world oceans near tipping point
Jul. 2nd, 2015 07:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ljgeoffThis actually made me nauseous, so ... well, it's particularly bad news. James Lovelock wrote how when he read some of the first papers on CO2 emissions, he felt like a patient who'd been given bad news about their biopsy. I don't know why this particular paper is hitting me so hard -- well, I do. The ocean is so vast and so incredible; to imagine how we are changing it, destroying the breath and depth of life there, is horrible.
Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios. Gatusso, et al. Science 3 July 2015: Vol. 349 no. 624
Abstract:
The ocean moderates anthropogenic climate change at the cost of profound alterations of its physics, chemistry, ecology, and services. Here, we evaluate and compare the risks of impacts on marine and coastal ecosystems—and the goods and services they provide—for growing cumulative carbon emissions under two contrasting emissions scenarios. The current emissions trajectory would rapidly and significantly alter many ecosystems and the associated services on which humans heavily depend. A reduced emissions scenario—consistent with the Copenhagen Accord’s goal of a global temperature increase of less than 2°C—is much more favorable to the ocean but still substantially alters important marine ecosystems and associated goods and services. The management options to address ocean impacts narrow as the ocean warms and acidifies. Consequently, any new climate regime that fails to minimize ocean impacts would be incomplete and inadequate.
Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios. Gatusso, et al. Science 3 July 2015: Vol. 349 no. 624
Abstract:
The ocean moderates anthropogenic climate change at the cost of profound alterations of its physics, chemistry, ecology, and services. Here, we evaluate and compare the risks of impacts on marine and coastal ecosystems—and the goods and services they provide—for growing cumulative carbon emissions under two contrasting emissions scenarios. The current emissions trajectory would rapidly and significantly alter many ecosystems and the associated services on which humans heavily depend. A reduced emissions scenario—consistent with the Copenhagen Accord’s goal of a global temperature increase of less than 2°C—is much more favorable to the ocean but still substantially alters important marine ecosystems and associated goods and services. The management options to address ocean impacts narrow as the ocean warms and acidifies. Consequently, any new climate regime that fails to minimize ocean impacts would be incomplete and inadequate.