lab on it to my class earlier today.
Took a selfie with you when you came to Shanghai. Glad to see that you are making videos again!
Thank you for your breakdowns of topics. Looking at scientific literature is much easier with a broad understanding to start.
As regards ocean acidification, it is estimated that the ocean’s global mean surface pH may have declined (i.e., become less alkaline and thus more “acidic”) by -0.07 to -0.08 in the last 200 years - from pH8.12 during pre-industrial times to 8.04 to 8.05 today (Wei et al, 2015). N.B. The decline in pH occurred before 1930.
However, and very importantly when you look the data after CO2 emissions began rising precipitously in the 1930s, the oceans have become less “acidic”!!!
By way of comparison, from one season to the next, or over the course of less than 6 months, pH levels naturally change by ±0.15 pH units, or twice the overall rate of the last 200 years. On a per-decade scale, the changes are even more pronounced. Oceanic pH values naturally fluctuate up and down by up to 0.6 U within a span of a decade, with an overall range between 7.66 and 8.40. This is decadal rate of pH change is larger than the overall 200-year span (0.07-0.08) by a factor of 8.
Hey the legend is back!
Nice to be back! I love TH-cam.
Please do Evolution, and genetics, (Mendel's law) Thanks love your videos
I'm fairly certain Paul already did Mendel.
Clarification question: In the Bjerrum graph, it depicts Carbonic acid at its peak when oceans are more acidic, and carbonate when oceans are more basic. However if it's an increase in H+ ions that causes oceans to become more acidic, should we get an very acidic ocean when carbonate is at its peak, rather than carbonic acid? I would have thought that lots of carbonate means lots of dissociated H+ ions floating around making the ocean more acidic. I'm sure I'm just missing something here.
Thanks, great video!
I'm also curious about it...
This is problem cannot be overestimated. I addressed that even though we could hypothetically build orbital solar shades to cool down the planet (implicit ofc solar dimming), this would not prevent ocean acidification, and so CO2 has to be dealt with regardless.
So glad I found this channel again after changing accounts, but even more glad to see how large it has grown. 1mill coming soon :D
It's great to see videos like this bringing ocean acidification into the public's eye. Once people are aware of what's happening, they can take action. Communities that support public transport systems, alternative energy sources, and other projects like bike sharing programs provide awesome examples of what can be done to reduce CO2 emissions!
Interesting but I am now boating in lake Huron. As everyone knows acid actually keep aluminum from coroding and because Huron is not sitting in lime stone so the PH has always been just above neutral. Buts this year the aluminum parts of my engine that sit in the water have all corroded so our lakes are getting more basic!
Glad to have you back!
Three relevant points:
1. The pH scale was created in 1909 by Danish chemist S. P. L. Sørensen. We have no idea of the pH of the oceans in 1751.
2. The solubility of CO2 in water is strictly/rigidly controlled by temperature. Cold water holds 5x as much as warm. Our cold oceans (from the last ice age) are saturated with CO2, and are gradually releasing it as they warm. This is the primary cause of rising CO2 levels today.
3. Human activities only account for ~3.6% of the total amount of CO2 released annually.
Outstanding! A masterpiece of science communication. Thank you!
get some pussy
CO2 is food for plants...the food is increasing but the consumer is being reduced....planting trees is the most basic...most cost effective...most natural and environmental friendly immediate step we can take in the right direction.
If only it were that simple. The majority of co2 deletion and o2 production happens in the ocean, not forests. And with the acidification, those phytoplankton might not survive for. Very long.
After you're done with coral bleaching could you please make a video on infectious diseases.you could talk about history's major pandemics and their causes.Thanks in advance.It's great to have you back!
Wow, you wrote that 4 years ago! And look at us now >.
Then you believe coral has an infinite life span, and unlike all other living things, doesn't have a life cycle? That would hardly pass the truth test ...
This was the final report for General Chemistry here at the University of Michigan, thanks for this!
Excellent information, plainly put: great job.
