[Stoves] more on ocean acidification

[Ronal W. Larson]

List:  

   1.   Apologies to Erin, but the conversation re ocean acidification has turned enough into stoves topics I feel a need to enter and also support Paul Olivier (who should have his hand slapped for bringing up the ocean and pH subjects).

   2.   First about the supposed  outstanding talk by a young unemployed recent chem engineering graduate.  I am pretty sure that his calculation (which I am not going to go through even I were competent to judge in detail) was calculating the average pH change in the ocean.  The entire ocean community agrees that that change is small.  All the talk of an 0.1 change in pH  (same as 30% change when not in log units) refers to the near surface pH.  Calculating an average change is worse than ludicrous.  His picking on one of the world's most well respected ocean scientist (Lubchenko) displays further ignorance.   Why should anyone be surprised that the average ocean surface pH changes by 30% when the atmospheric level has changed a little bit more?  (there are huge fluxes each way every day)  A great reference on all this is the PNAS paper given today (by mistake?) by Kevin.  Check wiki.  Check a yesterday Skeptical Science article on this at http://www.skepticalscience.com/Ocean-Acidification-Eating-Away-at-Life-in-the-Southern-Ocean.html
    I see no credentials (claimed or otherwise) for this young guy knowing any biology, so his comments on reduced calcium carbonate in certain sea creatures should receive zero credence (especially in the Antarctic)  And one wouldn't expect anything like a peer review at WUWT.   I consider WUWT to be the antithesis of sound science.  In my circles, it is considered a joke.

  3.   About half or more of the list has an interest in char-making stoves.  So I have to ask why Crispin is out there by himself with the first pat of this following quote from him today.  The entire stove community from what I have seen disagrees with Crispin on this:

   It has so happened that in recent years the emergence of char making TLUD stoves has exacerbated the errors in the simple models used for decades and there are serious consequences for the stove section. Stoves that are really IWA tier 1 performers can get a tier 4 rating for something because of defects in the models. "

   My conclusion is this observation would be approved by the vast majority of WUWT followers.  If something related to excess CO2 is proposed (such as char going in the ground), then the idea must be bogus, because climate scientists are liars, cheats, free-loaders etc.  Well fortunately that is not the majority view around the world and stove models and performance ratings are doing perfectly fine, with Crispin fighting all the way.  Glad to see Crispin bringing this up and hope we can continue this stove-related discussion.


4 .  The above two sentences were followed by these:
      "It is like that with the climate too. To date there are 73 well known, accessible climate models (GCM’s). Not one of them has predicted the current 200 month stasis in global temperature (indistinguishable from zero change). That means the models are invalidated. The implications are pretty serious.
     There is no reason at all to conclude that the models are in error and "invalidated" - and least of all for the relative flatness (for less than 200 months), given every other AGW indicator.  The oceans have continued to warm (and levels rise).  Arctic ice volume is about the same as last year's record low. Record temperature highs greatly exceeding record lows.    For decades the annual land temperature rise greatly exceeded the ocean temperature rise.  Why be surprised if it slows for awhile, to let the oceans catch up?  

5.  I applaud Cecil's comments.  I didn't think Crispin defended well.  But not enough stove material there except Cecil's last on precaution.  Thanks Cecil.

6. . Lastly,  three additions below in the latest Crispin message.  

On Aug 8, 2013, at 12:21 PM, "Crispin Pemberton-Pigott" <crispinpigott at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Kevin
>  
> I thought the young man addressed matters very directly and effectively. There is a comment below from a guy named Bob. Search for “Somewhere in my misspent youth I picked up 3 degrees in chemistry, postdoctoral research and a couple of decades in the chemical industry.”
        [RWL7.    Te the young man - yes he wrote well - but missed the main several points (stated above)    Nothing here on stoves.  I have searched for "Bob" and have no idea what that was about.
>  
> I haven’t found a chemist yet who supports the ‘acid ocean’ theory. But as Steve asks, why are they so silent? The answer is intimidation or they are bored with such a stupid topic.
      [RWL8:  I have not above used the word "denier".  These exemplify denial.   I don't think I could find a published peer reviewed paper that didn't think ocean surface.  pH has been climbing steadily
>  
> A topic that should follow this into the grave of silence is: ‘burying charcoal to help prevent the acidification of the oceans’. We do indeed have a long way to go.
>    [RWL9:  I was going to stay out of this "stove" dialog until reading this.  Truly amazing to say this on a stove list where he insults at least half of the list!   And most of them are not about to become deniers if I can help it.   I think/hope Crispin indeed has a "long way to go."      Ron


> Chemically yours,
> Crispin
>  
>  
> Dear Crispin
>  
> Thanks very much for the URL for the excellent article.
>  
> It is amazing what can be deduced using real science. :-)
>  
> It is scary that organizations like the UN, IPCC, and NOAA don't have competent people on staff to vet their "Ocean Acidification" statements. When a recent Chemical Engineering Graduate can point out the folly of "jumping on the Ocean Acidification Bandwagon", it should lead us to raise the question:
> "What else are the UN, NOAA, and the IPCC telling us about AGW that is wrong?"
>  
> Best wishes,
>  
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
> 
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20130808/ec68a560/attachment.html>