Surface of the oceans affects climate more than thought

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.tropos.de/en/current-issues/press-releases/details/surface-of-the-oceans-affects-climate-more-than-thought/

[font face=Serif][font size=5]Surface of the oceans affects climate more than thought[/font]

Leipzig, 30.09.2015
first detected abiotic source of isoprene

[font size=4]Lyon/ Leipzig. The oceans seem to produce significantly more isoprene, and consequently affect stronger the climate than previously thought. This emerges from a study by the Institute of Catalysis and Environment in Lyon (IRCELYON, CNRS / University Lyon 1) and the Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research (TROPOS), which had studied samples of the surface film in the laboratory. The results underline the global significance of the chemical processes at the border between ocean and atmosphere, write the researchers in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.[/font]

[font size=3]...

For the now published study, the research team took samples from the Norther Atlantic Ocean. The surface film was collected in the Raunefjord near Bergen in Norway. For this purpose, a glass plate is immersed in water and then again carefully pulled from the water. The 200 micron thin film sticks to the glass and is then scraped off with a wiper. The sample thus obtained is analyzed in the laboratory later. At the Institute of Catalysis and Environment in Lyon (IRCELYON), which belongs to the French research organization CNRS and the University of Lyon 1, the team investigated its photochemical properties during which collected samples were irradiated with light and the gases were analyzed: it became clear that isoprene was produced in magtnetudes that were previously attributed solely to plankton. "We were able for the first time trace back the production of this important aerosol precursor to abiotic sources, so far global calculations consider only biological sources," explains Dr. Christian George from IRCELYON.

Thus, it is now possible to estimate more closely the total amounts of isoprene, which are emitted. So far, however, local measurements indicated levels of about 0.3 megatonnes per year, global simulations of around 1.9 megatons per year. But the team of Lyon and Leipzig estimates that the newly discovered photochemical pathway alone contribute 0.2 to 3.5 megatons per year additionally and could explain the recent disagreements. "The existence of the organic films at the ocean surface due to biological activities therefore influences the exchange processes between air and sea in a unexpected strong way. The photochemical processes at this interface could be a very significant source of isoprene", summarizes Prof. Hartmut Herrmann from TROPOS.

The processes at the boundary between water and air are currently of great interest in science: In August, the team from the CNRS and TROPOS presented evidence in Scientific Reports, the open-access journal of Nature, that dissolved organic material in the surface film is strengthening the chemical conversion of saturated fatty acids into unsaturated gas phase products under the influence of sunlight. For the first time it was realized that these products have to be of biological origin not only, but also abiotic processes at the interface between two media have the potential to produce such molecules. In early September another team from Canada, the US, Great Britain and Germany showed in the journal Nature that organic material from the surface film of the oceans can be an important source for the formation of ice in clouds over remote regions of the North Atlantic, North Pacific and Southern Ocean. The recent publication of the teams from CNRS and TROPOS in Environmental Science & Technology provides indications how the climate models in the important details of the influence of isoprene could be improved. Because of the great importance this paper will be open access as "Editor's Choice". Tilo Arnhold

...[/font][/font]

[daleanime]

1. kick, kick, kick.....

[dumbcat]

2. Wait a minute! I thought 97% of scientists

already had this all figured out and that it was "settled science." Now they are telling me that there is new data and adjustments to models are necessary?

[haikugal]

3. You're making a joke right?

A sarcasm thing would help...

[dumbcat]

4. Making assumptions?

You know what they say about that.

[haikugal]

5. Did you miss the question mark or don't you understand punctuation?

[dumbcat]

6. You are absolutely correct

I read your question as an assumption and reacted wrongly. My apologies.

To answer your original question, no, I wasn't joking. But the point may have been too subtle for most. We'll see.

[haikugal]

7. Thank you..

You wrote..

2. Wait a minute! I thought 97% of scientists

already had this all figured out and that it was "settled science." Now they are telling me that there is new data and adjustments to models are necessary

You do realize that science is always gathering new data and that new data in this case in no way undermines the science and conclusions of 97% of scientist that support anthropogenic climate change?

This new data will enable them to model climate more accurately.

[kristopher]

8. The point wasn't subtle, it was wrongheaded.

You are attempting to express sarcasm reflecting your doubt about the degree of consensus on climate change. Since the article in the OP has absolutely no bearing on the degree of consensus on the existence of or the human culpability for climate change, the only thing your sarcasm demonstrated is that you don't know WTF you are talking about.

[dumbcat]

9. Now THAT'S an assumption

I think all will agree.