Even I have a hard time arguing the validity of this authors claim.{and I even argue with my coral just for fun? Any one else want to chime in?............ http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html ............THE EFFECTS OF FISHING AND WHALING ACTIVITIES ON THE GLOBAL CARBON CYCLE....in our ongoing experiment, (pulling everything that we can catch out of the sea), are we working towards the creation of a human-induced, modern “Strangelove Ocean”...a sea bereft of life, that exhales CO2?
by Debbie MacKenzie
ABSTRACT:
An increase in atmospheric CO2 is an expected consequence of removal of the marine biota. It is demonstrated that the progressive fishing-induced biomass depletion of the world’s ocean is a more plausible explanation for what has triggered the rising CO2 in the atmosphere, than is our more recent history of burning fossil fuels. The time frame of the effect (rising CO2) fits more closely to the proposed cause (fishing). Proof for the long-term trend in biomass depletion is found by examining the contrasting pictures of abundant marine species pre-fishing and the life-depleted status of the world’s ocean today. The realization that biomass depletion has “bottom-up” effects as well as “top-down” ones leads to the inevitable conclusion that marine primary productivity is functioning at a significantly lower level now than it did in the past, when the ocean-atmosphere maintained a steady carbon balance.
Humans living today cannot remember the great abundance of sea life that existed even 500 years ago...but the ocean can. Deep water circulation patterns today bring carbon to the surface in ocean upwelling areas, in the same manner and quantity as they always have. This carbon is “exhaled” to the atmosphere in a process known as “outgassing.” What comes out of the sea is “very old” carbon, the memory of marine primary production that took place centuries ago. The deep water contains a vast pool of carbon, and it circulates only very slowly; the average turnover time may be about 1000 years. For many thousands of years the ocean and atmosphere maintained a carbon balance, and atmospheric levels were steady, but no longer. “New” carbon cycled into the deep water annually balanced the amount that was cycled out...but a rather long lag time exists between the two. Due to the drop in marine primary productivity, todays carbon input to the deep water falls significantly short of what is required to balance the amount that the ocean sends out via “outgassing.” Due to the 1000 year lag time between the input and output ends of the cycle, readjustment will take a while. The ocean and atmosphere are seeking a new state of carbon balance. The amount of CO2 exhaled annually by the ocean today represents the average amount of carbon put into the deep pool on a yearly basis over the last 1000 years. Due to the fishing-induced imbalance, CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising. For the past two centuries the sea has “exhaled” larger amounts of CO2 than it has “inhaled.” This is an unrecognized consequence of human fishing, and continued fishing will only exacerbate the situation.
INTRODUCTION
“Strangelove Ocean,” is a colorful label once used by a serious research scientist (and movie buff?) to describe the condition of the Earth’s ocean immediately following the mass extinction of the dinosaurs (the episode that happened 65 million years ago). At that time it seems that the majority of living things in the sea experienced relatively sudden death...hence his reference to the effects of the Doomsday machine in the 1960’s SciFi movie “Dr. Strangelove.” The term “Strangelove ocean” is still used in serious scientific work because it provides a useful model of the physical functional processes in the sea that continue in the absence of life, and also the contrasting effects that occur as the result of the addition of life to the sea (e.g. Shaffer, 1993).
One predictable effect of the removal of a large fraction of marine life is that significant amounts of CO2 will be released from the sea to the atmosphere via a process known as “outgassing.” That is what happened following the dinosaur extinction, CO2 levels in the atmosphere rose to a very high level following that event, and it took millions of years for the reaccumulation of sea life to draw atmospheric CO2 back down to levels similar to those that we might enjoy. The recent evolution of large-scale fishing and whaling activities by terrestrial animals is relentlessly removing the life from the Earth’s ocean, and will have the same ultimate effect on the sea - a lifeless “desert” will be created, a “Strangelove ocean,” - and the same atmospheric consequences will ensue. The “experiment” has been underway for several centuries and is progressing nicely, CO2 levels in the atmosphere have been rising as predicted, rising ever higher as the sea life forms are increasingly depleted....the problem is, the humans running the experiment seem to have not the foggiest idea of what they are doing to the planet.
A DYING SEA WILL PREDICTABLY EXHALE CO2 <==> AND EARTH’S OCEAN IS DYING!
Recognition of the fact that the amount of life in the sea has been decreasing since we began fishing, brings us to the admission that the ocean is now slowly “dying,” and it has been for quite some time. The CO2 exhalations of the depleted sea are not a thing to watch for in the future, the change has already been demonstrated in records from the recent past. In recent decades the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere has risen into a range unprecedented during the last few million years.
Another point, fossil records indicate that there was a significant occurrence of unusual plankton blooms in the “Strangelove ocean” following the terminal Cretaceous event. Reassuring ourselves about the abundance of plankton, and that plankton levels look “normal” is not enough to prove that the ocean is not exhaling more CO2 than it is inhaling. That critical factor, the amount of CO2 ultimately taken in by the sea’s “biological pump,” is determined by the whole scope and vibrancy of the entire living marine web. Implying net CO2 uptake from plankton measurements alone is not possible. Unusual plankton blooms followed the extinction of the dinosaurs?....unusual plankton blooms are also increasingly emerging as a feature in our own experimentally altered ocean....is something “strange” happening at sea?
