Remember me
▼ Content

Restoring Alkalinity to the Ocean



Page 5 of 5<<<345
RE: An unambiguous definition for "microplastics"11-05-2022 01:57
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
I am not seeing the problems you are.I have no faith in the media.Yesterday I read an article in the paper that started with everytime you walk on the beach you are walking on micro plastics.I was at Cottesloe and all I could see was sand.It went on to cry about all the reefs bleaching and they have not.Apparently if we vote in Labor and the green party it will all get better



Perhaps it would help if we had an unambiguous definition for "microplastics".

The "plastics" part is the material they are made of.

The "micro" part is in regard to particle size.

These microplastics are, by definition, microscopic.

This may help to explain why they are not visible to the naked eye on the beach.

They are everywhere now, including the food chain.
11-05-2022 02:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12599)
squeal over's sock wrote:These microplastics are, by definition, microscopic.

... or they don't exist in the first place, i.e. it's just the next panic ploy to spark fear of something unseen.

Yeah, I think that's what it is.

squeal over's sock wrote:This may help to explain why they are not visible to the naked eye on the beach.

... because they don't exist.

squeal over's sock wrote:They are everywhere now, including the food chain.

Why should any rational adult believe this?
RE: Next time you walk on the beach11-05-2022 02:39
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
I am not seeing the problems you are.I have no faith in the media.Yesterday I read an article in the paper that started with everytime you walk on the beach you are walking on micro plastics.I was at Cottesloe and all I could see was sand.It went on to cry about all the reefs bleaching and they have not.Apparently if we vote in Labor and the green party it will all get better




Next time you walk on the beach, you can do an experiment.

Walk up to the high water mark, where the waves went up the farthest at the last high tide.

Brush off the dry floaty stuff from the surface of the sand.

Collect a sample of sand from the top and take it home.

Put that sand in water and see what floats to the top.

Most microplastics are less dense than water.

Too small to see individual particles, you will see a faint cloud as the dusty little things float to the top.

If you can get a microscope, you can collect the fine dust that floated to the top, and you can see what microplastics look like.

There will be naturally occurring objects as well, and they tend to look natural.

And there will be odd shaped tiny fragments of plastic that don't look natural.
11-05-2022 02:49
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12599)
squeal over's sock wrote:
Put that sand in water and see what floats to the top. ... If you can get a microscope, you can collect the fine dust that floated to the top, and you can see what microplastics look like.

That won't be microplastics. I don't even think these "microplastics" even exist.

What you will find in beach sand is/are dissolved salts, proteins, fats and a bunch of dead algae. It's what makes ocean water foam. The stuff that makes ocean water foam of course gets into the sand.
RE: photos of marine microplastics from a credible source11-05-2022 05:58
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
I am not seeing the problems you are.I have no faith in the media.Yesterday I read an article in the paper that started with everytime you walk on the beach you are walking on micro plastics.I was at Cottesloe and all I could see was sand.It went on to cry about all the reefs bleaching and they have not.Apparently if we vote in Labor and the green party it will all get better



Photos of marine microplastics from a credible source.

Duncan61, you have displayed the ability to locate credible sources of information, such as the accurate description of what biogeochemistry is.

You gained my respect from the start as a member who does not feel the need to hurl personal insults.

More respect for the ability to rationally discern what constitutes objective evidence, versus absurd conspiracy theories or flat out anti reality lies.

There are credible sources for photos of marine microplastics.

They sure don't look like plankton, or anything else of biological origin.

Microplastics of all different colors, with randomly fractured edges.

Like little translucent pieces of colored glass.

Unlike anything Mother Nature puts in the sea.

Biogeochemistry might even be of some value here.

Some of our plastics would make good food for bacteria, if they could just make the right enzymes.

Some of our plastics don't have to be dehalogenated under anaerobic conditions before they can be edible.

They would provide the bug with a decent, energy yielding meal if they just had the right enzyme.

We've known how to selectively breed organisms for desired traits for thousands of years.

We've only had plastics in the environment for a few generations.
11-05-2022 07:44
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12599)
squeal over's sock wrote:Photos of marine microplastics from a credible source.

... because the source of a photograph is what matters, not the photograph itself.

One would have to be truly gullible to fall for this. Let's see if you get any takers.

squeal over's sock wrote:Duncan61, you have displayed the ability to locate credible sources of information, such as the accurate description of what biogeochemistry is.

He mindlessly copy-pasted.

squeal over's sock wrote:You gained my respect from the start as a member who ...

... will mindlessly copy-paste.

By the way, duncan hurls petty insults. Where have you been?

squeal over's sock wrote:More respect for the ability to rationally discern what constitutes objective evidence, versus absurd conspiracy theories or flat out anti reality lies.

