The Mother of all Carbon Sinks: The Oceanic Biological Carbon Pump’s Vital Role in Capturing Carbon

[@PaulHBeckwith]

In James Hansen’s latest letter that I chatted about in my last video, he showed that in 1960 about 60% of human fossil fuel emissions stayed in the atmosphere, with 40% being sequestered in the oceans and on land (in soils, vegetation, etc.). At present, only 50% of the carbon stays in the atmosphere, with the other 50% being sequestered. It turns out, according to the latest peer reviewed science, that more carbon is being exported to the deep ocean than expected in the computer models. This is good news for the short term (atmospheric GHGs are lower than they would have been) but bad news in the intermediate to longer term, since ocean warming and stratification reduction of the oceanic carbon sink in the future will hit us much harder than we would have expected (yet another Faustian Bargain). I chat about these findings in the new paper titled: “Biological carbon pump estimate based on multidecadal hydrographic data” Link: www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06772-4.pdf I also chat about the Wikipedia page on the Biological Pump. Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_pump This Wikipedia page explains things so well that it deserves a separate video itself, so I’ll leave the TAB open on my computer until I film such a video. Please donate at PaulBeckwith.net to support my research and videos as I join the dots on abrupt climate system mayhem. Happy New Year (can I still say this on Jan 3rd; at what date is it too late to say?)

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

James Hansen just sent out an email that we are now officially at 1.5 Celsius global average. Enjoy the eco-apocalypse!

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Raffael Jovine, Marine Biologist founder of "Brilliant Planet" says all he needs is $$$ to sequester 10 gigatons per year of algae via near ocean desert algae farms!! He goal is 2 gigatons but he says that the total access available is five times that.

[@Livingthewild]

Believe me, we are totally screwed. There is no way out of this mess. Dont get stuck in bargaining mode. Acceptance will set you free.

[@666bruv]

I'm an apocaloptymast, there is a chance, we just need a big scare, and a change of mind set

[@Livingthewild]

According to the most conservative peer reviewed science, climate change is now abrupt and irreversible. At least 6c above baseline is baked into the cake and humans wink out at around 4c. All life is probably toast at around 5c. Expect major crop production failure this year. The chance of any human existing on this planet past 2040 is zero. The way I see it, optimism got us into this pickle in the first place. The advantage of being a pessimist? Your rarely dissapointed.

[@666bruv]

@@Livingthewild I hear ya. Global weather patterns are pretty fucked up. I'm in ag, so I follow weather reports religiously. The next 10 years will certainly be interesting, and I might even live to 2040, so I'll get back to you then perhaps

[@Livingthewild]

@@666bruv Sounds good. I sure hope my prognosis is wrong. Life is good!

[@666bruv]

@@Livingthewild am following the regenerative ag discussion around carbon sequestration and it's potential to reduce the atmopheric load. The worlds oceans have taken a massive hit, and this will prove a difficult hurdle to overcome

[@realeyesrealizereallies6828]

I can remember reading about 30% less phytoplankton in the oceans..And I've read that more than once..It stuck in my head because our oxygen comes from phytoplankton and they are a base of the ocean food chain..I believe it was northern hemisphere oceans though..Probably because that is where the study took place..I doubt if southern oceans are any better..

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Jim Massa, the Ph.D. oceanographer, just did a vid mentioning this.

[@whatabouttheearth]

I think that figure is since the 1950s, but that's still bad

[@thomasmeiereder6529]

Complex life came from the oceans, complex life might retreat to it...

[@marquesedillinger131]

Those stellars sea cows were some impressive animals. Whale-oil fueled the global economy before fossil fuels....their population still hasn't recovered.

[@terencefield3204]

Like wildlife across North America and across the globe

[@TheDoomWizard]

Wanted to make a video on this too. Thank you.

[@koicaine1230]

Dear Mr Beckwith, are you aware of anything that can remove/reduce Methane from the air? CO2 is a huge problem (Bamboo is our best remedy for that) but CO2 isn't our biggest problem. As you know, Permafrost is melting at a phenomenal rate and we don't have any way that I am aware of, to remediate this danger except for a bacteria that removes it directly from the soil if I remember correctly.

[@solexxx8588]

We can't remove methane or CO2 from the atmosphere on any scale that would help. The energy required would just lead to production of more greenhouse gas. We have to stop burning fossil fuels and start replacing forests. I agree that the release of methane from the permafrost and methane clathrates on the ocean floor is a dangerous tipping point since it's 80 times worse than CO2 until it breaks down into CO2.

[@koicaine1230]

@@solexxx8588 I respect your wisdom, but we can help offset CO2 with Bamboo and Duckweed (freshwater Aquatic plant). Bamboo removes 3.2 metric tons of CO2 per Hectare per year. We can make a difference, it won't happen overnight but it can still happen quickly if done right.

[@FrankWhite437]

Start living life to the fullest that's all you can do and stop hoping for some kind of miracle alien technology..

