Slashdot Mirror


Invisible Scum on Sea Cuts CO2 Exchange With Air 'By Up To 50%' (theguardian.com)

An invisible layer of scum on the sea surface can reduce carbon dioxide exchange between the atmosphere and the oceans by up to 50%, scientists have discovered. From a report: Researchers from Heriot-Watt, Newcastle and Exeter universities say the findings, published in the journal Nature Geoscience on Monday, have major implications for predicting our future climate. The world's oceans absorb around a quarter of all man-made carbon dioxide emissions, making them the largest long-term sink of carbon on Earth. Greater sea turbulence increases gas exchange between the atmosphere and oceans and until now it was difficult to calculate the effect of "biological surfactants." Teams from the Natural Environment Research Council, the Leverhulme Trust and the European Space Agency developed a system that compares "the surfactant effect" between different seawaters in real time. They found surfactants can reduce carbon dioxide exchange by up to 50%.

94 comments

  1. This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As the world continues to heat and the subocean deposits of methane start flowing, 50% reduction in local surface reactions is not going to mean squat. This is a bandaid on an aneurysm. Even conceptually it is unpromising.
    Reducing emissions is the obvious solution that we spend so much time effort and brainpower avoiding, because as a terraforming species we are lazy and deserve extinction. It's too bad higher order fauna on Earth goes with us.
    Really it's just the coal-fired intellects of the GOP and their Chinese counterparts that deserve to be doomed to extinction in their own filth. The rest of us are roped along by the economics of the past. Humanity fails traditionally.

    1. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're obviously not a scientist but a denialist moron. The Sun does not entirely control all climate variations on Earth, nor the amount of insulating gasses in the atmosphere that humans deposit there. (You're one of those deserving it.)

    2. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to remove him for you. I have a second amendment right to remove those who I don't agree with. Can you please forward his address pls/thx.

    3. Re: This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sarah?

    4. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Climate cycles are controlled by the Sun and we're at the beginning of a cooling cycle. All the farting in the world is not going to change that.

      Sorry to respond to myself .....

      I have done extensive - extensive - research on Fox News and listen to every political talk radio show host. They all know better than ANY Climate so-called "scientist". We all know that Sean Hannity knows more than ANYBODY!

      Why just the other day it RAINED where I live! It wouldn't have RAINED in Spring if Global Warming were true! Global Warming says that I'd be living in a dessert now! With chocolate and whipped cream!

      I'm done with you Liberal Snowflakes who get your "facts" out of your ass! I have to do research on this "Stormy Daniels" person that all the Liberal Lamestream media is harping about. And run out and get another box of tissues because of my allergies.

    5. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Very interesting. What explains the temperature at night, when you know, the Sun is blocked by an entire planet?

    6. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      So, if the sun doesn't entirely control all climate variations on earth, then you're saying there's hope for the earth when the sun goes supernova?

      No, the sun controls everything. Anything going on on earth is at best a second order effect compared to the sun.

    7. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So, if the sun doesn't entirely control all climate variations on earth, then you're saying there's hope for the earth when the sun goes supernova?"

      The Sun can't go supernova or even a plain simple nova.

      It's in the wrong class, just as you obviously were, all your life.

    8. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean as the temperature at night drops when the big Mr. Fusion In The Sky is no longer visible? You mean that temperature change?

    9. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There has to be an invisible scum
      That gives us hope when the whole day is done

    10. Re:This does nothing. by CaptainDork · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You have some good points but have missed an obvious one:

      "They," are "us."

      The driver behind shitting in our mess kit is shareholder greed .

      We want asymptotic stock gains over nanosecond time frames.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    11. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

      BURN

    12. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean as the temperature at night drops when the big Mr. Fusion In The Sky is no longer visible? You mean that temperature change?

      Everybody knows that the "Sun" going away is just God putting the sun away at night so we all go to bed! Duh! All the liberals go on and on and on about their math and science where they mistakenly say that the Earth is a sphere and the Earth goes around the sun, but we all know if that were true we would not be able to walk on the ground because it would be curved! Hahahaha!

