highwaystar101 said:
First off, wouldn't messing with the temperature of the ocean in such a way be tampering with the thermohalene circulation of the oceans too much? (The circulation of salt water driven by heat). Thermohalene circulation is essential to life. If you planted one of these tubes and it interrupted the circulation of salt water causing a "shut down", then it would ravage life in the ocean, and, subsequently, us. A shutdown would happen if you made the water either too hot or too cold. It wouldn't matter if the surface temperatures were more moderate at the surface or not if this were to happen, life would die. For completeness sake on this point it is probably worth mentioning that thermohalene circulation shutdown is also a postulated effect of global warming too, and if this were to become a serious threat, then yes, your idea might need to be implemented then to try and counteract it. But a real, real threat would need to be be posed before we even consider doing this. Second, when CO2 dissolves in the surface water it can become carbonic acid, and this has already lead to a 0.1PH increase in ocean acidity since the indstrial revolution just from the CO2 emissions we've released into the atmosphere being absorbed by the ocean. If the ocean becomes too acidic, again it would kill life. This is what's already killing the corals. There is a natural absorbtion rate for CO2 in the ocean, and yes this does mitigate some of the supposed effects of climate change, but doing this on too large a scale could also harm ocean life on a massive scale. Going out of our way to actually make the ocean absorb more CO2 at the surface than it presently does, like you said, seems a little silly to me to say the least. |
BALLOW!
Like I said (well, I didn't... but I should of), I'm nowhere near an expert on these matters... I just thought this idea seemed awesome. I've never heard of all this "thermohalene circulation" lark... but words that long are seldom not important.