So helpful! Thankyou so much, the diagrams of the loss of H+ ions really helped.
He is wrong... Carbon Dioxide In water largely stays as CO2. Only about 1% actually contributes to creation of carbonic acid. Carbon Dioxide will never acidify the oceans, it will be alkaline for quite some time.
Thanks for making this video! It is pretty surprising how ocean acidification is never talked about despite it being a large issue.
...nobody is talking about it, because it is a non-issue...!
@@Ironic1950 You're funny
@@pareason3847 No Ducky, I'm serious...ocean pH is fine; just look at the enormous thicknesses of calcareous rocks - chalk and limestone - formed from the skeletal remains of tiny ocean creatures when CO2 in the atmosphere was many times higher than today. Such creatures thrived with more CO2 making the oceans slightly less basic....
I have 2 remarks. I have seen this graph in textbooks, but then different. Then CO2 and HCO3 concentrations are equal at pH 6.5 , HCO3 and CO3 are equal at pH10.5. This is also the case if I make the calculus, with the help of Ka (the acid constant). This means your graph is wrong (or do you have another explanation?)
Second is this, if the concentration of CO2 increases in the oceanwater, doesn't that mean that the concentration of CO3 also gets larger (equilibriumtheory) ? So where is the problem for the carbonate needing organism? They would thrive!
You are really good teacher. You give me inspiration for learning about the science
and every student should be aware of this videos. Thank you. :)
This is such a great explanation, thanks!!
Great video as always!
would dumping lye in the ocean fix it?
Nope
excellent video but should you not use salt water , I have been wondering the results of this exact testing but with salt water .
what's in the tank if you don't mind me asking .
this helped so much! very clearly explained thank you!
Great. Im really interested in this topic and the ocean/water videos. Maybe do some ocean pollution videos and the effects
amazing knowledge in east way, clear my concept about oceanography and climate change
All those ancient limestone deposits were laid down when CO2 conc was 2000-4000 ppm. Why didn't they immediately dissolve?
Awesome video! Is there a chance to get the academic references you used?
The pH of the oceans in 1751 was 8.25? How do you know that? The concept of pH wasn't discovered till 1909 and reliable testing till 1924. Trouble is that pH can only be measured in real time.
Second, the solubility of CO2 in water decreases as water temp increases. To take his soda stream experiment, chilled water keeps bubbles longer.
Third, the experiments you see with sea shells disolving in water don't tell you one thing. They adjust pH down by adding hydrochloric acid. Of course sea life and this chlorine compound don't mix.
And the phrase around 2:30 “as we play these models out into the future”
And it looks like it’s the same as me saying “At 1 I was 60cm tall - at 50 I was 1.8m tall. So at 100 I guess I’ll be 3m tall”
The ocean ph does decrease but not all the way down to 7.
tambonthongchai.com/2019/12/14/ocean-acidification-2019/
The same way we can estimate temps and atmospheric composition thousands and even millions of years back. Ice cores, fossil records and the such. Secondly, yes temperature plays a role but so does pressure. So as pressure rises that helps the carbon stay in solution. Thirdly, you're assuming pH and temp rise at the same rates which they do not. Co2 is entering the ocean faster than temps are raising so your whole theory there isn't debunking much. Also, you have literally 0 proof that the water is cooled so.... Lastly, pH is dependent on number of H+ ions so it doesn't matter what kind of acid you use as long you reach the pH you want to test. Just because high temp slows co2 dissolving into the ocean that doesn't mean the amount in the ocean at that point isn't already causing damage. you can talk about hcl all you want but the fact is Coral is dying and marine shells are weakening already. That's happening now, meaning you cannot deny it.
Haha i KNOW who said that XD
@@midosabbagh Coral is dying? Hmmm... the Great Barrier Reef is at its highest level of coral cover in 36 years. I think you want to give the data-free alarmism a rest.
Thanks that was informative and quick.
