Squid, fish, crustaceans, plankton, larvae, marine mammals and the whole marine food chain are under threat from CO2 as the gas turns the oceans acidic, warns the world''s oldest scientific body, the Royal Society in London, reports Peter O''Neill.
"It is not known if organisms at the various levels in the food web will be able to adapt or if one species will replace another. ...Without significant action to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, this may mean that there is no place in the future oceans for many of the species and ecosystems that we know today," according to the report team, led by Professor John Craven [beard] of the School of Life Sciences of the University of Dundee, Scotland.
"Ocean acidification due to increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide", talks about the future in terms of 2050, just 44 years away and it tries to gaze up to 2100.
One's immediate reaction to the headline press release was 'how long before we hear the death knell for commercial fishing and famine for tens of millions who survive on coastal subsistence fishing?'
The report says squid and marine mammals may face serious problems, as oxygen reduces in the water, to breathe or squirt away. Crustaceans (krill upwards) may not be able to form enough calcium to make their shells. On coral, the acid and pH problems mean "the tropical and subtropical corals are expected to [be] amongst the worst-affected..." The report also looked at possible socioeconomic effects.
World Fishing readers will be pleased that your correspondent attended the launch, ready to hear and report, as usual, both bad and good news on what he expected to be a detailed doomsday scenario.
Relax, do not worry, because this report might well deserve to join literary models such as "War of the Worlds" -- courtesy of Ocean Welles, radio, and today in full-colour, distant-horizon-vision, appropriately Cruise, Tom.
Yes, there is some acidification --- fishermen and fish farmers knew that, even if the scientists have only just caught up (officially last year in Paris). But this report just does not stand up, is woefully short on proof and very big on fear of the unknown and unproven. The uncharitable might say it was hyped to attract funding (research money is urgently needed it says) and the authors made no bones about launching in time for the G8 summit (Kyoto, Bush and all that).
The real story behind this report is detailed in this month's Analysis, buttressed by a report from Menakhem Ben-Yami about other scientists challenging the significance of man-made global warming vs Nature naturally at work.