      And what about the people in the southern hemisphere? If the Earth were a sphere, how would they keep their feet on the ground? Thats right! They would fall and get eaten by all the turtles that are all the way down there!

      God liberals are so f**king Stupid!

    13. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 on any other day

    14. Re: This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Straw man. Yawn.

    15. Re: This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      9/11 was an Islam job. Never forget what Muslims do.

    16. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, of course, that the temperature does not always drop at night. It tends to do so, but sometimes it increases, or stays about the same.

    17. Re: This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in the country. I have reduced my emmissions. Our small commumities are nothing the likes of large liberal cities. They should do more for the environment.

    18. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is a bandaid on an aneurysm. Even conceptually it is unpromising.

      Holy fuck, how did this get marked as insightful?

      NOBODY is proposing this as a solution to anything. They are saying it is a real phenomena, which is happening right now, which changes some of our understanding of the mechanisms at play.

      They're not saying "hey, let's spread this around to solve that other problem". They're saying "OK, this is happening, we've not identified it before".

      This isn't "conceptually unpromising", because it's not a fucking concept, it's a real measurable thing which is newly measured.

    19. Re:This does nothing. by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      As the world continues to heat and the subocean deposits of methane start flowing,

      Scientific consensus is that will not happen.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    20. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why does it drop more in the desert? Why does it drop more in winter than summer? Does space know how much infrared energy to absorb depending on the orbital position of the Earth around the Sun?

    21. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spot on!
      You forgot to mention your sources though: Habibullo Abdussamatov.

    22. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a fucking ignorant non-scientific climate zealot.
      One look at the correlation over, say, 1 million of years of CO2 and sun spots would tell it all.
      But not to you, obviously.
      We're going into a sun cycle that's the like of the Meander minimum, but to you that doesn't matter.
      Nor that the sun's activity modulates the GCR (Galactic Cosmic Radiation) which modulates the clouds formation rate, which modulates the earth's albedo, but that's obviously too difficult for you to grasp.
      But meh, that's only a total explanation for the past climate changes, and the science is in and more of that blabber which obviously is heretic to your climate religious ears.

    23. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the contrary.
      50% reduction in CO2 uptake by the oceans means that the rise in atmospheric CO2 is not due to us, humans, but to that other scum, floating atop the oceans.
      This also means that the current CO2 reduction hype is just that: a hype. And a baseless scare.
      The world has been warming up (it won't anymore, as a new Meander minimum is approaching) and we or our CO2 has had nothing to do with it.

    24. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. It's not warming 2. It was but it isn't now 3. It's not us. 4. It's us, but let's blame China 5. It is but tree huggers stopped us having nukes, so them 6. If we tried to fix it people in poor countries couldn't have cars and thus would starve 7. It's about to get cooler because the sun/sea/baby Jesus 8. It will hasten the rapture, bring it on. 9. It's too late.

    25. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've confused Fox News with the UK 's Open University broadcasts. If there are kipper ties and beards, it's probably the OU.

    26. Re: This does nothing. by q_e_t · · Score: 1

      We're allowed those, just not plastic ones.

    27. Re: This does nothing. by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      A strawman argument consists of painting the opponent's views as different - commonly more extreme - than they actually are. I think GP's obvious parody is pretty much equally extreme as GGP's ignorant, long-debunked talking points. If you're going to yawn at something, yawn at those.

    28. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hate to rain on your parade here, but exactly who was keeping track of the sunspots over a million years?

      Wouldn't want you to be making shit up and all.

    29. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sun does enough through its sun spot activity in modulating the GCR (Galactical Cosmic Radiation) reaching the earth, thereby creating CCN (Cloud Condensation Nucleii) that form clouds and increase the earth's albedo.
      In short: no sun spots, no 'protection' against GCR, more clouds, more cooling.
      One week ago the last sun spot was noticed.
      We are heading towards a new Meander minimum, cooling the earth considerably for the next 30-60 years.
      Climate science or no climate science...