I have a correction/disagreement with the second part of the video (involving shells and carbonate)
If the ocean was getting more acidic by direclty adding H ions in the form of an strong acid (ex. HCl), then it is very clear that the carbonate system would shift, and CO3 would get consumed and less available for shell formation. Similarly, this video makes the audience believe that over time, CO3 in the ocean decreases because of the pH is going down (acidic).
However in our case, the ocean is getting more acidic by a CO2 input that reacts with water to form carbonic acid H2CO3. This H2CO3 dissolves to form more H ions, and in the process is also forming more bicarbonate (HCO3) and carbonate (CO3). So *the CO3 concentration does not technically decrease*, (if anything increases). Its concentration gets smaller only relative to the other carbonate species (H2CO3 and HCO3, which are now much much higher than before).
The bottom line is, a shell in our acidified ocean is not techincally exposed to less CO3, but instead exposed to an excess of hydrogen ions and a H2CO3-dominated medium that pressures the shell into dissolving quicker to match its medium.
Something related the kinetic of the process and also pressure and water temperature in the water column should be discussed, but this cannot be 7 minutes video..
Tell this to trump and co.
Russell Maijimiz How? not all of the republicans are bad
Hi! your videos get me through every science subject I need to go through and to even enjoy it more! Impacts of the animal industry in relation to global warming and ocean acidification would be a great topic to speak about. Sharing ideas on how to lower our impact through our actions relating it to the science would promote great awareness to all of your watchers! Thanks for you great work!!
Well done.
thanx for this explanation, very spot on.
My father always tell me the same story. In his youth, in Uruguay, he use to collect gigantics sea shells from very remote beaches. The beaches were full of these things. Nowadays there are none. You're very lucky if you get one of a centimeter long.
Acidification could be the reason?
Thanx for the video.
No, it's not acidification because the oceans are alkaline. The lack of these large shells is due to people collecting them, both along the shore and by divers in deeper water.
Why don't they drop ground basalt into the oceans. That would have dissolved co2 form bicarbonate, which is the main limiting factor how much co2 the oceans can absorb. Also taking care of ocean acidity. Of course that makes more sense after we stop burning fuels which is the fastest way to stop co2.
Not sure if it's feasible and how much would be needed.
I just realized that probably means just fertilizing the ocean with iron would be mainly for cloud cover generation via dsm (which would have immediate impacts though), rather than for sequestering much more carbon: plankton shells would bind the dissolved carbon, but it won't change the ocean acidity balance or draw more co2 from the atmosphere, for that you need bicarbs from basalt.
Question: There has been shellfish in the ocean in geological times where the CO2 level in the atmosphere was in the order of 1000+ ppm. Why is it a problem now?
Because it's happening to fast for life to adjust, it hasn't even been 1 million years that should be minimum time to adjust. But still not even 1,000 years. Not 500 years in just 200 years this has become such a major drastic problem and things are only getting worse by the second.
@@dallassimmons9254 Thank you for your answer. I understand the argument. But I can not find any scientific studies that gives merit to that argument. The only studies that i know off is with CO2 concentrations in the region of 1000's ppm CO2. And by the time we reach that level we should have alternative soloutions to fossil fuel.
@Dallas Simmons. "Too fast for life to adjust".
This is nonsense ! Life is able to adjust very rapidly when it has to and we are all aware of this.
We know that rats have repeatedly evolved resistance to anti-coagulants and mice are doing the same.
Crop pests evolve resistance to new insecticides in a decade or less. Weeds in our gardens and fields have evolved resistance to dozens of herbicides.
Microbes are evolving resistance to antibiotics so fast we can't produce new ones quickly enough.
In places which are heavily fished, fish have become smaller, breed earlier and escape through the mesh of the net. Sure, we don't want smaller fish, but nature has acted rapidly.
Nature doesn't need 1 million years to adjust, that's what they thought back in the 1850's.
@@ZaphodBeeb1 the only reason microbes can adapt so fast is because of their insane Rate of replication. The more often a species replicates, the more often it mutates. Larger species arent so lucky.