Too funny! WACKY conspiracy theories are all duncan embraces. Science he denies on sight.

squeal over's sock wrote:There are credible sources for photos of marine microplastics.

They don't exist as you describe. Any "microplastics" in the ocean would be immediately broken down and poof! ... gone.

squeal over's sock wrote:They sure don't look like plankton, or anything else of biological origin.

Then it is a staged photo and not credible.

squeal over's sock wrote:Biogeochemistry might even be of some value here.

It might be of value to someone who needs that particular religion.

squeal over's sock wrote:Some of our plastics would make good food for bacteria, if they could just make the right enzymes.

The ocean will break it down. I would have thought that a professed preacher of biogeocarpentry would avoid underestimating the power of the ocean.

You should expand your understanding of nature.
11-05-2022 13:04
duncan61
★★★★★
(2003)
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions
11-05-2022 17:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
IBdaMann wrote:
The ocean will break it down. I would have thought that a professed preacher of biogeocarpentry would avoid underestimating the power of the ocean.

You should expand your understanding of nature.


It is ironic that this so-called 'expert' on bacteria can't figure out the bacteria that each such plastic in pretty short order. It's the same ones that eat oil slicks.

Yup. Poof...it's gone.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2022 20:38
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12599)
Into the Night wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
The ocean will break it down. I would have thought that a professed preacher of biogeocarpentry would avoid underestimating the power of the ocean.

You should expand your understanding of nature.


It is ironic that this so-called 'expert' on bacteria can't figure out the bacteria that each such plastic in pretty short order. It's the same ones that eat oil slicks.

Yup. Poof...it's gone.

Absolutely, but such bacteria is only one of the forces out there. The ocean's constant churning of the alkaline and saline water will destroy anything eventually.

But apparently, biogeocrybabies think plastic is somehow invulnerable.

.
11-05-2022 23:00
duncan61
★★★★★
(2003)
I had a magnificent lunch overlooking Cottesloe beach and all I could see is sand.I was reading the west paper and next to the letters page was an article on plastics in the ocean.It claimed when Australians pick up sand on the beach they are picking up micro plastics in the sand.I am going looking for this stuff.
RE: Give me some time for suggestions11-05-2022 23:44
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions



Give me some time for suggestions.

I would like to either look up or contemplate simple tests you could do at home with a sand sample from the high water mark. Such as a solvent you might have at home that dissolves plastic, but not the naturally occurring objects that floated to the top.

A few more thoughts.

Not all of the components in an oil spill are less dense than water.

The black carbon that gets separated out as petroleum coke is MORE dense than water.

After the last big oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, two contaminant plumes were monitored.

One was floating on the surface, blown by the wind, and carried by the surface current.

The other was snaking its way along the seafloor. Heavy with black carbon, this part of the oil spill sank to the bottom, where currents flow differently than at the surface, and gravity pulled the stuff downhill along the paths of least resistance along the seafloor.

Some bacteria have been successfully bred to degrade many of the alkanes in petroleum.

All alkanes have the same basic chemical formula, C(n)H(2n +2).

Methane, CH4 = C(n)H(2n+2) up to the paraffins C(100)H(202).

The chains vary in length, but their chemistry along the way is uniform.

All single bonds, either C-C or C-H.

So, selectively breeding for one good enzyme wasn't so tough.

Plastics are another story. Lots of C=C double bonds. Depending on the plastic, other ingredients such as oxygen, halogens, etc.

An alkane degrading enzyme can't touch them.

Polyethylene and polypropylene might be the easiest ones to start with, as far as accelerating the evolution of new enzymes go.

Then, the bacteria can do the clean up work for us, if it turns out that the "problem" is not imaginary.

The halogenated xenobiotics are a tougher nut to crack, but much successful work has been done by creating extreme reducing conditions and utilizing bacteria that can perform reductive dehalogenation, when provided with carbohydrate or other energy-rich organic carbon food source.

Then upon return to aerobic oxidizing conditions, other bacteria easily clean up the leftovers.
11-05-2022 23:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
The ocean will break it down. I would have thought that a professed preacher of biogeocarpentry would avoid underestimating the power of the ocean.

You should expand your understanding of nature.


It is ironic that this so-called 'expert' on bacteria can't figure out the bacteria that each such plastic in pretty short order. It's the same ones that eat oil slicks.

Yup. Poof...it's gone.

Absolutely, but such bacteria is only one of the forces out there. The ocean's constant churning of the alkaline and saline water will destroy anything eventually.

But apparently, biogeocrybabies think plastic is somehow invulnerable.

.

UV light also breaks down all plastics, although polymerization of some plastics can be triggered by exposure to UVa light.