    30. Re: This does nothing. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      That is more Satire with hyperbole then a Straw Man argument.
      Sadly enough the degree of the hyperbole is much less in today then it really should be.

      Politically I would much rather see debate on how to deal with climate change and at what degrees from our leaders and the media vs them just denying it all together.

      If climate change is some grand conspiracy, I really don't get the final outcome it is meant to achieve. General Air Quality pollution would be an easier sell to try to "have government take over private industry" as smog, can be seen and smelled.

      However denying climate change and trying to discredit the science is a way to ignore the problem, so not to waste time and money to fix the problem.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    31. Re: This does nothing. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      " I really don't get the final outcome it is meant to achieve."

      That's easy, funding for climatologists and environmental related organizations. I'm not saying there is no climate change but remember, climate science has been predicting disaster after disaster from all sorts of things since the 70's and none of these disasters have come to pass. When it comes to our climate and environment there is as much doom and gloom being peddled all the time as from televangelists.

      Not all science is equal, there are certain areas where there is more bias and political influence at play than others.

    32. Re:This does nothing. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Not quite, as a company goes public or goes through its rounds of capital venture the executive leadership gets replaced with people from the ranks of the upper class.

    33. Re:This does nothing. by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      You must be mistaking pro-Constitution people with Antifa and other utopian socialists,

      The second amendment is for self protection; to not be helpless is the face of tyranny. It has never been for the the annihilation of those you disagree with. Most 2nd Amendment folks are very strong proponents of the First Amendment - something that Antifa and their whiny supporters abhor.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    34. Re:This does nothing. by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      So, "exactly."

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    35. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The second amendment is for self protection

      I thought it was to protect the country (though not necessarily its government), not one's self.

    36. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, are you serious? I really hope you are not an American, otherwise you are proof that our education system has failed.

    37. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not, the so-called scientist do it all the time. First it was global cooling, whoops. Then it was global warming, whoops. Now let's just call it climate change so no matter what happens, we're right. Oh and let's go ahead and blame America for everything and ignore China and India.

    38. Re:This does nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have done extensive - extensive - research on Fox News and listen to every political talk radio show host. They all know better than ANY Climate so-called "scientist".

      And this largely self-contradictory statement proves that you haven't and don't.

  2. Before now... by thatseattleguy · · Score: 5, Funny
    Before now, we thought the only type of scum causing rising CO2 levels was located in Washington DC.

    Yea science!

    1. Re:Before now... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Nope! Trump thought he could "drain the swamp". What that fool didn't realize was that the "swamp" was really a giant fucking OCEAN! Good luck draining that!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  3. DRAIN THE DRUMPF! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'd be one thing if we had a concerted effort to study the problem rather than Drumpftards deliberately setting fire to decades of already-paid-for research. Maybe we should put a layer of THEM in the ocean depths and see...

    1. Re:DRAIN THE DRUMPF! by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      If you saw the senate hearings on climate change

      Senate hearings are a stage, not science.

      The Dems did not like to listen to this science and brought their own science with them.

      Do you understand that both Dems and Reps only chose scientists who would say things they already like? They would be fools to do otherwise, because that would make them look bad on a stage.

      Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.

      It's not because you don't post left, it's because you post clearly on the right. That is, you mold your opinion largely to match the party.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:DRAIN THE DRUMPF! by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      ok, best of luck to you.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. You Rebel scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What am i supposed to put here?

  5. Solution is easy... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    The solution is easy. We just need to install an air pump with a bubbler in the ocean to cause surface disturbance and aid gas exchange. That's what I do in my non-planted aquariums.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  6. Ocean acidification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So is ocean acidification not a bad thing anymore? Sounds like they stumbled upon a beneficial side effect of pollution for a change.

    1. Re:Ocean acidification by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      So is ocean acidification not a bad thing anymore? Sounds like they stumbled upon a beneficial side effect of pollution for a change.