I'v been wondering about this topic for while, my mind literally exploded when I saw the graph. IT EXPLAINED ALMOST EVERYTHING. One thing that is annoying me though, you forgot the H2 for the Carbonic Acid in the graph (on the green line)
Nicely explained
Just watched a video on sun dimming spraying sulfur particles in the upper atmosphere. That should help the acidic problem. Also,, what is the ph of the ocean around the White Cliffs of Dover, can’t find that one
pls make a video lecture on thermodynamics
I would love to know more about the isotopic compoud of this problem, like how you trace the global warming the isotopes of carbon
What impact will the massive amount of freshwater released from glaciers make on the acidification though?
First we have no past record of ocean pH, so that 0.1 decrease is hypothetical
Secundo, a small oceanic region with a low pH (7.7) provide 20% of all fishes in the world, the Humboldt Current
How about transistor and modes of transistor? Eagerly waiting for your reply!!
Thank you once again Paul! I got a question regarding alkalinity and metabolism/immune regulation (as you mention with the fish). I see of lot of people jumping on the bandwagon that eating food with the "right" pH is good for our health. Claims that this can cure cancer and such seems very far stretched but do you have any knowledge if pH in food is related to our health as is it with fish? This might be too much of a dietitian-thing but maybe you know something about it.
Thanks a lot, I love your video's!
Dear mr.anderson are you familiar with sat subject biology E/M tests.could you make a video about the differences between AP bio and sat biology E/M.And are you planning on making some videos focusing on this test
Thank you so much!
Excellent!. Actually I have to make a powerpoint presentation about that theme and your video is perfect to me!!
same
awesome video!👍👍
what about the ocean respiration from the point of view of chemical and biological processes and how they interact together to create a balance on the gases in the ocean and the atmosphere
I would like you to read and respond to the book Speed and Violence on climate change.
He addresses many factors in climate change. It seems so much more complicated than decreasing
carbon dioxide levels. Pearce talks about methane clathrates, glacial cracks, etc. He says that we are
at the 10,000 year mark since the last ice age, ice ages usually occur every 100,000 years but we are at
the tipping point now.
I don't understand, if the shellfish are taking more carbonate out of the water to build shells, shouldn't that also mean more hydrogen ions are released, as there is less carbonate for them to bond with to form bicarbonate? It seems like more shellfish = more hydrogen ions, which then means less carbonate, and then less successful shellfish?
The whole system is reversible in its stages and is therefore an effective buffer. It will become more and more difficult for the pH to fall. AT 3.40 the presenter says that the bicarbonate level will increase as the carbonate falls. But that increases the pH because the bicarbonate requires an H+. It's self correcting. However, it was misleading to say that the bicarbonate was increasing, because the Bjerrum plot he is using shows the bicarbonate to be levelling off. If the pH goes lower than 7 (acid territory) the bicarbonate decreases as it reverses back to CO2, which would be driven off. So the pH would rise again. The oceans are not going to become acid.
The initial experiment of blasting CO2 into distilled water is irrelevant and alarmist.
Or how about biasing of diodes. You deserve a noble prize for ur great teaching
Hey dude, would you say that carbon dioxide dissolves in water for it to become carbon acid, Is it a necessary step?
Thanks for clarification
Love u sir from india
I watched a video about this issue and how it effects the development of a single species of Mollusk and when I realized that this video was not "concerned" with "what we can do to avoid future catastrophe" and are "Documenting Present Day Observations" and that it's "Happening Now"......all this knowledge becomes "useless" when we fail to "use it "....in time.
good one
Yes! Thank you so much for this excellent video!!!!
Good explanation sir ,. India
Could anyone answer me on why he says the free hydrogen will be competing with shellfish and forming more bicarbonate at 3:50. Doesn't he mean there is gonna be competition for the carbonate supply? Because of how shell fish need to form calciumcarbonate and bicarbonate needs carbonate to form.
