The road to Hell is paved with Warmist intentions
Can we alter the ocean to counter climate change faster? This experiment aims to find out
Later this summer, a fluorescent reddish-pink spiral will bloom across the Wilkinson Basin in the Gulf of Maine, about 40 miles northeast of Cape Cod. Scientists from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution will release the nontoxic water tracer dye behind their research vessel, where it will unfurl into a half-mile wide temporary plume, bright enough to catch the attention of passing boats and even satellites.
As it spreads, the researchers will track its movement to monitor a tightly controlled, federally approved experiment testing whether the ocean can be engineered to absorb more carbon, and in turn, help combat the climate crisis.
As the world struggles to stay below the 1.5-degree Celsius global warming threshold—a goal set out in the Paris Agreement to avoid the most severe impacts of climate change—experts agree that reducing greenhouse gas emissions won’t be enough to avoid overshooting this target. The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, published in 2023, emphasizes the urgent need to actively remove carbon from the atmosphere, too.
“If we really want to have a shot at mitigating the worst effects of climate change, carbon removal needs to start scaling to the point where it can supplement large-scale emissions reductions,” said Adam Subhas, an associate scientist in marine chemistry and geochemistry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, who will oversee the week-long experiment.
Well, if every Warmist gave up their own use of fossil fuels we’d be in Shangrila, right? Per their dogma
The test is part of the LOC-NESS project—short for Locking away Ocean Carbon in the Northeast Shelf and Slope—which Subhas has been leading since 2023. The ongoing research initiative is evaluating the effectiveness and environmental impact of a marine carbon dioxide removal approach called ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE).
This method of marine carbon dioxide removal involves adding alkaline substances to the ocean to boost its natural ability to neutralize acids produced by greenhouse gases. It’s promising, Subhas said, because it has the potential to lock away carbon permanently.
See, once they start talking about carbon instead of Carbon Dioxide, they’re into cult land, not science. And this is another bad idea, which will hopefully be shut down.
Professor teach typed, risibly whining:
Jesus. Does he not understand that carbon dioxide contains carbon? It’s in the name: CARBON dioxide. Did he not understand what the scientists intended?
Did he find it confusing?
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a gas and is soluble in water. When it dissolves, it reacts with water molecules to form carbonic acid (H2CO3)(which is NOT carbon dioxide), which can further dissociate into bicarbonate (HCO3-)(which is NOT carbon dioxide) and hydronium (H3O+)(also neither carbon nor carbon dioxide) ions. This is how CO2 lowers the pH of water.
Pure water should have a pH of 7.0, correct? Yet, water exposed to air has a slightly acidic pH because of dissolved carbon. (BTW, pH is the logarithm of the hydrogen ion (actually hydronium ion) concentration). A pH 7.0 solution has a H+ concentration of 10e-7. A pH of 3 (acidic) has a H+ concentration of 10e-3.
CO2 + H20 H2CO3 HCO3- + H+
To be correct Mr teach should refer to carbon dioxide in sea water as carbon dioxide – carbonic acid – bicarbonate, NOT as carbon dioxide.
Almost all soluble inorganic carbon in seawater exists as the bicarbonate ion (HCO3-).
Scientists writing “carbon” instead of “carbon dioxide-carbonic acid-bicarbonate” is a “synecdoche”, a figure of speech where a component of the whole stands for the whole. “You want regular or decaf?” at the diner. Would you be confused?
Another Rimjob cut&paste with a little ChatGPT thrown in.
“Synecdoche” Bwaha! Such a wordsmith!
You’re not that clever, dipshit.
Bwaha! Lolgfy Loser!
MAGA47 Motherfucker!
CO2 is NOT the same as carbon, just as sodium chloride is NOT the same as sodium. The “scientists” who use CO2 and carbon interchangeably, are climatistas who have an agenda and/or simply do not know what they are talking about.
Both carbon and CO2 are necessary for life as we know it. They are NOT pollutants. To claim that CO2 is the temperature control knob for the planet is nonsense.