This author proposes that human fishing and whaling acitivity has resulted in an increasingly nitrogen-deficient sea, and thereby has caused a progressive slowing of the “biological carbon pump” and disruption of the pre-fishing balance that characterized the planetary carbon cycle in recent millenia.
FISHING INDUCED MARINE BIOMASS DEPLETION
VS.
FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS
--which is the greater contributor to the rising concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide?
Operating on the assumption (a not commonly accepted, but intuitively obvious, one) that the fishing industry has caused a progressive loss of overall marine biomass, comparing the time scales of the fishing industry with that of the recently rising CO2 trend, makes an interesting exercise. This is not to say that fossil fuel emissions are having zero impact on the atmosphere, it merely points out that the impact of the missing sea life appears to be a much greater one. The data seem to fit together better.
The records of the CO2 rise and the rise in fossil fuel emission, how closely do they match? It presents a surprisingly poor correlation. Prior to 1800, CO2 levels in the Earth’s atmosphere had stabilized at approximately 280 ppm for a period of at least 10,000 years. The current increase began at the turn of the nineteenth century, 60 years before the beginning of the industrial revolution (1860), in fact a substantial rise was recorded well before that time.
“INITIAL INCREASES IN CO2 PREDATE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.”
This is an important clue, and it is one that has not been overlooked by the researchers. But it presents a perplexing question because CAUSE clearly must precede EFFECT. So, there had to be another anthropogenically-induced net source of CO2 to the atmosphere prior to 1860. In the search for the source of excess CO2 pre-1860, scientists have concluded that it was the result of land-clearing practices and wood burning at the time. Therefore, at some point, the official explanation for the rise in atmospheric CO2 changed from “fossil fuel emissions” to “fossil fuel emissions plus land clearing.”
Land-clearing has obviously continued since 1860, with a shift in the activity from northern temperate areas to tropical ones in more recent times. The absolute effect of land-clearing on CO2 levels remains hard to pinpoint however, since areas where trees regrow (new growth forests) are carbon sinks, as opposed to old growth forests which appeared to exist in an approximate carbon balance with the atmosphere. Also, human activity may have supressed the baseline level of forest fires, therefore preventing some release of CO2 from wood-burning that would have occurred naturally. Another observation has been that some of our changes in land use, for example the culture of certain crops, results in carbon fixation at higher rates that the natural undisturbed vegetation would have accomplished. Terrestrial sources and sinks of carbon have been studied in great detail in recent years, and it has been increasingly revealed that terrestrial ecosystems, even the human-altered ones like North America, are surprisingly effective as carbon sinks.
by Debbie MacKenzie
ABSTRACT:
An increase in atmospheric CO2 is an expected consequence of removal of the marine biota. It is demonstrated that the progressive fishing-induced biomass depletion of the world’s ocean is a more plausible explanation for what has triggered the rising CO2 in the atmosphere, than is our more recent history of burning fossil fuels. The time frame of the effect (rising CO2) fits more closely to the proposed cause (fishing). Proof for the long-term trend in biomass depletion is found by examining the contrasting pictures of abundant marine species pre-fishing and the life-depleted status of the world’s ocean today. The realization that biomass depletion has “bottom-up” effects as well as “top-down” ones leads to the inevitable conclusion that marine primary productivity is functioning at a significantly lower level now than it did in the past, when the ocean-atmosphere maintained a steady carbon balance.
Humans living today cannot remember the great abundance of sea life that existed even 500 years ago...but the ocean can. Deep water circulation patterns today bring carbon to the surface in ocean upwelling areas, in the same manner and quantity as they always have. This carbon is “exhaled” to the atmosphere in a process known as “outgassing.” What comes out of the sea is “very old” carbon, the memory of marine primary production that took place centuries ago. The deep water contains a vast pool of carbon, and it circulates only very slowly; the average turnover time may be about 1000 years. For many thousands of years the ocean and atmosphere maintained a carbon balance, and atmospheric levels were steady, but no longer. “New” carbon cycled into the deep water annually balanced the amount that was cycled out...but a rather long lag time exists between the two. Due to the drop in marine primary productivity, todays carbon input to the deep water falls significantly short of what is required to balance the amount that the ocean sends out via “outgassing.” Due to the 1000 year lag time between the input and output ends of the cycle, readjustment will take a while. The ocean and atmosphere are seeking a new state of carbon balance. The amount of CO2 exhaled annually by the ocean today represents the average amount of carbon put into the deep pool on a yearly basis over the last 1000 years. Due to the fishing-induced imbalance, CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising. For the past two centuries the sea has “exhaled” larger amounts of CO2 than it has “inhaled.” This is an unrecognized consequence of human fishing, and continued fishing will only exacerbate the situation.
INTRODUCTION
“Strangelove Ocean,” is a colorful label once used by a serious research scientist (and movie buff?) to describe the condition of the Earth’s ocean immediately following the mass extinction of the dinosaurs (the episode that happened 65 million years ago). At that time it seems that the majority of living things in the sea experienced relatively sudden death...hence his reference to the effects of the Doomsday machine in the 1960’s SciFi movie “Dr. Strangelove.” The term “Strangelove ocean” is still used in serious scientific work because it provides a useful model of the physical functional processes in the sea that continue in the absence of life, and also the contrasting effects that occur as the result of the addition of life to the sea (e.g. Shaffer, 1993).
One predictable effect of the removal of a large fraction of marine life is that significant amounts of CO2 will be released from the sea to the atmosphere via a process known as “outgassing.” That is what happened following the dinosaur extinction, CO2 levels in the atmosphere rose to a very high level following that event, and it took millions of years for the reaccumulation of sea life to draw atmospheric CO2 back down to levels similar to those that we might enjoy. The recent evolution of large-scale fishing and whaling activities by terrestrial animals is relentlessly removing the life from the Earth’s ocean, and will have the same ultimate effect on the sea - a lifeless “desert” will be created, a “Strangelove ocean,” - and the same atmospheric consequences will ensue. The “experiment” has been underway for several centuries and is progressing nicely, CO2 levels in the atmosphere have been rising as predicted, rising ever higher as the sea life forms are increasingly depleted....the problem is, the humans running the experiment seem to have not the foggiest idea of what they are doing to the planet.
A DYING SEA WILL PREDICTABLY EXHALE CO2 <==> AND EARTH’S OCEAN IS DYING!
Recognition of the fact that the amount of life in the sea has been decreasing since we began fishing, brings us to the admission that the ocean is now slowly “dying,” and it has been for quite some time. The CO2 exhalations of the depleted sea are not a thing to watch for in the future, the change has already been demonstrated in records from the recent past. In recent decades the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere has risen into a range unprecedented during the last few million years.
Another point, fossil records indicate that there was a significant occurrence of unusual plankton blooms in the “Strangelove ocean” following the terminal Cretaceous event. Reassuring ourselves about the abundance of plankton, and that plankton levels look “normal” is not enough to prove that the ocean is not exhaling more CO2 than it is inhaling. That critical factor, the amount of CO2 ultimately taken in by the sea’s “biological pump,” is determined by the whole scope and vibrancy of the entire living marine web. Implying net CO2 uptake from plankton measurements alone is not possible. Unusual plankton blooms followed the extinction of the dinosaurs?....unusual plankton blooms are also increasingly emerging as a feature in our own experimentally altered ocean....is something “strange” happening at sea?
This author proposes that human fishing and whaling acitivity has resulted in an increasingly nitrogen-deficient sea, and thereby has caused a progressive slowing of the “biological carbon pump” and disruption of the pre-fishing balance that characterized the planetary carbon cycle in recent millenia.
FISHING INDUCED MARINE BIOMASS DEPLETION
VS.
FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS
--which is the greater contributor to the rising concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide?
Operating on the assumption (a not commonly accepted, but intuitively obvious, one) that the fishing industry has caused a progressive loss of overall marine biomass, comparing the time scales of the fishing industry with that of the recently rising CO2 trend, makes an interesting exercise. This is not to say that fossil fuel emissions are having zero impact on the atmosphere, it merely points out that the impact of the missing sea life appears to be a much greater one. The data seem to fit together better.
The records of the CO2 rise and the rise in fossil fuel emission, how closely do they match? It presents a surprisingly poor correlation. Prior to 1800, CO2 levels in the Earth’s atmosphere had stabilized at approximately 280 ppm for a period of at least 10,000 years. The current increase began at the turn of the nineteenth century, 60 years before the beginning of the industrial revolution (1860), in fact a substantial rise was recorded well before that time.
“INITIAL INCREASES IN CO2 PREDATE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.”
This is an important clue, and it is one that has not been overlooked by the researchers. But it presents a perplexing question because CAUSE clearly must precede EFFECT. So, there had to be another anthropogenically-induced net source of CO2 to the atmosphere prior to 1860. In the search for the source of excess CO2 pre-1860, scientists have concluded that it was the result of land-clearing practices and wood burning at the time. Therefore, at some point, the official explanation for the rise in atmospheric CO2 changed from “fossil fuel emissions” to “fossil fuel emissions plus land clearing.”
Land-clearing has obviously continued since 1860, with a shift in the activity from northern temperate areas to tropical ones in more recent times. The absolute effect of land-clearing on CO2 levels remains hard to pinpoint however, since areas where trees regrow (new growth forests) are carbon sinks, as opposed to old growth forests which appeared to exist in an approximate carbon balance with the atmosphere. Also, human activity may have supressed the baseline level of forest fires, therefore preventing some release of CO2 from wood-burning that would have occurred naturally. Another observation has been that some of our changes in land use, for example the culture of certain crops, results in carbon fixation at higher rates that the natural undisturbed vegetation would have accomplished. Terrestrial sources and sinks of carbon have been studied in great detail in recent years, and it has been increasingly revealed that terrestrial ecosystems, even the human-altered ones like North America, are surprisingly effective as carbon sinks.
ratio in the N. Atlantic, and increased export production in the N.