Corals evolved when CO2 levels in the atmosphere were much higher than today, and life teems around deep ocean subsea vents, where the water actually is 'acidic'.
this helped so much!!!
Thank you
THANK YOU SO MUCH G
But the plants need co2. So...
Sir, why the green line represent carbonic acid when carbon dioxide is being labeled there?
Does anyone have a link to the video where he talks about coral kicking out their algae? I'm covering this in an assignment so would be really useful, thanks!
hey .. videos you make are very informative ..Can you make a video over global warming and its unequal impact on earth's atmosphere biosphere lithosphere
It was helpful. Thanks.
Like the Video... can you do a Video on pH control in the Ocean... Thankyou :)
that was really helpful..
But I have a simple question, as we all know that ocean is going to be more acidic day by day but at the same, we believe that ocean has alkaline properties as SALTY water
Simple issue.
When water gets warmer it LOSES CO2. When it gets colder it holds MORE CO2. And since warming should cause increased CO2 release from the ocean for a loss and an increase in the air, it seems it would make the water LESS acidic.
Warming cannot be enhanced by CO2 release into the atmosphere from the ocean and increase acidification which would require taking in CO2. Decide. Is the ocean getting more or less CO2. One or the other. Because the saturation point of how much the ocean can hold decreases with every degree of warming.
Last, the ph of the oceans routinely varies from ph 7.8 to 8.2 which is alkaline, not acidic. We are well within the normal range or variance at ph 8.1. There is no indication that it is leaving this range. I mean even purified water is 7.0 and that is not acidic either. You know fresh water is much lower ph or using their terms, more "ACID", and it is not killing off or dissolving fresh water shelled animals or mullusks. Acidity is normally considered at around 6.0 or below and we are nowhere near that.
The SCIENCE does not make sense.
Why decrease carbon dioxide? You are tying the two together when all we need to do is put some baking soda in the ocean and raise the pH back to pre industrial levels.
I'm all for conservation of the environment, but is there other wildlifes that can survive ocean acidification?
3:13
Doesn't the green line represent carbon dioxide?
Before coming to this video, I saw many other videos but this video made some quality stuff regarding ocean acidification . Thanks a lot
I worked in a water lab and the pH of water is pH 7 when it comes out of the deionizer but let it stand for about 30 minutes and it is pH of 6.23 and still going down. I have been told it levels out at 5.8pH. The average pH Sea water is pH of 8.1 to 8.3 which is basic. not acidic!
Love this! Easy to understand and straight to the point! Thank you!
What happens to organisms over time if the ph level is more base? Does more base levels of ph help the organisms thrive or does this also cause living organisms to die? Some conclusions can't be determine unless the other side of the coin is explored!
Most organisms prefer an environment with a ph of 7.Small changes in this value can be regulated by the organism using a buffer system.But a big shift will kill the organism,as most of the enzymes in our body require a specific ph to function. I hope you found this a bit helpful
The oceans are not acidic. The oceans are 8.3 pH which means VERY alkaline
How can we reduce Acclimation?
where do they talk about copepods
Ok so "the more of this H+ we have in a solution, the lower the ph is going to be and it's going to be more acidic." It looks like when we have carbonate there is two hydrogen ions in the solution so wouldn't that mean that when the water is acidic you would have more carbonate and not less? I know that this is wrong but i don't understand why, could someone please explain. I just want to make sure that i understand it.
Btw, thank you for making this video, it is very helpful
"Evil twin" arent they both evil
yeah
Conservation biology - specifically extinction due to habitat fragmentation and humans.
Glass destilled water is always acid! pH is around 5.5 ! No buffering, but CO2 makes IT acid.great barrière reef....temps go down!
Who disliked this?
Helped me.
if the global warming increase, the ice are supposed to melt, would it diluate the acid in the ocean? or the quantity are too low, or am I wrong?
Blasmemphy!
The Gulf Stream would be effected and we’d head faster into an ice age, invest in wool
1:18 P and H in an orange block as black text... who edited this
A finely cultured man.