[Stoves] on ocean acidification

Mon Jul 8 12:37:35 CDT 2013

Dear Crispin,

I think this does pertain to 'stoves' in regard to biochars produced and use
in ag related additives and water treatment because IMO people put much too
much emphasis in a pH measurement. It means little when one looks at how the
value is being used. The pH value of biochars, soil and water mean little
(except for what it is at that moment) because when a pH is determined it is
what's needed to change that pH to what one wants or what that pH has
regarding potential of doing is the info we really want. So the right pH we
walk away happy but the wrong pH and we need a lot more info to make
corrections. 

To measure the pH of the ocean to 0.1 pH units  seems impossible. Not sure I
could do it in the lab using our 4 pH meters and all using the same buffers
to calibrate. That because the pH constantly drifts with solubility of
gases, changes in microbial activity, temperature differences and pH
electrode activity etc. And we think we can measure the pH of the ocean with
all the currents, planktons, temperature variations, depth and turnovers etc
to a 0.02 units for an accurate 0.1 value?!!  And then we have CO2 being
taken up by plants and chemical activity and released in varying stages - in
an ocean of water....     

Like climate change and glaciers I think a better indicator would be shell
destruction as mentioned in that excellent video Peter attached. Or a
measure of alkalinity (titrating to pH 4.5) or, perhaps the aggressive
index, ryzner indix, langlier index that includes many other factors placing
water between a scale of aggressive at one end and scale forming at the
other.  Then people use the pH reading to determine the change in hydrogen
concentration? When there are so many hydrogen sinks and release in many
configurations. But I am sure at a pH of 8.3 it will take up a lot of the
CO2 we produce - good for land but not for the oceans.   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langelier_Saturation_Index#Langelier_Saturation
_Index_.28LSI.29
http://www.krwa.org/docs/Aggressive%20Index%20Formula.pdf
http://www.lenntech.com/calculators/langelier/index/langelier.htm
http://www.lenntech.com/calculators/ryznar/index/ryznar.htm

I have never used these on ocean water but domestic water we determine if
the water is aggressive and will eat the pipes  OR if the water is scale
forming and will place a layer of calcium carbonate coating protecting the
pipe. The calcium carbonate is the same make-up as shells so should predict
the same  I would think. We go for slightly scale forming so to protect
pipes but not fill them up with lime deposits. 

The pH of Biochar means nothing unless we give it a lime equivalent
(carbonate as CaCO3) and/or neutralizing value (back titrate an acid to pH
8.3 as CaCO3) to relate  an application rate to liming and predict what it
will do to the soil. 

As for the calculations; I was looking for a paper I wrote explaining this
to clients to attach to this e-mail but it might be at home or lost as it
was 30+ years ago. 

Regards
Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 1:26 AM
To: Stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] on ocean acidification

Dear Frank

I want to get the math of this correct. The claim is that the oceans have
changed pH from 8.2 to 8.1, that this is (at least in part or totally)
caused by human emissions of CO2, right?  And further that this represents a
'30% increase in acidity'. 

The method described asserts that it is a logarithmic scale and that the 30%
and the term 'acidity' are appropriate. 

I would like to put this in perspective. If the 'acidity' rose 15,800% then
the oceans would be Neutral, neither acidic nor alkaline using conventional
terminology. 

As oceans vary from about 8.4 to 7.8 that is a natural variation of '400%',
using the same definition as is applied in the case of '30%'. 

In the case of rain, which has a CO2 content of over 10,000 ppm it is
'50,000% more acidic' than ocean water at pH 8.2. In fact rain really is
acidic. 

Seems to me that if '30%' is catastrophic the EPA should ban rainfall with
immediate effect. It is obviously wrecking the ocean.  

Regards
Crispin
>From BB9900

-----Original Message-----
From: "Frank Shields" <frank at compostlab.com>
Sender: "Stoves" <stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 10:29:22
To: 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Reply-To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
	<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: Re: [Stoves] on ocean acidification

This is a very good topic and related to Stoves to the point of noting the
difference of a measure of Biochar pH value and alkalinity value. The pH is
really not that important as many think it is. It's the alkalinity that is
important. Having a water with a pH of 8.3 takes little acid to lower the pH
but toss in a chunk of lime and the pH is still 8.3 but you will need to add
acid until all the lime is dissolved before the pH goes down. So pH is just
a reading. Alkalinity (or neutralizing value) is a measure of the amount of
buffering holding that pH. We report this as CaCO3 equivalent units so it
can be compared to adding limestone to a soil. We boil a Biochar sample in
100 mls of 0.5N HCl to dissolve all the carbonates and oxides in the sample
then back titrate using NaOH to determine the amount buffering (or
neutralizing value) the sample has.  Much more useful.     

Frank

Thanks 

Frank Shields

BioChar Division
Control Laboratories, Inc. 
42 Hangar Way
Watsonville, CE  95076

(831) 724-5422 tel
(81) 724-3188 fax
frank at biocharlab.com
www.controllabs.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
ajheggie at gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 11:47 PM
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Subject: Re: [Stoves] on ocean acidification

On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 23:21:20 -0600,Mark Bigland-Pritchard / Low Energy
Design Ltd <mark at lowenergydesign.com> wrote:

>I wouldn't normally want to post off-topic, but I think it is necessary 
>that an error be corrected before this thread is put to sleep.

Mark I'm happy with your correction explaining pH. As we generally do use pH
to denote acidity rather than hydrogen ions I think it is misleading to then
say a 30% increase in hydrogen ion activity equates to a 30% change in
acidity.

I think change in ocean ecology due to this small change in pH is a very
serious concern but please all of you take the discussion elsewhere and
stick to stove issues.

AJH

_______________________________________________
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/

_______________________________________________
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/

_______________________________________________
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/