[@ronwalker4998]

​@koicaine1230 as Paul likes to say .. rainbows and unicorns

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

In Zhejiang alone, some 27,000 hectares of recently planted bamboo forests have produced 5.4 million certified carbon credits so far, and new afforestation projects are getting off the ground in Hubei and Fujian provinces.

[@benbashore8561]

Very great presentation! Thank you.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Excrement sounded like Extra-Mint !!

[@edithcrowther9604]

Very good - thanks. The ironic nature of buying time in a Faustian way which you describe so well was explored by John Abraham and colleagues in a 2020 study published in the Nature Climate Change journal - but such studies are not accessible to most of us, nor is their use of language inviting. The paper shows that the stratification of the oceans - less dense waters sitting above more dense water - is increasing. In other words, the oceans are become more stable, with less “up-and-down” motion. Paradooxically, although a more stable ocean sounds idyllic, it creates a dangerous feedback loop for our warming planet So whilst humans have made the oceans more stable, the result will be more extreme weather and the acceleration of climate change. Just as hot air rises, warm water also rises. In oceans, water tends to stratify, with warmer, less dense water sitting atop colder, more dense water. This as known as a “stable” configuration. Summarizing the paper for the Guardian (UK newspaper), Abraham said - "Stable oceans are warmer and less able to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Consequently, more of the carbon dioxide we emit will remain in the atmosphere, which will lead to more warming. In addition, a more stable ocean is less efficient at moving nutrients through its waters. This means animals that require the flow of nutrient-rich waters could be at risk. The more stable oceans mean we expect the Earth to warm faster in future because of the weakening mixing that penetrates down to deep oceans, and the lower capability of the ocean to absorb carbon dioxide. In a terrible twist of fate, the warming we have caused in the past has resulted in a more stable ocean, and that will increase future warming - a feedback loop that keeps getting stronger." One immediate effect would appear to be increased rainfall in several regions of the world - certainly the UK is at the moment drenched in rain to a really unwelcome degree. No doubt this is preferable to drought - but flooding is not funny either.

[@klondike444]

Interesting. The good news just keeps coming.

[@edithcrowther9604]

Ha ha. But you know we humans are going to have to go through the "School of Hard Knocks" for a while if we are to abandon the religion of Growth, Progress, and Consumption. Wiki tells me that the phrase "school of hard knocks" orginated in a book of advice for salesmen in 1870 ("The Men Who Advertise"). Although Consumerism is at the root of our problems, I have always had a sneaking admiration for salesmen of any kind - certainly I could not sell water in a desert never mind anything less obviously necessary. Now it is the scientists trying to "sell" awareness of the depth of our plight to the public that are going through the hard knocks - and after that it will be the general public itself as the physical results of Overshoot (including Climate Change) become ever more painful. Time for all those old sayings - "kill or cure", "bite the bullet", etc. etc. You do emerge stronger, if you emerge at all - that much has been recorded for centuries, and can be proved. Humans do not surrender quite so easily as other species to external pressures, whoever or whatever is causing them. G.K. Chesterton summed it up in 1911, in his poem "The Ballad of the White Horse" - "I tell you naught for your comfort, yea naught for your desire, save that the sky grows darker yet, and the seas rise higher." The poem is about King Alfred the Great fighting off the Danes (with considerable difficulty and many setbacks) - but Chesterton meant it as an allegory for the world in 1911. Now things are even worse, with the seas literally rising (something of which Chesterton had no knowledge, though in fact they were rising very slightly by then, by about 1 mm a year). @@klondike444

[@klondike444]

@@edithcrowther9604 And over a century later people are still denying they're rising at all. They assume any rise must be the same everywhere.

[@edithcrowther9604]