      Kind of like how global dimming in the 70's and 80's was having a minimal effect on keeping global warming down. Once we started controlling certain dark pollutants, such as soot down, dimming reversed and might have added a little to global warming.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:Ocean acidification by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Sounds like they stumbled upon a beneficial side effect of pollution for a change.

      Maybe. If the oceans take up less CO2, the concentration in the atmosphere will accelerate. Less acidification, but more warming.

    3. Re:Ocean acidification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It won't matter though. It's a landfill, not a recycling plant. At best case, it'll add years before things collapse.

      Eventually the landfill will overflow because it's not actually getting rid of it, You still need to get CO2 output lower or equal to the ability to scrub it (i.e. actual plants or some technology).

    4. Re:Ocean acidification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The official model says we're acidifying (well, actually neutralizing, given the pH is over 8) the ocean, but the model doesn't match the actual measured data.

    5. Re:Ocean acidification by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It was not soot, it was sulfure oxides.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:Ocean acidification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets cover the oceans in plastic and see what happens. Oh I see we have already started.

  7. Scum of the earth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hmm, global warming is due to the scum of the earth - so it is all Hillary's fault.

  8. LET THEM BREATH BITCOIN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A partially visible layer of libertarian scum will now cover this thread.

    - AC

  9. Okay by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    But this invisible scum may actually deoxygenate the water, killing off the fish life.

    1. Re:Okay by jtgd · · Score: 1

      True. I expect "exchange" means both CO2 and O2.

      But you're forgetting that we've over-fished the ocean into extinction.

      --
      J
    2. Re:Okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The oceans release more O2 than they take up, this will de-oxygenate the atmosphere if anything.

  10. Message from chicken little here: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!

  11. Not news for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go away.

  12. AE911Truth org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big deal! Invisible jet fuel made WTC7 collapse on 9-11. LOL

  13. Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correlation does not equal causation! This kind of stupid "science" is why people no longer trust so called "scientists". They would have us believe the ocean has "scum" on it, or that there is global warming (or is it cooling now I can never remember), or that we are somehow "descended" from monkeys. It's all bullshit designs to push liberal leftist SJW homosexual agenda.

  14. Scum is natural by FeelGood314 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't a problem. The scum is biological. Further it is slowing the rate of change by 50%. The oceans and the atmosphere will still reach the same equilibrium given time. Also we don't want more CO2 in the oceans. It causes acidification and messes with all kinds of ocean life. You could debate where it does more harm, atmosphere or ocean, but ideally we don't want more in either place.

    1. Re:Scum is natural by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't a problem. The scum is biological. Further it is slowing the rate of change by 50%. The oceans and the atmosphere will still reach the same equilibrium given time. Also we don't want more CO2 in the oceans. It causes acidification and messes with all kinds of ocean life. You could debate where it does more harm, atmosphere or ocean, but ideally we don't want more in either place.

      Until we develop a permanent solution for both environments, it is good news it is preventing acidification. It's better that it stays in the air. More time to sea to adapt, or simply more food during more time for humans.

    2. Re:Scum is natural by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't a problem. The scum is biological.

      Wow, this changes everything, let me call my oncologist buddy and tell him he can drop all his patients since cancer is biological, and therefore isn't a problem.

  15. Equilibrium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If the global ocean were to come to equilibrium with the atmosphere, exchange rate would only hasten or slow the time it takes to get to equilibrium. While I doubt there is a "scum" on a significant area of the ocean's surface which drastically changes exchange, its effect would be temporary. Unless the ocean (or atmosphere) is involved in other (significant) exchanges. I guess this article must factor in things such as (fresh) water "exchange" and CO2 exchange with the silt/mud/floor. Only if one of these other two is at about the same rate will changing rate by 50% matter. In my ignorance, I doubt that they are that large, but I really have no basis for that wild assed guess.