So-called 'microplastics' just means more surface area for such light to break it down. It is no longer plastic.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 11-05-2022 23:57
12-05-2022 00:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
[quote]duncan61 wrote:
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions



Give me some time for suggestions.

I would like to either look up or contemplate simple tests you could do at home with a sand sample from the high water mark. Such as a solvent you might have at home that dissolves plastic, but not the naturally occurring objects that floated to the top.

A few more thoughts.

Not all of the components in an oil spill are less dense than water.
Im a BM wrote:
The black carbon that gets separated out as petroleum coke is MORE dense than water.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
After the last big oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, two contaminant plumes were monitored.

One was floating on the surface, blown by the wind, and carried by the surface current.

The other was snaking its way along the seafloor. Heavy with black carbon, this part of the oil spill sank to the bottom, where currents flow differently than at the surface, and gravity pulled the stuff downhill along the paths of least resistance along the seafloor.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Some bacteria have been successfully bred to degrade many of the alkanes in petroleum.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
All alkanes have the same basic chemical formula, C(n)H(2n +2).

Methane, CH4 = C(n)H(2n+2) up to the paraffins C(100)H(202).

The chains vary in length, but their chemistry along the way is uniform.

All single bonds, either C-C or C-H.

So, selectively breeding for one good enzyme wasn't so tough.

Plastics are another story. Lots of C=C double bonds. Depending on the plastic, other ingredients such as oxygen, halogens, etc.

An alkane degrading enzyme can't touch them.

Polyethylene and polypropylene might be the easiest ones to start with, as far as accelerating the evolution of new enzymes go.

Then, the bacteria can do the clean up work for us, if it turns out that the "problem" is not imaginary.

The halogenated xenobiotics are a tougher nut to crack, but much successful work has been done by creating extreme reducing conditions and utilizing bacteria that can perform reductive dehalogenation, when provided with carbohydrate or other energy-rich organic carbon food source.

Then upon return to aerobic oxidizing conditions, other bacteria easily clean up the leftovers.

Still denying that bacteria eats plastic, eh? What a moron.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: maybe add one drop of gasoline12-05-2022 00:02
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions



maybe add one drop of gasoline.

Gasoline is almost 100% heptane and octane.

These two alkanes are basically inert for spontaneous chemical reactions other than combustion with oxygen.

They are also pretty good solvents for polyethylene and polypropylene.

So, if you can get a good look at a slide under a microscope, first get a good look at all the visible objects.

Add one drop of gasoline and wait a while.

Put the cover slide back on and see how many of them dissolved.
12-05-2022 00:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions



maybe add one drop of gasoline.

Gasoline is almost 100% heptane and octane.

These two alkanes are basically inert for spontaneous chemical reactions other than combustion with oxygen.

They are also pretty good solvents for polyethylene and polypropylene.

So, if you can get a good look at a slide under a microscope, first get a good look at all the visible objects.

Add one drop of gasoline and wait a while.

Put the cover slide back on and see how many of them dissolved.

Must be why we use polyethylene fuel tanks.

What a moron. You obviously don't know the first thing about plastics.
Gasoline is not pure heptane and octane. Obviously you don't know the first thing about petroleum products.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 12-05-2022 00:08
RE: gasoline will dissolve many microplastics12-05-2022 00:42
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
Im a BM wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions



maybe add one drop of gasoline.

Gasoline is almost 100% heptane and octane.

These two alkanes are basically inert for spontaneous chemical reactions other than combustion with oxygen.

They are also pretty good solvents for polyethylene and polypropylene.

So, if you can get a good look at a slide under a microscope, first get a good look at all the visible objects.

Add one drop of gasoline and wait a while.

Put the cover slide back on and see how many of them dissolved.



The off the cuff suggestion certainly applies to polyethylene and polystyrene.

One drop of gasoline will dissolve these two common plastics, and others.

Polypropylene and polyurethane, not so much...

The color from the dissolved plastic, if they had color added, will bleed out.

There should be a visible difference under the microscope. Fewer particles, and more color in the matrix.

And if I do what I said and give it more thought and look up a few things, there are other simple things you could try at home.
RE: 1 drop gasoline and 1 drop nail polish remover12-05-2022 01:40
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
I had a magnificent lunch overlooking Cottesloe beach and all I could see is sand.I was reading the west paper and next to the letters page was an article on plastics in the ocean.It claimed when Australians pick up sand on the beach they are picking up micro plastics in the sand.I am going looking for this stuff.


Just so you know that I'm taking your question seriously.

And because I'd love to think up a triple cocktail of the kind of solvents one can find at home so that anyone else who is interested could try it.

Nail polish remover is most often acetone.

Acetone also dissolves many plastics, PVDF, polycarbonate, polysulfone, cast acrylic, PVC, and CPVC, among others.

