Thanks Bruce, It is interesting, and sure... should be studied, but underwater and surface volcanic eruptions were happening before the industrial age. But the topic is about anthropogenic sulfure sources, specifically shipping, which 'we' can do something about through regulations.
But if we want to take it globally and stress the need for more stringent regulations, then, I like to point out that besides the large ocean impacts of shipping's sulfur emissions, there are other human and environmental health issues, there may be also a large effect on the hydrological cycle: Tropical Rainfall Trends and the Indirect Aerosol Effect. Leon D. Rotstayn http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015%3C2103%3ATRTATI%3E2.0.CO%3B2 Lets add to that shipping's soot emissions: Effects of soot-induced snow albedo change on snowpack and hydrological cycle in western United States based on Weather Research and Forecasting chemistry and regional climate simulations. Yun Qian et al http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008JD011039/abstract So to recap: *Shipping emissions:* *1. *Can lead to* hight local ocean acidification * *2. Affects human health* *3. Effects on the surface environment (acid deposition, etc)* *4. Effects on the hydrological cycle (drough - flood)* *5. Effects on surface albedo (soot on snow)* So, if someone would like to point out the 'beneficial' effects of shipping emissions ie. solar radiation scattering, do so, but don't discount any of the negative effects. Best regards, Oscar E. On Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:02:37 PM UTC-5, French, Bruce wrote: > > Oscar, > > > > You might find this information on submarine volcanoes of interest: > > > > http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/eoi/geology/submarine_eruptions.html > > > > > http://news.stanford.edu/news/2011/september/acidsea-hurt-biodiversity-091211.html > > > > > Now, perhaps what is needed is a large-scale, coordinated effort to > investigate the contribution of these eruptions to the problem of ocean > acidification (deep and surface waters). > > > > Bruce > > > > *From:* geoengi...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> [mailto: > geoengi...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>] *On Behalf Of *Oscar Escobar > *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:31 PM > *To:* geoengi...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> > *Cc:* oscar200...@gmail.com <javascript:> > *Subject:* Re: [geo] Shipping emissions can lead to high local ocean > acidification > > > > Greg: > > > > I don't know what you mean by saying that "this problem would seem to > pale in comparison to CO2 acidification with an ocean input of about 8 GT > (vs thand NOx). Also, probably dwarfed by SOx and NOx from land based > generation" > > > > I think the point of the article is the *heightened "local" and > temporal*effects of shipping emissions, specially in coastal areas close to > shipping > routes. Also, shipping SOx is estimated to be 16% of all global > emissions (all inclusive I take it to be), perhaps *comparable to those > of all road vehicles in the world*. > > The 16% figure from this study: Ship impacts on the marine atmosphere: > insights into the contribution of shipping emissions to the properties of > marine aerosol and clouds > http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/8439/2012/acp-12-8439-2012.pdf (Coggon > et al.) > > > > As to solutions: > > > > Perhaps a change in fuel, coxed (pun intended) by regulation, would have a > more immediate effect... “Thanks to decisions taken in London by the body > that polices world shipping, this pollution could kill as many as a million > more people in the coming decade – even though a simple change in the rules > could stop it” Fred Pearce in "How 16 ships create as much pollution as all > the cars in the world" (2009 DailyMail article) > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-pollution-cars-world.html > > > > > By the way, he also makes the point: *“The most staggering statistic of > all is that just 16 of the world’s largest ships can produce as much > lung-clogging sulphur pollution as all the world’s cars.” *I don't know > how accurate this statistic is, but It does re-enforce the argument for > the local and temporal ocean acidification effects of shipping emissions. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Oscar E. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:14:13 PM UTC-5, Greg Rau wrote: > > Thanks, Oscar. However,e stated MTs of SOX this problem would seem to > pale in comparison to CO2 acidification with an ocean input of about 8 GT > (vs thand NOx). Also, probably dwarfed by SOx and NOx from land based > generation. Speaking of seawater scrubbing, this is also commonly done at > power plants (esp Asia) - good for air but very efficiently acidifies the > ocean. Solution - place limestone downstream of the gas/seawater > contacting. You could do the same for ships if they were wiling to > sacrifice some cargo tonnage for limestone. > > Greg > ------------------------------ > > *From:* geoengi...@googlegroups.com [geoengi...@googlegroups.com] on > behalf of Oscar Escobar [oscar200...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 12, 2014 1:00 PM > *To:* geoengi...@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* [geo] Shipping emissions can lead to high local ocean > acidification > > Strong acids formed from shipping emissions can produce seasonal ‘hot > spots’ of > > ocean acidification, a recent study finds. These hot spots, in ocean areas > close to > > busy shipping lanes, could have negative effects on local marine ecology > and > > commercially farmed seafood species. > > > > Shipping emissions can lead to high local > > ocean acidification > > > > Oceans have become more acidic since pre-industrial times. The average > global ocean pH – > > which decreases with increasing acidity – has dropped by 0.1 because the > seas have > > absorbed 30-40% of manmade CO2. However, it is not only CO2 that can > acidify oceans. > > Shipping emissions, a significant source of atmospheric pollution, > annually release around > > 9.5 million metric tons of sulphur and 16.2 million metric tons of nitric > oxides. > > > > When dissolved in seawater, these pollutants are converted into the strong > sulphuric and > > nitric acids, adding to ocean acidification. Increasing acidity poses a > threat to marine > > ecosystems, harming species such as coral and algae, as well as commercial > aquaculture > > species, such as shellfish. > > > > The researchers used state of the art computer modelling techniques and > datasets to create > > a high resolution simulation of global shipping emissions’ effects on > ocean acidity. The > > simulation calculated the acidifying impacts of shipping sulphur and > nitric oxide emissions on > > a month by month basis, over one year. In addition to shipping-related > influences on acidity, > > the model also included many physical and environmental factors, such as > ocean surface > > water mixing and atmospheric effects. > > > > The results agreed with previous studies of the average annual ocean > acidification, but, > > importantly, revealed significant differences between regions and seasons. > Ocean > > acidification was highest in the northern hemisphere, occurring in ‘hot > spots’ close to coastal > > areas and busy shipping lanes during the summer months. These ‘hot spots’ > coincide with > > peak activity of some biological processes, such as plankton blooms and > fish hatching, > > where they may cause greater harm. On a local scale, the acidification – a > pH drop of > > 0.0015-0.0020 – was equal to CO2’s global annual acidifying effects. > > > > The model did not include some coastal ocean areas, such as the > Mediterranean Sea, as > > there were limitations in the oceanographic atlases used. However, > acidification is likely to > > be high in these areas given the heavy shipping traffic from ports. > > > > International regulation is in place to reduce shipping atmospheric > sulphur emissions > > through the International Maritime Organization’s Emission Control Areas > (ECA), which are > > in force in four ocean areas, including the Baltic and North Seas. One > technology commonly > > used to achieve ECA targets is ‘seawater scrubbing’, where exhaust > pollutants are removed > > using seawater. > > > > This study drew on data from 2000 and 2002, prior to the enforcement of > ECAs. However, > > the researchers note that seawater scrubbing, without additional steps to > neutralise the > > acids that it produces, causes acidification in regions where biodiversity > or commercial > > aquaculture may be most negatively affected. These previously overlooked > sources of ocean > > acidification and policy impacts could be used to inform future > discussions of controls > > relating to shipping emissions or ocean acidification > > > > The study: > > > > *Shipping contributes to ocean acidification* > > Ida-Maja Hassellöv et al DOI: 10.1002/grl.50521 > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50521/full<http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2F10.1002%2Fgrl.50521%2Ffull&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHJSxPMNe8CpfUrXOtZREvy7hx6jg> > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50521/abstract > > > Abstract > > [1] The potential effect on surface water pH of emissions of SO*X* and NO > *X* from global ship routes is assessed. The results indicate that > regional pH reductions of the same order of magnitude as the CO2-driven > acidification can occur in heavily trafficked waters. These findings have > important consequences for ocean chemistry, since the sulfuric and nitric > acids formed are strong acids in contrast to the weak carbonic acid formed > by dissolution of CO2. Our results also provide background for discussion > of expanded controls to mitigate acidification due to these shipping > emissions. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to geoengineerin...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to geoengi...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
