Permafrost Melting Will Cost Us $70 Trillion

On 4/28/2019 at 4:14 AM, ronwagn said:

I like mine Pittsburg style. Burned on the outside and rare in the middle. You get pure carbon and a variety of meaty flavors. 

Plus a shed load of PAH's, Nitrosamines, and Amines. 

Its like getting several months diesel particulate matter in one sittingūüėĄ

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2019 at 6:41 PM, specinho said:

May be Enthalpic is right........  NaCl is indeed not a buffer but a salt ......... The saltiness is measured by part per thousand........

On the other hand......... pH is measured by pH meter............. it depends on the mineral contents in the sea.... According to the internet the average pH of the sea is 8.1........ Therefore....... when carbon dioxide dissolves into water especially in colder zones the equation could be this:

2 H2O + 2 CO2   --->  2 H2CO3     ---->  2 H+  +  2 HCO3-

It's acidic. Hence...... it does have the possibility to change the pH value of the sea......... probably in hundred years of course........

 

This probably helps explain in a chart

 

 

Ocean acidification.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

You're in no position to criticize my English. If I could type Pinyin maybe we could move this to mandarin. 

Bottom line, Enthalpic erroneously assumed the salt I was referring to was common table salt. Then he compounded his error by giving an example of a strong acid/base not being buffered by NaCl.  The link clearly shows the buffering occurs with WEAK acid/base, which as any grade school science nerd knows is what carbonic acid is, the point of my post being that this weak acid was in no way causing the ocean to acidify. 

Learn of what you speak before you throw stones from your glass house, lest you further embarrass yourself. 

 

I made no errors - the example / question was a learning opportunity for you... from your own link.  Good grief man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, NickW said:

Plus a shed load of PAH's, Nitrosamines, and Amines. 

Its like getting several months diesel particulate matter in one sittingūüėĄ

But it tastes awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

You're in no position to criticize my English. If I could type Pinyin maybe we could move this to mandarin. 

Bottom line, Enthalpic erroneously assumed the salt I was referring to was common table salt. Then he compounded his error by giving an example of a strong acid/base not being buffered by NaCl.  The link clearly shows the buffering occurs with WEAK acid/base, which as any grade school science nerd knows is what carbonic acid is, the point of my post being that this weak acid was in no way causing the ocean to acidify. 

Learn of what you speak before you throw stones from your glass house, lest you further embarrass yourself. 

So Professor Calculus - what is causing the pH of oceans to fall if its not due to the increasing concentration of Carbonic acid in the oceans? 

pH has fallen from about 8.1 to 8.07 in 20 years. When one considers the volume of the oceans, whatever is causing that change is significant. 

Edited by NickW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NickW said:

I am feeling generous so I will help you out here.

Acidification means a lowering of pH. It doesn't necessarily mean turning something acid - with a pH below 7.0. 

I learnt that in Chemistry aged 12-13. 

No. You. Didn't. 

The Dictionary defines acidification thus "the action or process of making or becoming acidic". Now notice that it does NOT say "a lowering of pH". Perhaps the term you are looking for is titration? 

Fear mongers are pushing a narrative and headlines screaming, "Acidification of the oceans will kill us all! " get more clicks than, "A slight decrease in the alkalinity of 'some' locations may occur".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

No. You. Didn't. 

The Dictionary defines acidification thus "the action or process of making or becoming acidic". Now notice that it does NOT say "a lowering of pH". Perhaps the term you are looking for is titration? 

Fear mongers are pushing a narrative and headlines screaming, "Acidification of the oceans will kill us all! " get more clicks than, "A slight decrease in the alkalinity of 'some' locations may occur".

Those full stops are unnecessary and poor grammar. 

Not withstanding the wordsmithery here - please explain if its not H2Co3 causing the fall in the pH in the oceans - what is? I believe this is an observed phenomena in oceanic waters across the globe.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NickW said:

So Professor Calculus - what is causing the pH of oceans to fall if its not due to the increasing concentration of Carbonic acid in the oceans? 

pH has fallen from about 8.1 to 8.07 in 20 years. When one considers the volume of the oceans, whatever is causing that change is significant. 