The combo of gasoline and acetone will dissolve a wider array of plastics.

Now, to find a third household solvent to dissolve some of the others.
12-05-2022 01:53
duncan61
★★★★★
(2003)
I have plumbing cleaning fluid. It takes the shine of of uPVC pipes before the solvent is applied. I will put the sand in a steel bowl then fill it up with cleaner and let it evaporate. The plastic may coagulate and be a lump at the bottom of the bowl.
12-05-2022 03:15
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
Sealover
I will be there tomorrow so I will take a sample and do what you have described.I am confident with the size of the ocean V the amount of plastic claimed I may struggle to find anything conclusive

I like this forum and its not personnel to me.It affects my life not at all.Thank you for suggesting field work I had not considered.If I find nothing I will send a sample to a lab.Suggestions



maybe add one drop of gasoline.

Gasoline is almost 100% heptane and octane.

These two alkanes are basically inert for spontaneous chemical reactions other than combustion with oxygen.

They are also pretty good solvents for polyethylene and polypropylene.

So, if you can get a good look at a slide under a microscope, first get a good look at all the visible objects.

Add one drop of gasoline and wait a while.

Put the cover slide back on and see how many of them dissolved.



The off the cuff suggestion certainly applies to polyethylene and polystyrene.

One drop of gasoline will dissolve these two common plastics, and others.

Polypropylene and polyurethane, not so much...

The color from the dissolved plastic, if they had color added, will bleed out.

There should be a visible difference under the microscope. Fewer particles, and more color in the matrix.

And if I do what I said and give it more thought and look up a few things, there are other simple things you could try at home.

Did you know that gasoline tanks are made of polyethylene?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
12-05-2022 03:17
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I had a magnificent lunch overlooking Cottesloe beach and all I could see is sand.I was reading the west paper and next to the letters page was an article on plastics in the ocean.It claimed when Australians pick up sand on the beach they are picking up micro plastics in the sand.I am going looking for this stuff.


Just so you know that I'm taking your question seriously.

And because I'd love to think up a triple cocktail of the kind of solvents one can find at home so that anyone else who is interested could try it.

Nail polish remover is most often acetone.

Acetone also dissolves many plastics, PVDF, polycarbonate, polysulfone, cast acrylic, PVC, and CPVC, among others.

The combo of gasoline and acetone will dissolve a wider array of plastics.

Now, to find a third household solvent to dissolve some of the others.

Heat it, and you'll have Dip.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: solvents to dissolve plastic but require high temperature12-05-2022 03:33
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
duncan61 wrote:
I have plumbing cleaning fluid. It takes the shine of of uPVC pipes before the solvent is applied. I will put the sand in a steel bowl then fill it up with cleaner and let it evaporate. The plastic may coagulate and be a lump at the bottom of the bowl.



Hi duncan61

I'm not real big on recycling plastic.

It would be better not to make most of it in the first place.

The TV ads hyping how great the plastic recycling is for the world usually forget to mention that they only catch a very small fraction, less than 10%, of the total.

The sure fire techniques to dissolve plastics such as polyethylene and polypropylene generally require about 160 degrees Centigrade to work.

You probably don't have any xylene or 1, 2, 4 - trichlorobenzene at home.

But it's a chance to preach about the hazards of recycling plastic.

In the 1980s, before plastic waste was everywhere...

Some poor folks in poor countries did this at home.

They collected plastic waste, washed it, and dried it.

Then they added their non polar or chlorinated benzene solvent and heated it up, breathing poison in the process.

The "melted" (dissolved) plastic could then be molded into wash basins, etc.

I watched a guy get sick while doing it.

I'll get back to you with more ideas for home experiments.
12-05-2022 05:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I have plumbing cleaning fluid. It takes the shine of of uPVC pipes before the solvent is applied. I will put the sand in a steel bowl then fill it up with cleaner and let it evaporate. The plastic may coagulate and be a lump at the bottom of the bowl.



Hi duncan61

I'm not real big on recycling plastic.

It would be better not to make most of it in the first place.

The TV ads hyping how great the plastic recycling is for the world usually forget to mention that they only catch a very small fraction, less than 10%, of the total.

The sure fire techniques to dissolve plastics such as polyethylene and polypropylene generally require about 160 degrees Centigrade to work.

You probably don't have any xylene or 1, 2, 4 - trichlorobenzene at home.

But it's a chance to preach about the hazards of recycling plastic.

In the 1980s, before plastic waste was everywhere...

Some poor folks in poor countries did this at home.

They collected plastic waste, washed it, and dried it.

Then they added their non polar or chlorinated benzene solvent and heated it up, breathing poison in the process.

The "melted" (dissolved) plastic could then be molded into wash basins, etc.

I watched a guy get sick while doing it.

I'll get back to you with more ideas for home experiments.

You make up stories faster than the Irish.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Halogenated xenobiotics in the ocean12-05-2022 06:19
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
Halogenated xenobiotics in the ocean.

Much attention is being paid to plastics in the ocean.

Some of these plastics, such as PVC (poly vinyl chloride), are very difficult to degrade because their molecular structure contains halogens such as chlorine.

Halogens include fluorine, chlorine, bromine, and iodine.

Many of the halogenated xenobiotics that humans have put in the ocean are not plastics.

Take DDT as a case study.

DDT is an insecticide that was once widely used in agriculture and other pest control.

Birds up the food chain, after feeding on insects and other critters that had sublethal doses of DDT in their bodies, ending up laying brittle eggs and bird populations plummeted.

Rachel Carson wrote the famous book "Silent Spring" about it.

She was wrong in her prediction that DDT would prove toxic to human beings.

The use of DDT in malaria control was never banned. Indeed, impoverished nations could still receive it free of charge.

As malaria vectors became resistant to DDT, its use was discontinued many places. Far better biological control methods are available.

But lacing mosquito tents with DDT is still very effective to protect people.

Okay, DDT is a halogenated xenobiotic. It has five chlorine atoms in its structure.

These chlorine atoms make it very difficult to degrade.

Some of the degradation products, such as DDMU, are toxic to humans where DDT is not.

Case study of DDT in the ocean.

Tons of DDT ended up in barrels on the sea floor off the coast of southern California. They were put there on purpose and they are still a problem.

Other tons of DDT ended up in the ocean sediments of the San Francisco Bay around the Port of Richmond, in northern California.

They were not put there on purpose.

It was the major loading center for DDT exports, and a lot of little accidents had deposited a lot of it in the water.

What to do about it?

Some say leave well enough alone. It's not going anywhere and it is more or less sealed off in sea floor sediments.

But they needed to dredge for port improvements so they couldn't just ignore the stuff.

One approach they attempted with partial success in the laboratory was to use a "white rot" fungus to treat the sediments.

White rot fungi can degrade lignin, which is no easy feat.

They only do so when they are desperate for nitrogen.

Tearing up the lignin costs a lot of energy, but it releases nitrogen from ligno-protein complexes.

So, they fed the fungi carbohydrate, starved it for nitrogen, and put it to work on the sediments.

They were able to tear up some of the DDT, but it proved to be relatively ineffective as a practical remediation measure.

The approach that worked better was to do something similar with bacteria.

Under extreme low oxygen, chemically reducing conditions, these bacteria use the halogen (chlorine) as oxidant to acquire energy from the oxidation of organic carbon.

They have to be fed carbohydrate from an outside source, but they can do it and do it well.

Then let oxygen come back into the sediments and other bacteria will degrade the leftovers.
12-05-2022 18:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
Halogenated xenobiotics in the ocean.

Much attention is being paid to plastics in the ocean.

Some of these plastics, such as PVC (poly vinyl chloride), are very difficult to degrade because their molecular structure contains halogens such as chlorine.

Halogens include fluorine, chlorine, bromine, and iodine.

Many of the halogenated xenobiotics that humans have put in the ocean are not plastics.

Buzzword fallacies.
Im a BM wrote:
Take DDT as a case study.

DDT is an insecticide that was once widely used in agriculture and other pest control.

Birds up the food chain, after feeding on insects and other critters that had sublethal doses of DDT in their bodies, ending up laying brittle eggs and bird populations plummeted.

Fiction. It was a contrived 'experiment' done for political purposes.
Im a BM wrote:
Rachel Carson wrote the famous book "Silent Spring" about it.

A work of fiction.
Im a BM wrote:
She was wrong in her prediction that DDT would prove toxic to human beings.

The use of DDT in malaria control was never banned.
...deleted fiction and spam...

Yes it was in many countries. Many people died because of the ban.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Alkalinity - The Basics15-08-2022 00:52
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
Alkalinity - The Basics

Alkalinity is NOT a measurement of pH.

Alkalinity (a noun) is NOT synonymous with "alkaline" (an adjective).

Alkalinity is the measurement of acid neutralizing capacity (ANC).

Alkalinity is reported as moles of protons per liter that can be neutralized.

Alkalinity is also reported as grams of calcium carbonate equivalents, per liter.

Since one mole of calcium carbonate weighs about 100 grams, and can neutralize TWO moles of protons, the conversion factor is 50.

Acid neutralizing capacity times 50 = grams per liter calcium carbonate equivalents.

CaCO3 equivalents grams per liter divided by 50 = moles of ANC per liter.