I think Denial is not because people are stupid, but because they cannot process emotions like fear, anger, anxiety, etc., in a calm way, but instead react by "kicking the cat" or something - which just gets them into trouble because it is anti-social and other people do not understand WHY they are forced to let off steam in this unadmirable way (although all humans have a tendency to do this "scapegoating", but we can rein it in unless really upset). Humans are self-aware, and we do know how dangerous it is to put large numbers of us under massive stress in overcrowded conditions - history is littered with the bloody results of this in various regions of the Earth, and now the whole Earth contains millions of humans trying to live in such conditions. But despite being self-aware, we cannot actually CHANGE our basic nature. So for most people, instead of discussing or exploring a sensitive topic, a "solution" is just to avoid it altogether - in order to avoid "kicking the cat", which most of us know is only going to make things worse after the initial release of tension - and not only for the cat. "Green" tech is just one form of Avoidance. So is Space Exploration - and I could list many others. This Avoidance tactic applies to women as much as men - all humans rely on their right brain to balance the laser-like focus of the left brain and provide a calming "bigger picture" when our forward progress on a narrow track is annoyingly impeded by something outside our control. Women are no better than men at enlisting the help of their right brain - in fact I sometimes think we are worse, though our "kick the cat" reactions are less violent on the whole than men's and thus less noticeable. We cry, or go shopping, or get our nails done, or indulge in bitchy gossip - all unpleasant and useless ways of processing "bad" or "negative" feelings, with tears probably the least damaging to ourselves and others but still not very useful in preventing repeats of the causative factor/s. We also indulge far more readily in optimistic "green" "solutions", feeling obliged to be kind and caring as our hormones and society dictate. This kind of Avoidance earns approval from many - but not from all. Some prefer the unvarnished truth, not platitudes and panaceas. Practical caring is done at very close quarters - family and CLOSE neighbours. Intellectual caring can be done over huge distances, but has to be right-brain governed, or it is just fake - and that means scooping up the dark with the light and not avoiding it. As far as I can see, it is nearly always men who excel at this. Intellectual women always feel obliged to sugar the pill in some way. But even if the majority of humans got a handle on how to use their right brain better, it would make little difference to the outcome of our left-brain prowess. It is absurd to talk of us destroying the planet - this is just more left-brain arrogance. Hallo - the planet will bite back hard, already is in small ways. That is actually the solution - like it or not. Where people with powerful left brains coupled with powerful right brains are so useful that they are almost miraculous, is when they can communicate - in speech or writing - their broader vision to the rest of us and provide some crumbs of solace and calm to anyone able to listen without getting irritated by right brain "bigger picture" interventions throwing the march of Progress off track. Human history has plenty of examples of such miracle-workers (usually men and usually religious, artistic or musical in some way but often at the same time good at engineering or maths, I call it the "Jesus Was a Carpenter Syndrome"), who have provided real comfort instead of mere panaceas to those open to TRUTHFUL comfort which does not attempt to gloss over the dark side of anything but instead places it in a context which mitigates its awfulness. That is the best we can hope for, in my opinion - a sort of "Palliative Care" from the best of God's justifiably favourite species, as Earth moves into Terminator mode and wipes out anyone and anything that provokes it - whether "innocent" or "guilty", the Earth is not interested in such niceties. @klondike444 @@klondike444

[@EmeraldView]

Very fascinating

[@bimmjim]

Algae blooms are a good thing, especially when they are out in the middle of the ocean. . They add biomass to the ocean.

[@ronwalker4998]

Not if it's fueled by agriculture pollution such a sargasso is .. which emits NOx when it dies

[@tiaretsnyheter6026]

I like the rapid fire video series! Just too bad it won't be prolonged until you've reassembled an excess of open browsers.

[@whatabouttheearth]

I suggest the video titled 'Marine Carbon Cycle' on the channel 'Natural World Facts', it is an extremely beautiful video explaining the MCC and Biological Pump.

[@parrsnipps4495]

A 'Down to Earth' online article; '2023 warmest on record, temperatures 1.48C above pre-industrial'. And this: By May 2024, the 12-month running-mean global temperature could be 1.6-1.7°C relative to 1880-1920. “Thus, given the planetary energy imbalance, it will be clear that the 1.5°C ceiling has been passed for all practical purposes,” they explained.

[@earthsystem]

I have a betting pool going about the most complex life form to survive ecosystem collapse. Kingdoms Plantae, Animalia? Archaebacteria, Eubacteria, Protista? Fungus amongus?

[@obsoleteoptics]

Most likely extremophiles around hydrothermal vents at the ocean floor and in deep underground caverns.

[@annodomini2012]

I think maybe some insects with extremely short lives (less than a few months) that feed on dead/decaying matter have a chance; so, some flies and beetles. Jellyfish will possibly be okay as well

[@RjbigIamMe]

​@@obsoleteopticsyes, agreed. For awhile I was convinced we would actually kill off all life on planet. But then it occured to me that the life around the vents will likely survive.🤗.

[@MaggieJohnson-vn6su]

So now the carbon sinks have collapsed?

[@666bruv]

And all the cultivated soils, ancient and present, have lost 90% of it's C. The .5-1% that is tye average levels, are way to low for postive agricultural practices

[@castello544]

Did you mention the largest crime against the environment ever? #Nordstream! Brought to you by the cia

[@justmenotyou3151]

Dude, get educated. Nord stream stopped operating at the beginning of September following gradual supply reductions during the summer, whereas Nord Stream 2, despite containing gas, was never launched. This release was not the biggest contributor to ocean methane. Additionally, the CIA angle has been discredited. The Ukrainians have been brought up as causing the destruction. Not real likely because of the Longistics involved. The russians have the ability and technology. They had vessels in the area prior to the destruction with their identification transponders turned off. Additionally, the owner of nord stream Gazprom potentially stands to benefit: it will no longer need to invent excuses not to supply Europe, which will dramatically reduce the risk of compensation claims for non-delivered volumes of gas. Additionally, Gazprom might even hope to collect some insurance for the damaged pipelines. One final note, nord stream, could also serve as a message to western countries that their underwater infilstructure is not safe.

[@girowinters]

Bought to you by a rabid Putin and his demonic blind followers

[@gehwissen3975]

"... largest crime against environment ever.." Not even close. However, the dominance of the West on this planet should be ended. Soon. WTF CIA..? 😬😁

[@lobee4393]

?

[@castello544]

@@QuinnOsgood-rj7wz kzbin.infoFVbEoZXhCrM