The pH of the "oceans" is not even being measured properly. Some locations, conveniently near large cities in comfortable climates (like Honolulu) get measured and results are tortured into confession through statistical means. However the range is far wider than your graph and the error bars even wider. Conflicting data is routinely discarded. Can't go against the AGW faithful, that's sacrilege. 

Indeed, when one considers the volume of "the oceans" AND the  buffering effect of the salts present, "acidification" seems unlikely, and is. I'll leave the molar balance equations as an exercise for the student. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ward Smith said:

The pH of the "oceans" is not even being measured properly. Some locations, conveniently near large cities in comfortable climates (like Honolulu) get measured and results are tortured into confession through statistical means. However the range is far wider than your graph and the error bars even wider. Conflicting data is routinely discarded. Can't go against the AGW faithful, that's sacrilege. 

Indeed, when one considers the volume of "the oceans" AND the  buffering effect of the salts present, "acidification" seems unlikely, and is. I'll leave the molar balance equations as an exercise for the student. 

Any evidence to back this up? You would appear to be suggesting that the limited range of samples has insufficient estimation power to make a reliable estimate. 

I believe measuring ocean pH in deep ocean environments (away from coastlines) is carried out routinely by numerous different research organisations across the globe.

New Zealand for example appears to be measuring pH in the Antarctic Ocean which is very long way away from Hololulu and major sources of land based pollution that might influence the results. 

http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/environment/environmental-reporting-series/environmental-indicators/Home/Marine/ocean-acidification.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The pH of the "oceans" is not even being measured properly. Some locations, conveniently near large cities in comfortable climates (like Honolulu) get measured and results are tortured into confession through statistical means. However the range is far wider than your graph and the error bars even wider. Conflicting data is routinely discarded. Can't go against the AGW faithful, that's sacrilege. 

Indeed, when one considers the volume of "the oceans" AND the  buffering effect of the salts present, "acidification" seems unlikely, and is. I'll leave the molar balance equations as an exercise for the student. 

So fairly predictably you resort to the Oil Price Dot com golden chestnut of claiming its a statistical massage scam to avoid actually explaining what is causing the fall in pH which every research establishment taking field measurements across the globe are reporting. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NickW said:

So fairly predictably you resort to the Oil Price Dot com golden chestnut of claiming its a statistical massage scam to avoid actually explaining what is causing the fall in pH which every research establishment taking field measurements across the globe are reporting. 

 

Every research establishment paid by the AGW hegemony you mean. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ward Smith said:

Every research establishment paid by the AGW hegemony you mean. 

Game, set and match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

No. You. Didn't. 

The Dictionary defines acidification thus "the action or process of making or becoming acidic". Now notice that it does NOT say "a lowering of pH". Perhaps the term you are looking for is titration? 

Fear mongers are pushing a narrative and headlines screaming, "Acidification of the oceans will kill us all! " get more clicks than, "A slight decrease in the alkalinity of 'some' locations may occur".

I don't think so. In the case of Seawater we know what the salt content is and we can easily measure the HCo3. 

From this source

 https://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/lab/techniques/titration/what.html

A titration is a technique where a solution of known concentration is used to determine the concentration of an unknown solution. Typically, the titrant (the know solution) is added from a buret to a known quantity of the analyte (the unknown solution) until the reaction is complete.

Or the Cambridge Dictionary

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/titration

a method of finding exactly how much of a substance there is in a solution bygradually adding measured amounts of another substance that reacts to it in aknown way, for example by causing a colour change

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Every research establishment paid by the AGW hegemony you mean. 

If a proper research institute could prove AGW didn't exist do you not think they would be hosed with dinothorian amounts of cash from Coal, Oil and Gas companies. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2019 at 10:48 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Yet you¬†continue to read this forum.¬† ūü§Ē

Its entertaining. Watching my 3 year old son do a silly show off dance in the lounge is entertaining too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, NickW said:

I don't think so. In the case of Seawater we know what the salt content is and we can easily measure the HCo3. 

From this source

 https://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/lab/techniques/titration/what.html

A titration is a technique where a solution of known concentration is used to determine the concentration of an unknown solution. Typically, the titrant (the know solution) is added from a buret to a known quantity of the analyte (the unknown solution) until the reaction is complete.