The overwhelming majority of alkalinity in sea water arises from bicarbonate ions - HCO3(-) Each bicarbonate ion can neutralize one proton to become carbonic acid - H2CO3.

The second biggest player, in much smaller amounts, is carbonate ion - CO3(2-)

Carbonate can neutralize a proton to become bicarbonate, and a second to become carbonic acid.

Other oxyanions in sea water, such as borate and phosphate, also supply a tiny fraction of the total alkalinity in sea water.

Hydroxide ion - OH(-) provides the smallest fraction of all to total alkalinity in sea water, but provides 100% of the alkalinity in pure water.

Pure water is not alkaline, but it does provide alkalinity.

With pH 7, pure water contains 0.0000001 moles per liter ANC, as hydroxide ion.

One contributor to sea water alkalinity that is finally getting attention is ORGANIC alkalinity.

Organic alkalinity is the acid neutralizing capacity that arises from anions of deprotonated organic acids.

Organic alkalinity can comprise 25% of the total alkalinity in submarine groundwater discharge from coastal wetlands.

Among their many properties, organic anions can form stable complexes with ions of ferric iron - Fe(III), or ferrous iron - Fe(II), that are soluble at sea water pH. The bioavailability of iron in sea water is highly dependent on organic alkalinity.

Ocean "acidification" is an unfortunate misnomer because it implies that the ocean is becoming "acidic" (pH < 7), which is not the case.

The severe depletion of sea water alkalinity due to increased emissions of carbon dioxide causes only minimal decrease in pH due to the buffering effect of bicarbonate and carbonate ions.

On the other hand, it DOES cause significant decrease in the bioavailability of carbonate ions which organisms need for shell formation.

Commercial marine aquaculture already has to supply manmade alkalinity so that oyster farms, etc., can continue to produce.


sealover wrote:
Submarine groundwater discharge from coastal wetlands is the major source of alkalinity for many marine ecosystems.

In the low-oxygen, organic carbon-rich wetland sediment, bacteria use sulfate as oxidant to acquire energy from organic carbon. Sulfate reduction by bacteria generates alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized (inorganic) carbon product.

Three different approaches are offered to engineer coastal wetlands to increase their output of alkalinity to neutralize ocean acidification.

As only one file can be attached, let's start with a good one.
RE: Alkalinity generation in coastal wetlands15-08-2022 01:20
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
Alkalinity generation in coastal wetlands

Under low oxygen conditions, bacteria can use other electron acceptors (oxidants) to oxidize organic carbon and derive metabolic energy.

When oxygen (O2) is used as the electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon, the products are carbon dioxide and water.

Carbon dioxide absorbed by sea water is the source of weak acid (carbonic acid) that is depleting the alkalinity of the ocean.

When bacteria use other oxidants under low oxygen conditions to oxidize organic carbon, such as sulfate, nitrate, ferric iron, or manganese(IV), it does NOT generate carbon dioxide as the product.

Instead, these microbial reduction reactions generate ALKALINITY (bicarbonate or carbonate ions) as the oxidized (inorganic) carbon product.

Why the difference?

Using sulfate - SO4(2-) for comparison.

The oxygen atoms in oxygen gas are in a chemically OXIDIZED state.

At great energetic expense, photosynthesis ripped an electron off a water molecule to generate hydrogen and oxidized oxygen (O2).

When the oxidized oxygen atom is the oxidant, carbon dioxide is the product.

Sulfate is another story.

The four oxygen atoms in sulfate are in a chemically REDUCED state.

They do not act as oxidant because they are already reduced.

It is the sulfur atom in sulfate that is in a chemically oxidized state.

It is the sulfur that get reduced to hydrogen sulfide, pyrite, etc. in order to oxidize the organic carbon.

The oxygen that gets added to the organic carbon is already reduced, and the inorganic carbon product carries the extra electrons as anion charge in bicarbonate or carbonate ions.

On a global scale, microbial sulfate reduction is the largest source of alkalinity entering the ocean as submarine groundwater discharge.

In some environments, enough nitrate is present that microbial nitrate reduction under low oxygen conditions is another major source.

Microbial reduction of ferric iron (to become ferrous iron) or manganese (IV) (to become manganese (II) are usually second after microbial reduction of sulfate as the source of alkalinity from wetlands.

"Pyrite burial" is the term often used to describe the alkalinity generating process.

Iron pyrite is formed when microbial reduction of ferric iron generates ferrous iron, and microbial reduction of sulfate generates sulfide, and the dissolved ions form the solid mineral pyrite.

Conversely, when wetlands are drained, the buried pyrite is exposed to oxygen.

Microbial oxidation of pyrite using oxygen (O2) generates sulfuric acid.

The amount of (sulfuric acid) acidity generated by pyrite oxidation is equal to the amount of alkalinity generated by pyrite burial during microbial sulfate reduction.

Whereas intact wetlands are a net source of alkalinity to the sea, drained wetlands become a net source of acidity to the sea due to pyrite oxidation.


sealover wrote:
Submarine groundwater discharge from coastal wetlands is the major source of alkalinity for many marine ecosystems.

In the low-oxygen, organic carbon-rich wetland sediment, bacteria use sulfate as oxidant to acquire energy from organic carbon. Sulfate reduction by bacteria generates alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized (inorganic) carbon product.

Three different approaches are offered to engineer coastal wetlands to increase their output of alkalinity to neutralize ocean acidification.

As only one file can be attached, let's start with a good one.
RE: This post was a "veiled attack"?02-09-2022 20:32
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
sealover wrote:
Submarine groundwater discharge from coastal wetlands is the major source of alkalinity for many marine ecosystems.

In the low-oxygen, organic carbon-rich wetland sediment, bacteria use sulfate as oxidant to acquire energy from organic carbon. Sulfate reduction by bacteria generates alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized (inorganic) carbon product.

Three different approaches are offered to engineer coastal wetlands to increase their output of alkalinity to neutralize ocean acidification.

As only one file can be attached, let's start with a good one.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was my first post, a little less than six months ago.

That's how I know there were 1587 members at the time.

Earlier today, this post was described by the dominant troll:

"You(r) first post was a veiled attack on the posters of this site who think independently..."

Hmmm...

Within hours of this first post, the dominant troll said:

"You are a liar. You came to this site to preach non-science gibber babble."

Well, it's only natural to be offended by such a "veiled attack".

Calling someone a "liar" is a very low form of "debate".

Posting a map to a member's home and providing names of that member's family is an even sleazier way to win a "debate" about science.

And the website owner really doesn't give a shit.

That is probably the single biggest reason that fewer than 16 out of 1619 members have posted more than twice in the last six months.
02-09-2022 20:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19346)
Im a BM wrote:
sealover wrote:
Submarine groundwater discharge from coastal wetlands is the major source of alkalinity for many marine ecosystems.

In the low-oxygen, organic carbon-rich wetland sediment, bacteria use sulfate as oxidant to acquire energy from organic carbon. Sulfate reduction by bacteria generates alkalinity, rather than carbon dioxide, as the oxidized (inorganic) carbon product.

Three different approaches are offered to engineer coastal wetlands to increase their output of alkalinity to neutralize ocean acidification.

As only one file can be attached, let's start with a good one.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was my first post, a little less than six months ago.

That's how I know there were 1587 members at the time.

Earlier today, this post was described by the dominant troll:

"You(r) first post was a veiled attack on the posters of this site who think independently..."

Hmmm...

Within hours of this first post, the dominant troll said:

"You are a liar. You came to this site to preach non-science gibber babble."

Well, it's only natural to be offended by such a "veiled attack".

Calling someone a "liar" is a very low form of "debate".

Posting a map to a member's home and providing names of that member's family is an even sleazier way to win a "debate" about science.

And the website owner really doesn't give a shit.

That is probably the single biggest reason that fewer than 16 out of 1619 members have posted more than twice in the last six months.

YOU told him your name. YOU told him who you are. YOU have only yourself to blame. YOU started a sock account. YOU AGAIN told him who you are.

You DISCARD science. You discard the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law, acid-base chemistry, oxy-reduction chemistry, and spew gibberbabble as 'science'.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 02-09-2022 20:52
02-09-2022 21:56
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12599)
Im a BM wrote:Posting a map to a member's home and providing names of that member's family is an even sleazier way to win a "debate" about science.

I don't recall anyone posting a map to your home and providing names of your family members. You must be confusing someone on this site with someone else on the internet who read your published information.

Im a BM wrote:And the website owner really doesn't give a shit.

The website owner gives you wide latitude in posting your own personal information on the internet. You're correct that he doesn't care what you publish about yourself on other sites.

Im a BM wrote:That is probably the single biggest reason that fewer than 16 out of 1619 members have posted more than twice in the last six months.

Nope. The reason many people lurk and the reason for normal website "turnover" is a question of standard statistics. There's no mystery here.


.
RE: "dissolved organic nitrogen" real world science I can be proud of03-10-2022 01:12
Im a BM
★★☆☆☆
(199)
IBdaMann wrote:
sealover wrote: one more attempt to attach a file
Let's see if it let me attach the pdf file


I'll attach the abstract. The parts in red are just boolsch't. The underlined phrases are the calls for greater funding and greater government control while downplaying any need to provide specifics.

