Fish can slow down global warming—but not if we keep eating them

I think this is the right forum. Mods move if not. According to this article, we are destroying the very thing which works to keep the atmosphere in balance because we eat it. Apparently, there's a system in place where Phytoplankton absord or "eat" CO2 then those plants are eaten by the middle level fish. Those Middle level fish are eaten by the lower level fish "deep sea fish" and that's how the CO2 completes its journey into the depths of the deep sea.

In fact, bottom-dwellers transfer more than a million tonnes of CO2 a year from surface waters of the UK and Ireland, helpfully storing between €8 million and €14 million ($10.9 million and $19 million) a year in carbon credit value, says a new study (paywall) by a University of Southampton team. Killing too many of those fishes, as well as the ones they feed on, risks damaging the ocean’s ability to store carbon, leaving more CO2 in the atmosphere.

It's a pretty interesting read for all of you scientists here at ATS. I think it's important information. What says ATS?

qz.com...

But I like to eat fish. Can't we just plant more trees, I don't eat trees. I will burn their dead in a ritual in my woodstove though.

Wikipedia - Ocean Fertilization

This lead Martin to speculate that increased iron concentrations in the oceans could partly explain past ice ages.[13] This experiment was followed up by a much larger field experiment (IRONEX I) where 445 kg of iron was added to a patch of ocean near the Galápagos Islands. The levels of phytoplankton increased three times in the area where the iron had been added.[14] The success of this experiment and others has led to proposals to use this technique to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere on a commercial basis.[15]

Sperm whales act as agents of iron fertilisation when they transport iron from the deep ocean to the surface during prey consumption and defecation. Sperm whales have been shown to increase the levels of primary production and carbon export to the deep ocean by depositing iron rich faeces into surface waters of the Southern Ocean. The iron rich faeces causes phytoplankton to grow and take up more carbon from the atmosphere. When the phytoplankton dies, it sinks to the deep ocean and takes the atmospheric carbon with it. By reducing the abundance of sperm whales in the Southern Ocean, whaling has resulted in an extra 2 million tonnes of carbon remaining in the atmosphere each year.[16]

I don't know that fish are a requirement.

I'm not sure how much fish we catch and then throw away but I bet it's a lot. Ok - just looked it up. It's 1/4 of all fish that goes to market - actually going to landfill, and countless more accidental fish caught but thrown back dead. I'm thinking that is a whole lot of fish, and maybe enough in and of itself to keep the oceans healthy if not wasted.

I don't agree with adding stuff like iron to the ocean. We have got to leave stuff alone. That's my opinion. We are not smarter than Mother Nature and seem to not be able to accept this. Short term it seems things work but there are too many unknowns. We should work with what we can control and has zero risk by finding a way to stop wasting. We have abundance but less is more sometimes.

Meh, I don't like to be inconvenienced. Can't we just let the grandkids figure it out?

I've been doing my part since birth. If it doesn't moo or cluck I'm out.

I can't stand the smell or taste of anything that comes out of the water. Maybe that will make up for driving my SUV... cancel it out so to speak.

a reply to: lostbook

Can't eat fish

Can't eat plants

Can't eat cows

I think the general idea is that humans are bad for the environment.

With that being said, I had salmon today for dinner.

originally posted by: zazen
Meh, I don't like to be inconvenienced. Can't we just let the grandkids figure it out?

Which is probably what your grandfather once said.

global warming is a hoax.

originally posted by: Necrose
global warming is a hoax.

After reading reports on climate depot that there is still ice on lake superior, and snow on the ground in Michigan, I think you might be right, Neil De Grassie's researchers have their own agendas, and he's as thick as two short planks anyway, there are enough fossil records to show the earth cools and heats regularly, its all down to jobs and money, with some self aggrandisement thrown in.

With no direct evidence of global warming in sight, the hoaxers are getting desperate.

It's pretty sad.

We need more fish yes but we get less and less...

So I say; it's nice to know fish can help but sadly we will make the problem worse for sure in near future since fish = money.

What do I say.. I say it's a crock of BS.

They cannot possibly know what they only THINK they know about ocean life and how it effects the rest of the world.. the worlds oceans are less studied than our own moon.

I'll bet if you follow the money on this story you'd find a lobbyist someplace that wants to shut down the fish markets.

They play into the myth the worlds oceans are being over fished but there is no real evidence fo that.

I can't wait for global warming. I want my lakes/oceans to all be like hot tubs now!

a reply to: JohnPhoenix

Just some random link:
www.cbsnews.com...

Salt-Water Fish Extinction Seen By 2048

russgeorge.net...

They released data showing that 90% of fish and other ocean life have perished in the last 100 years. 18% of ocean species have been reduced in number by more than 90% with 7% of fish species now extinct.

Even more startling is the projection that, by the year 2048, all the major economic fish species, indeed most higher forms of sea life, will be completely extinct. No more fish will be left to eat. With the annihilation of life in the 70+% of the world that is ocean, the global ocean ecosystems will begin to break down. Many human communities also depend on seafood and scientists fear that the mass extinction will trigger a cascade reaction among all the food chains on the planet.

originally posted by: Plugin

They released data showing that 90% of fish and other ocean life have perished in the last 100 years.

No they didn't. That's BS too. they have not had nor do they have now accurate measuring equipment to even have a clue as to how much ocean wild life is out there - much less 100 years ago to have data to compare it to.

There are No facts in that study, it's all guesses. It's guesses because someone has an agenda they want pushed through.