  16. Fake news. Science is settled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    There can be no further climate research of any sort. We already knew everything many years ago. Thatâ(TM)s whatâ(TM)s science is settled means. We know everything. Nothing left to discover. Fake news. Move along. Nothing to see here.

  17. TFS tainted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    TFS:

    The world's oceans absorb around a quarter of all man-made carbon dioxide emissions

    How do the oceans decided which carbon dioxide emissions are man-made.

    1. Re:TFS tainted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How do the oceans decided "

      How do the creimerbrain decided to writed bad crammar?

    2. Re:TFS tainted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't. They just absorb a lot of CO2 and 1/4th of that turns out to be antropogenic.

  18. Lake Nyos lessons by technosaurus · · Score: 3, Informative

    Deep water stores more CO2 due to its higher pressure, but natural events can cause overturn. I'm not sure any climate models account for that. A major storm, earthquake or landslide could break up the layer while bringing the high concentrations of CO2 (and other gases) to the surface to effervesce. This could explains some of the unexplained coastal die offs. The events at Lake Nyos killed hundreds of people.

    1. Re:Lake Nyos lessons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adding a CO2 vapor barrier would also block O2 absorption. Sea life will die.

      Let all these geo engineering ideas die, please. Anything man does usually backfires spectacularly.

      The only thing humans should do is practice birth control so populations return to sustainable levels... probably no more than 10s of millions. I did my part -- no kids.

    2. Re:Lake Nyos lessons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing humans should do is practice birth control so populations return to sustainable levels... probably no more than 10s of millions. I did my part -- no kids.

      Pitty that the genes and/or memes of people that want to have lots of sex and kids will outcompete yours.

    3. Re:Lake Nyos lessons by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Sure but it is quite possible that overpopulation is a pressure resulting in increased rates of sexual preference that is incompatible with producing offspring. There are mechanisms known to alter similar things in plants.

    4. Re:Lake Nyos lessons by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

      Much of the dissolved O2 in the ocean is put there from photosynthesizers, not just from the atmosphere. In fact you often get areas of super-saturated (partial pressure of O2 higher than the atmosphere) water from high primary productivity.

      --
      horror vacui
  19. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He also finished deploying 750 PCs and 1,500 monitors ahead of schedule, ending his 12-month contract after nine months.

    You delusional piece of lard!

    I had to redeploy those 750 PCs by myself after paying you to do it. That's why I let you go early so you wouldn't be in the way!

    I redeployed everything in 3 months and met the deadline but the money we gave you is a total lost.

    You also threw away a bunch of valuable spare parts in your genius closet cleaning and we had to buy new ones, further adding to the bill. You are a disaster.

    Fuck you!

  20. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You also threw away a bunch of valuable spare parts in your genius closet cleaning and we had to buy new ones, further adding to the bill. You are a disaster.

    CROFLOL! He most probably ate those spare parts and farted as he was going...

  21. Dangerous by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    What effect does this chemical have on various forms of sea life? If CO2 is trapped in the ocean wouldn't that cause the oceans to be more acidic?

  22. But wait Re: This does nothing. by stinkyjak · · Score: 1

    What about non-manmade emmision?

  23. Just Keep The Leftists Out of the Oceans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That solves the scum in the oceans problem right there.

  24. Insightful or POS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for summing up thousands of papers in a single sentence. I had no idea it was just that simple. So insightful!

  25. Scum Suckers by Doctrinsograce · · Score: 1

    We need aquatic scum sucking pigs!

  26. You're nothing but a goddamn liar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Everything you said is BS and you know it making you a liar.

    The disasters are predicted to happen towards the end of this century. So, of course they didn't happen.

    And ALL of the near terms predictions have come true. The biggest one is the melting of the Arctic ice allowing ships through.

    And *whoosh* in one ear out the other. Because you want to believe this all some sort of BS and it's not that bad so you can live your pathetic little life being a good consumer and ruining this planet for future generations.

    That's easy, funding for climatologists and environmental related organizations.

    What a load of horseshit. And you know it and that makes you a liar.