Or the Cambridge Dictionary

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/titration

a method of finding exactly how much of a substance there is in a solution bygradually adding measured amounts of another substance that reacts to it in aknown way, for example by causing a colour change

 

 

OK wise guy, tell us the EXACT PROCESS used to measure the alkalinity of seawater. Let us know if it involves the word, titration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ward Smith said:

OK wise guy, tell us the EXACT PROCESS used to measure the alkalinity of seawater. Let us know if it involves the word, titration. 

Here is one methodology

 

The pH of seawater can be measured in the field using potentiometric and spectrophotometric methods. The use of pH standards or buffers is an important aspect of the calibration of both methods in a laboratory on a common concentration scale. The buffers can also be used to monitor the performance of pH meter and spectrophotometer during a cruise. A procedure is described for the determination of the pH of seawater, where the proton concentration is expressed as moles kg-H2O‚ąí1 using seawater buffers. The buffers are prepared in synthetic seawater in the laboratory by the methods outlined by Bates and coworkers. We have prepared four buffers (Bis, Tris, Morpholine and 2-Aminopyridine) that cover a pH range from 6.8 to 8.8. The emf values of the buffers were measured with a H2, Pt/AgCl, Ag electrode system after their preparation and bottling for use at sea. The measured emf values were found to be in good agreement (¬Ī0.05 mV) with the original measurements of Bates and coworkers from 0 to 45¬įC. The measured pH of these buffers are in good agreement (¬Ī0.001 pH units) with the values calculated from the equations of Dickson on the total pH scale based on Bates et al. Studies are underway to access the long term stability of these buffers. We have also used these buffers to calibrate systems used to make potentiometric and spectrophotometric measurements of pH on seawater relative to the H2, Pt/Ag, AgCl electrode from 5 to 45¬įC.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NickW said:

If a proper research institute could prove AGW didn't exist do you not think they would be hosed with dinothorian amounts of cash from Coal, Oil and Gas companies. 

 

Not a chance. Exxon, BP, and Shell are already counting their trillions from carbon exchanges. You're deluded if you think they're against the story or that they'd put up a dime. That's what you get from your ridiculous sources and fevered imagination

Interestingly, at the same time they're all in on AGW and can't wait to exchange carbon credits, they have massive teams of engineers and scientists constantly monitoring pH near their offshore platforms. They'd dearly love the alkalinity to be decreasing, because that would save them Millions in corrosion mitigation. Unfortunately, their results don't jibe with the orthodoxy from your religion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NickW said:

Plus a shed load of PAH's, Nitrosamines, and Amines. 

Its like getting several months diesel particulate matter in one sittingūüėĄ

You must boil your meat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NickW said:

Yes - but that doesn't disprove the premises that the permafrost is melting - a  consequence of global warming (in the absence of any other apparent cause) 

Permafrost always melts to some extent. It is not really permanent! You should see the collapses in other areas of Siberia. It is a perpetual cycle of freezing and melting just like much of the world. Warmists use any phony story they can yet the sea level stays about the same. That is the only truth teller. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NickW said:

Here is one methodology

 

The pH of seawater can be measured in the field using potentiometric and spectrophotometric methods. The use of pH standards or buffers is an important aspect of the calibration of both methods in a laboratory on a common concentration scale. The buffers can also be used to monitor the performance of pH meter and spectrophotometer during a cruise. A procedure is described for the determination of the pH of seawater, where the proton concentration is expressed as moles kg-H2O‚ąí1 using seawater buffers. The buffers are prepared in synthetic seawater in the laboratory by the methods outlined by Bates and coworkers. We have prepared four buffers (Bis, Tris, Morpholine and 2-Aminopyridine) that cover a pH range from 6.8 to 8.8. The emf values of the buffers were measured with a H2, Pt/AgCl, Ag electrode system after their preparation and bottling for use at sea. The measured emf values were found to be in good agreement (¬Ī0.05 mV) with the original measurements of Bates and coworkers from 0 to 45¬įC. The measured pH of these buffers are in good agreement (¬Ī0.001 pH units) with the values calculated from the equations of Dickson on the total pH scale based on Bates et al. Studies are underway to access the long term stability of these buffers. We have also used these buffers to calibrate systems used to make potentiometric and spectrophotometric measurements of pH on seawater relative to the H2, Pt/Ag, AgCl electrode from 5 to 45¬įC.

