New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions to Protect Clean Water

The U.S. EPA is considering stiffening standards for the ocean acidification caused by rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


U.S. EPA is weighing a revision of standards aimed at preventing the acidification of marine waters.

The effort marks the first time EPA has invoked the Clean Water Act to address ocean acidification, and comes in response to a 2007 petition from the Center for Biological Diversity. The center noted that EPA has failed to update the pH standard since 1976 and has ignored research published since then.

Concerns about ocean acidification have risen lately, as research shows a link between it and rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Studies show that oceans absorb about 22 million tons of CO2 per day from the atmosphere, resulting in increasing acidity that impairs marine animals' ability to build and maintain protective shells and skeletons and threatens coral reefs.

The agency moved toward stiffening marine pH standards in a Federal Register notice [pdf] seeking information on possible changes in ocean acidity.

Miyoko Sakashita, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity's ocean program, described the notice as a step in the right direction.

"The federal government has finally acknowledged that ocean acidification is a threat," she said in a statement. "Now it must take the next step and fully implement the Clean Water Act to protect our nation's waters from 'the other CO2 problem.'"

The center says EPA's recommended pH criterion is an important benchmark for states and tribes. A stricter recommendation could potentially help promote the imposition of federal CO2 controls.

The center also asked EPA to publish a guidance providing recommendations to states on preventing ocean acidification.

"We must take immediate action to address ocean acidification, or the impacts will be catastrophic," Sakashita said. "Fortunately, we need not wait for new legislation addressing CO2 emissions, as the Clean Water Act already provides us with important tools to confront this problem."

Stakeholders will have 60 days to submit ocean acidification data to the agency. EPA plans to decide whether the pH standards should be revised within one year.

Reprinted from Greenwire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. www.eenews.net, 202-628-6500

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe