Group #3 (Witt Welch, Elizabeth Fulhan, Zach Muster)

Due to the burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide is entering the atmosphere more rapidly than from natural sources. One of the effects of an increase in carbon dioxide emissions is changes in the acidity of the ocean. Scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have created models that predict that ocean acidity increases over the next 1,000 years what would have previously taken 300 million years. They used present carbon emission rates as well as geological and historical records in these models. Both natural rates of increases in ocean acidity and carbon emissions from industrialization are important in these models. At this rate, there will be negative effects on all animals in the ocean that contain calcium carbonate, particularly coral reefs and marine life. At this point in time, scientists doubt that there are any effective solutions to this issue. Although there may be no immediate solutions to the issue, it is important to recognize the magnitude of this problem in order to make strides in bettering our Earth.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Group 2

Ocean acidification is important because it impacts biodiversity. A falling ph level has detrimental impacts on species that build shells or skeleton based on carbonate. For example, tropical corals. Hence ocean acidification destroys ecosystems, resulting in the ultimate disappearance of certain species. The computer generated evidence predicts that if the carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise exponentially, this will result in the drastic increase in the ocean ph level. The levels of PH are predicted to rise as much as they have in the past 300 million years in the next 1000 years. The computer models used past historical and geographical evidence to see what the natural rise would be and compared it to the rate at which ph levels are rising today. It would be difficult for nature to compensate for these damages. Consequently, resulting in further reduction on the marine biodiversity, specifically, coral reefs. Aidan Coco Grace Miske Jingyi Li Ling Zheng
Read more
Group 5: We misidentified the metal as Iron, when it is in fact Zinc. This occurred because we calculated the volume incorrectly which thereby translated to the wrong density. In addition, we observed that the metal did not melt. Our metal also fell apart onto the table which could have been a sign of possible meltage. As for our mineral, we believed that it was quartz, when it was actually Fluorite. We did not believe it had dissolved into the test tube; however, it in fact was slightly soluble. The largest error we made, which would have helped us determine correctly what the quartz and the metal were, was incorrectly calculating the density. If we would have done this part correctly, we likely would have determined the correct mystery materials.
Read more