 

 

I'm unconvinced of your "methodology" source. KISS principles apply. It is of interest that the word "buffer" keeps coming up in your source. Ever wonder why? Perchance was I entirely correct in my very first statement? Why yes, yes I was. Are you and Enthalpic edumacated enough to follow all this? The jury is still out

Alkalinity is a measure of the buffering capacity of seawater, or the total amount of H+ that can be absorbed by the solution (alternate definitions: excess of bases over acids; or difference in number of non-proton exchanging cations and anions in solution). To measure alkalinity, seawater is titrated with acid to a specified endpoint (pH=4.5) where essentially all of the proton acceptors have reacted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, NickW said:

This probably helps explain in a chart

 

 

Ocean acidification.png

Thank you very much NickW. Excellent chart. Clear and easy to understand....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

20 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

You're in no position to criticize my English. If I could type Pinyin maybe we could move this to mandarin. 

Bottom line, Enthalpic erroneously assumed the salt I was referring to was common table salt. Then he compounded his error by giving an example of a strong acid/base not being buffered by NaCl.  The link clearly shows the buffering occurs with WEAK acid/base, which as any grade school science nerd knows is what carbonic acid is, the point of my post being that this weak acid was in no way causing the ocean to acidify. 

Learn of what you speak before you throw stones from your glass house, lest you further embarrass yourself. 

Do you pay my bills?? Noo?? Who gives you the right to say what position I'm in to say what i want about what you wrote then?? ..................... :D

You might have poor understanding about the concept .... Here's why:

1. The two ions that are present most often in seawater are chloride and sodium. These two make up over 90% of all dissolved ions in seawater. By the way, the concentration of salt in seawater (salinity) is about 35 parts per thousand.

http://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/why-ocean-salty?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects
 

Hence.... by salt.... it is indeed refering to NaCl..... 

2. Seawater pH is limited to the range 7.5 to 8.4. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawater

Hence... there is a possibility to turn sea water acidic..... depending on where.... no??

you seee.......... With a little bit of dilligence.... it's unbelievable that there are more things out there to be googled and to be known than reading and quoting merely from a two pages text book .............. xD

 

17 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

The pH of the "oceans" is not even being measured properly. Some locations, conveniently near large cities in comfortable climates (like Honolulu) get measured and results are tortured into confession through statistical means. However the range is far wider than your graph and the error bars even wider. Conflicting data is routinely discarded. Can't go against the AGW faithful, that's sacrilege. 

Indeed, when one considers the volume of "the oceans" AND the  buffering effect of the salts present, "acidification" seems unlikely, and is. I'll leave the molar balance equations as an exercise for the student. 

Once upon a time.... there was a stupid kid (the author).... (aided by a good supervisor and an brilliant assistance)....... had braced the rough condition of estuarine area in the Atlantic Ocean to measure the pH (and other things) - station after station - from the river to the sea.... (do not want to mention the unsightly side stories).......... If this amateur kid was doing it for FREE properly don't you think those professionals who are GETTING PAID to measure would do it in a more proper manner?? Not everyone needs to distort the data to hell to get fund......... Some do it out of duty....

image.png.7191349db8b574106a54fe0525249129.png

Edited by specinho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, specinho said:

Thank you very much NickW. Excellent chart. Clear and easy to understand....

Does anyone wonder why the chart magically begins in 1990? Weren't there decades of measurements before then? Oh yes, there were, but the results didn't align with the orthodoxy, so new methods were employed. We're told that electrode measurements are superior to tried and true Chemical methods to measure a chemical quantity. Why is that? 

Problems with measurement quality. The source here is true believers at NOAA so no whining. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

10 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Does anyone wonder why the chart magically begins in 1990? Weren't there decades of measurements before then? Oh yes, there were, but the results didn't align with the orthodoxy, so new methods were employed. We're told that electrode measurements are superior to tried and true Chemical methods to measure a chemical quantity. Why is that? 

Problems with measurement quality. The source here is true believers at NOAA so no whining. 

i coached debate team ........once upon a time...... (alright.alright......... just ONE...... team)........... so please......... that's enough....... :D

Edited by specinho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites