New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Some Coral Should Produce Shells in Acidifying Ocean

Of four common corals and algae tested, three still produced shells in conditions that mimic oceans if atmospheric CO2 concentrations reached 1,000 ppm. David Biello reports
 

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.


The oceans are turning more acidic. Surface waters absorb carbon dioxide produced by the burning of fossil fuels. And those CO2 molecules react with the seawater to make carbonic acid.
 
Voilà, a more acidic ocean.
 
That's big trouble for tiny plants and animals in the sea that make shells. Because more acidic water makes it harder to produce those shells. And once the shells do form, the more acidic water also corrodes the shells. Many marine biologists have thus been anxious that climate change may mean an end to coral reefs.
 
But a set of experiments undertaken in Hawaii, Moorea and Okinawa give new hope, at least in the Pacific.
 
Four common corals and algae were subjected to conditions that mimic oceans if CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere reached 1,000 ppm, more than double the levels today. And three out of the four could still easily form their hard calcium shells even in such a more acidic ocean. [Steeve Comeau et al, Pacific-wide contrast highlights resistance of reef calcifiers to ocean acidification, in Proceedings of the Royal Society B]
 
That doesn't mean ocean acidification won't be bad for corals and algae. But it does mean that across the Pacific some of these organisms can tough it out. Whether other organisms, including us humans, could thrive in a 1,000 ppm CO2 world is another question.
 
—David Biello
 
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

[*Clarification (7/31/14): This transcript was edited to reflect a rebroadcast of the original podcast to clarify phrasing and terminology in the original script, which inadvertently created the impression ocean water is acid rather than that it is largely neutral but becoming more acidic.]


 

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