Submarine groundwater discharge (SGD) links terrestrial and marine systems, but has often been overlooked in coastal nutrient budgets because it is difficult to quantify. In this Review, we examine SGD nutrient fluxes in over 200 locations globally, explain their impact on biogeochemistry and discuss broader management implications. SGD nutrient fluxes exceed river inputs in ~60% of study sites, with median total SGD fluxes of 6.0 mmol m−2 per day for dissolved inorganic nitrogen, 0.1 mmol m−2 per day for dissolved inorganic phosphorus and 6.5 mmol m−2 per day for dissolved silicate. SGD nitrogen input (mostly in the form of ammonium and dissolved organic nitrogen) often mitigates nitrogen limitation in coastal waters, since SGD tends to have high nitrogen concentrations relative to phosphorus (76% of studies showed N
values above the Redfield ratio
). It is notable that most investigations do not distinguish saline and fresh SGD, although they have different properties. Saline SGD is a ubiquitous, diffuse pathway releasing mostly recycled nutrients to global coastal waters, whereas fresh SGD is occasionally a local, point source of new nutrients. SGD-derived nutrient fluxes must be considered in water quality management plans, as these inputs can promote eutrophication if not properly managed.


A casual glance will reveal that this document is intended to say absolutely nothing while filling the mandatory quota of white space with text. The thesis statement, i.e. that greater funding and control are required in this area, is pushed by fear, of course. This document seeks to engender a panic surrounding the flourishing of plants and algaes that might happen if this funding and control are not increased per this alarm warning. Did you catch that? The threat is possible "eutrophication", i.e. that plants and algaes might flourish.

sealover, the first line of the abstract says that SGD links terrestrial and marine systems. Does that mean that SGD links Army tactical vehicles to Navy aircraft carriers? ... or does it link terrestrial data centers with ocean drilling platforms?




This was one of the first responses to my very first post.

It begins with an unsourced cut and past abstract of perfectly valid science.

This is followed by bizarre anti scientific analysis from the dominant troll.

"This document seeks to engender panic.."

The "scientific" analysis is purely political, if not simply delusional.

However, the abstract contains something the fills me with pride.

It mentions that "..ammonium and dissolved organic nitrogen.." were the main forms of nitrogen in submarine groundwater discharge.

A search of scientific papers reveals that prior to 1995, the term "dissolved organic nitrogen" appears in the title of just three papers.

One of them was my own, "Determination of dissolved organic nitrogen using persulfate oxidation..." (1994, Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis).

We developed a new method to measure dissolved organic nitrogen because the classic Kjeldahl digest was too cumbersome, slow, dangerous, and inaccurate.

But dissolved organic nitrogen didn't really get much attention until after 1995.

That was the year I published the paper in the journal Nature.

The first sentence was:

"The importance of dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) in ecosystem nutrient fluxes and plant nutrition is only beginning to be appreciated."

The same issue of Nature (1995) includes a review article about the significance of my paper:

"New cog in the nitrogen cycle". (easy to look up with just those words)

Before that, virtually nobody was even trying to measure dissolved organic nitrogen in waters (soil water, ground water, surface water)

They knew that it existed as a theoretical component, but assumed it was negligible.

It is now standard fare to include measure of dissolved organic nitrogen, in addition to nitrate, ammonium, and sometimes nitrite, in water samples.

Otherwise they miss what is often a major component of the total nitrogen.

So, I am very proud of this contribution I made to real world science.

Persulfate oxidation has also now largely replaced the Kjeldahl digest to measure organic nitrogen. Something else I am proud of.

But I am MOST proud that OTHER discoveries I published are frequently cited in newer work related to climate change.

For example, the importance of plant polyphenols (tannins) for sequestration of carbon into stable organic matter with very long mean residence time in soil.

For example, the importance of plant polyphenols for minimizing the emission of nitrous oxide, a very powerful greenhouse gas.

For example, the importance of plant mycorrhizal associations for facilitating the sequestration of carbon and minimizing nitrous oxide emissions.

None of the local trolls displayed any interest
03-10-2022 01:26
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12599)
Im a BM wrote:However, the abstract contains something the fills me with pride.

Yes, it mentions a paper you wrote filled with undefined buzzwords.

You like to do that, i.e. say absolutely nothing through a litany of undefined terms.
Page 5 of 5<<<345





Join the debate Restoring Alkalinity to the Ocean:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Geoengineering to Neutralize Ocean Acidification18828-08-2022 22:39
Climate Change and Ocean Acidification Science - how to find "sealover" posts1318-08-2022 06:25
Nitrate Reduction - Powerful Greenhouse Gas Emission AND Alkalinity8812-05-2022 03:11
CO2 ocean uptake30622-02-2021 04:08
The Atlantic Ocean Is Growing2530-01-2021 03:11
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact