Chat transcripts

20:01 10/09/2004] <@JP> Hello everyone, welcome to the chat. Tonight, Craig will be discussing the Carbon Cycle. Please hold your questions until everything is said and done.
[20:01 10/09/2004] <@JP> Craig, have fun.
[20:02 10/09/2004] <@craig> Good evening everyone, tonight will be yet another in my line of off the cuff chats, so please excuse delays. :-)
[20:03 10/09/2004] <@craig> I'll start the discussion with one sentence that sums up the carbon cycle:
[20:03 10/09/2004] <@craig> The carbon cycle is the movement of carbon atoms between physical carbon stores.
[20:05 10/09/2004] <@craig> There are two "main" cycles discussed in biogeochemistry; The Physical Carbon Pump and the Biological Carbon Pump.
[20:05 10/09/2004] <@craig> Physical being the movement of carbon driven by water temperature.
[20:06 10/09/2004] <@craig> Biological being the movement of carbon driven by, yes, biological means, E.G. photosynthesis.
[20:07 10/09/2004] <@craig> Both of these cycles are mainly relevent to Earth's oceans, but can be applied to smaller bodies of water such as our fish tanks.
[20:08 10/09/2004] <@craig> Of particular interest to plant growers is that cooler waters can hold more carbon dioxide than warmer waters.
[20:10 10/09/2004] <@craig> One statement I will make tonight and stick to my guns on is that carbon dioxide in our fish tanks will *always* seek equilibrium.
[20:12 10/09/2004] <@craig> Surface turbulence can and will effect carbon dioxide levels in both a positive and negative manner. Please note: I am speaking in terms of free CO2.
[20:13 10/09/2004] <@craig> Now that I have dug myself a hole, let me get on with the physcal carbon pump in the oceans and I'll try to bring what I said above full circle.
[20:15 10/09/2004] <@craig> The exchange of CO2 with the atmosphere is manyfold.
[20:15 10/09/2004] <@craig> The largest mechanism is through the physical mixing of the deep waters of the oceans.
[20:16 10/09/2004] <@craig> As I said above, cooler waters hold more CO2 than warmer. Cooler water is also more dense, so will tend to move downward.
[20:17 10/09/2004] <@craig> The physical downward movement of the waters of the oceans creates a pump which is constantly "churning" the oceans.
[20:18 10/09/2004] <@craig> Further driving this pump is the movement of water from the lower (thus warmer) latitudes to the higher and cooler latitudes.
[20:21 10/09/2004] <@craig> I've greatly simplified this part of the carbon cycle for one reason.. The point I want to make is that, cooler water holds more CO2 than does warmer water.
[20:21 10/09/2004] <@craig> The second of the carbon pumps is the Biological Carbon Pump.
[20:23 10/09/2004] <@craig> I'm going to shamelessly rip a quote from the CalSpace website to explain this:
[20:24 10/09/2004] <@craig> "The biological pump, in essence, removes carbon dioxide from the surface water of the ocean, changing it into living matter and distributing it to the deeper water layers, where it is out of contact with the atmosphere. Thus, when the ocean shares carbon dioxide with the atmosphere, it does so by not only simply taking on carbon dioxide into solution but also by incorporating the carbon dioxide into living organisms."
[20:26 10/09/2004] <@craig> So what was said above?
[20:27 10/09/2004] <@craig> Algae, phytoplankton and similar organisms use carbon dioxide during photosynthesis, which while removing CO2 from the water, makes them able to grow and multiply.
[20:27 10/09/2004] <@craig> They become a source of carbon themselves, an organic source, as they die off and produce sediment layers at the bottom of the oceans.
[20:29 10/09/2004] <@craig> Now lets see if I can wrap this up..
[20:30 10/09/2004] <@craig> Carbon is *the* most important elements for life, its movement from carbon store or reservoir is the key to life both in the oceans and our fish tanks.
[20:30 10/09/2004] <@craig> And with that, I'll turn the floor back over to JP..
[20:31 10/09/2004] <@JP> Thanks Craig. Since I'm sure Russ has some things to say, I'll just open things up...
[20:31 10/09/2004] <@craig> Folks, yes, I do have a headache now. :-)
[20:32 10/09/2004] <russ> Great presentation Craig:-)
[20:32 10/09/2004] <@craig> Greatly simplified. :-)
[20:33 10/09/2004] <Noname> That was informative, although my mind has almost compleatlt melted
[20:33 10/09/2004] <Noname> *compleatly
[20:33 10/09/2004] <Noname> someone explain to me why I took Biology again?
[20:34 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> looks good on a resume? :D
[20:34 10/09/2004] <Noname> probably...
[20:34 10/09/2004] <russ> The concentration of carbon in living matter (18%) is almost 100 times greater than its concentration in the earth (0.19%). So living things extract carbon from their nonliving environment. For life to continue, this carbon must be recycled.
[20:34 10/09/2004] <@craig> Because one day you knew you were going to keep fish and how important carbon was? :-D
[20:34 10/09/2004] <@craig> Go! Russ. :-D
[20:34 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> russ - a hell of a lot of carbon is tied up in sea bed and in forest/rainforest
[20:35 10/09/2004] <russ> Ah, glad you mentioned tht:-)
[20:35 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> many of the seabed gasses are carbon based - split out only by thepressure
[20:36 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> minor changes in temp or pressure *can* release them?
[20:36 10/09/2004] <@craig> Nigel, to comment on your comment about CO2 density. It isn't the density of CO2 that makes it sink, its the fact that colder water holds more CO2 and it in itself (cold water) is more dense. ;-)
[20:36 10/09/2004] <@JP> As usual, I have nothing good to add to the conversation. :-D
[20:36 10/09/2004] <russ> I think there is a little more to their release than just pressure and temp.
[20:37 10/09/2004] <@craig> A *lot* more..
[20:37 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> partially
[20:37 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> methane only stays so under pressure
[20:37 10/09/2004] <@craig> Remineralization...
[20:37 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> sort of
[20:37 10/09/2004] <@craig> Ahem, let me finish. ;-)
[20:38 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> :-D
[20:38 10/09/2004] <russ> Carbon enters the biotic world through the action of autotrophs:
[20:38 10/09/2004] <@craig> The action of decay upon organic materials by decay and bacteria releases the minerals back into the system.
[20:38 10/09/2004] <russ> primarily photoautotrophs, like plants and algae, that use the energy of light to convert carbon dioxide to organic matter.
[20:38 10/09/2004] <@craig> Bah, my brain is running in circles tonight..
[20:38 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> *but* - plants and the sea are also stores
[20:38 10/09/2004] <russ> and to a small extent, chemoautotrophs 2014 bacteria and archaeans that do the same but use the energy derived from an oxidation of molecules in their substrate.
[20:39 10/09/2004] <russ> Carbon returns to the atmosphere and water by
[20:39 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> that's dealing with the absorbtion - not the amounts absorbed in relation to expelled?
[20:39 10/09/2004] <russ> respiration (as CO2)
[20:39 10/09/2004] <russ> burning
[20:39 10/09/2004] <@craig> Nigel, its the movement *between* stores that is the crux of the issue.
[20:40 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> fair point
[20:40 10/09/2004] <russ> decay (producing CO2 if oxygen is present, methane (CH4) if it is not.
[20:40 10/09/2004] <russ> :-)
[20:40 10/09/2004] <@craig> Don't forget denitrification Russ.
[20:40 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> wassat?
[20:40 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> :-D
[20:40 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> don't make me google it :-D
[20:40 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> ohhh
[20:41 10/09/2004] <@craig> When O2 isn't present, the use of NO3..
[20:41 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> de nitrification
[20:41 10/09/2004] <russ> heteratrophs play many roles in this
[20:41 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> not sure what how the nitrites work
[20:42 10/09/2004] <@craig> Nitrates. ;-)
[20:42 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> ahhh - ok - those i know about ;-D
[20:43 10/09/2004] <russ> plants and algae, that use the energy of light to convert carbon dioxide to organic matter.
[20:43 10/09/2004] <@craig> I lost my reference to that whole mess too, gimme a second.. :-D
[20:43 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> LOL
[20:43 10/09/2004] <russ> and to a small extent, chemoautotrophs 2014 bacteria and archaeans that do the same but use the energy derived from an oxidation of molecules in their substrate
[20:44 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> tho on death that's partially released
[20:44 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> ?
[20:45 10/09/2004] <@craig> Calspace to the rescue again..
[20:45 10/09/2004] <@craig> "Oxygen (O2) is used up while carbon dioxide is being produced from organic matter on the sea floor and from organic matter still falling down from above. In places where oxygen is entirely used up, nitrate (NO3) is used by the bacteria as an oxygen source instead. In this process, nitrous oxide (N20) and molecular nitrogen (N2) are made while nitrate is being destroyed."
[20:46 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> is it no2 you heat to make oxygen?
[20:46 10/09/2004] <@craig> Not sure there, but I do know the role of NO2 in another cycle.. :-D
[20:47 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> :-D
[20:47 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> yeah - it has other uses ;-D
[20:47 10/09/2004] <@craig> The nitrogen cycle, its used by the secondary bacteria as a food source to produce NO3.
[20:47 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> makes cars go faster for one
[20:47 10/09/2004] <russ> Now my head is starting to hurt:-)
[20:47 10/09/2004] <@JP> Mine too. (Ice cream headache..)
[20:48 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> craig - it's knocking 3 am here and i've got to bail - but can we continue this over trhe weekend? - is fascinating :-D
[20:48 10/09/2004] <@craig> Sure..
[20:48 10/09/2004] * Noname saluts Nigel
[20:48 10/09/2004] <russ> This will make a very interesting reference transcript to fall back on:-)
[20:48 10/09/2004] <@craig> So, anyone for alphabet soup? :-D
[20:48 10/09/2004] <@Nigel> cool - on that note - g'night folks - cya's tomorrow (ish) - have a good one :-D
[20:49 10/09/2004] <russ> take care Nigel
[20:49 10/09/2004] <@JP> Take care, Nigel.
[20:50 10/09/2004] <@craig> I need to look into that methane thing Russ..
[20:50 10/09/2004] <russ> Craig, when you indicated that carbon will alway seek equalibrium, did you mean balance?
[20:51 10/09/2004] <@craig> Yes, they are one in the same, correct?
[20:51 10/09/2004] <russ> Not if youtake the greenhouse effect into consideration..Then it is a little off balanced
[20:51 10/09/2004] <@craig> Please take the note into consideration here too. Free CO2.
[20:52 10/09/2004] <russ> Actually, this effect is causing more growth of forrests on land and little algae guys in the ocean
[20:53 10/09/2004] <@craig> That being said, will not carbon precipitate out into solution when free CO2 is not present?
[20:53 10/09/2004] <russ> Whats the name of those tiny plant and animal critters?
[20:53 10/09/2004] <@craig> Phytoplankton?
[20:53 10/09/2004] <russ> yes, thats the name that fell off my brain:-D
[20:54 10/09/2004] <@craig> Given silicates there's also diatoms too. ;-D
[20:55 10/09/2004] <@craig> (Who would have thought a high school drop-out would be participating in a discussion like this.)
[20:55 10/09/2004] <russ> I think diatoms are dead critters. Don't know how much carbon is released by them, but it must be a bunch.
[20:55 10/09/2004] <russ> Craig:-)
[20:56 10/09/2004] <@craig> There's one other organism, which I can't spell, let me grab the name that plays a role here too..
[20:56 10/09/2004] <russ> some folks have a lot of 'book sense' others have a lot of practical sense and experience by doing and testing
[20:57 10/09/2004] <@craig> Coccolithophores -- they grow when diatoms aren't present because of the lack of silicates.
[20:58 10/09/2004] <@craig> Here's a another killer rip from Calspace:
[20:58 10/09/2004] <russ> Hmmm, lithophores sounds familiar, but the prefix is gonna make me look that one up:-D
[20:58 10/09/2004] <@craig> "Altering this ratio of carbon atoms can be done, for example, by changing the amount of silicate (SiO4) in seawater. If there is plenty of silicate, marine organisms called “diatoms” will grow more happily. They fix carbon into organic matter, and they take much of it down to deep waters because many diatoms, at the end of their life cycle, tend to settle out of the water where they grew. If there is very little silicate available, organisms called
[20:58 10/09/2004] <@craig> “coccolithophores” grow more readily than diatoms. Coccolithophores precipitate lots of carbon into carbonate, along with making organic matter, and they, too, tend to settle out."
[20:59 10/09/2004] <russ> that makes more sense now:-)
[21:00 10/09/2004] <@craig> Just to get this on record...
[21:00 10/09/2004] <@craig> http://calspace.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/climatechange1/06_1.shtml -- is an excellent resource for further study of tonights topic.
[21:01 10/09/2004] <russ> don't diatoms have a symbiotic relationship with photopantonic algae?
[21:01 10/09/2004] <russ> kind of like teeny tiny little corals?
[21:01 10/09/2004] <@craig> Beats me, I just know the little critters do a good job holding other algaes at bay when there are enough silicates to promote their growth.
[21:02 10/09/2004] <russ> yep:-)
[21:03 10/09/2004] <russ> somehow, I now see a developing understanding of how diatoms work in one's tank water also
[21:03 10/09/2004] <@craig> Care to elucidate a bit more on that thought?
[21:04 10/09/2004] <russ> I'm staring to see a tie-in to some of that 'equalibrium' you mentioned:-)
[21:05 10/09/2004] <russ> since diatoms are generally the first guys to show up in a tank....before higher algae starts to show as the nutrient level creeps up
[21:06 10/09/2004] <russ> Could the diatoms, in a sense, be feeding the nutrient load a little?
[21:07 10/09/2004] <@craig> Given what I've been seeing in researching this stuff, yes.
[21:07 10/09/2004] <russ> Thoughts are forming, but I can't get them all to materialize the way I want:-D
[21:07 10/09/2004] <@craig> Any organic material is going to contribute to the nutrient load.
[21:08 10/09/2004] <russ> More 'recycling'! :-)
[21:08 10/09/2004] <@craig> Yep, we just see it on a macro scale in our fish tanks.
[21:08 10/09/2004] <russ> or part of the carbon recycle?
[21:08 10/09/2004] <russ> yep:-)
[21:09 10/09/2004] <@craig> Whats the opposite of precipitation?
[21:09 10/09/2004] <@craig> nevermind, fixation. (doh!)
[21:09 10/09/2004] <russ> ;-)
[21:09 10/09/2004] <russ> don't forget respiration
[21:10 10/09/2004] <@craig> Right..
[21:10 10/09/2004] <russ> are there any other folks on board here that would like to trow some thoughts around?
[21:10 10/09/2004] <russ> 'throw'
[21:10 10/09/2004] <@craig> You are speaking of respiration of free CO2 back into the system, right?
[21:12 10/09/2004] <russ> where our fish tanks are concerned, yes
[21:12 10/09/2004] <Noname> megan is braver than Ill ever be venturing in here during such a heated convo....
[21:12 10/09/2004] <@craig> k, just was getting that point to sink. :-D
[21:12 10/09/2004] <@craig> Geoff, this isn't heated..
[21:12 10/09/2004] <russ> sink. Thats a good way of putting that:-D
[21:13 10/09/2004] <megan> lol
[21:13 10/09/2004] <@craig> A pun and I didn't even try.
[21:13 10/09/2004] <russ> :-)
[21:14 10/09/2004] <@craig> You never did answer my question about precipitation back into solution. ;-)
[21:14 10/09/2004] <russ> But, it related directly to your presentation points (a couple)
[21:14 10/09/2004] <russ> Because thats one of the points that is making my head hurt
[21:15 10/09/2004] <@craig> Somewhat rhetorical of a question Russ.. Yes, it will.
[21:16 10/09/2004] <russ> I would imagine that any carbon that is not taken up into a structure, but as a gas will somehow re-enter at the air/water interface
[21:16 10/09/2004] <@craig> I was speaking of carbon already fixed.
[21:16 10/09/2004] <russ> or air/surface interface
[21:17 10/09/2004] <russ> oh
[21:17 10/09/2004] <russ> when the structure is decayed or burned, it goes back into the 'soup' :-D
[21:18 10/09/2004] <@craig> Granted, precip on its own merits no, it won't, but through photosynthesis or even possibly denitrification the CO2 has to get put back into the system.
[21:31 10/09/2004] <@craig> Anything else we need to add to this or is it time to close up shop for the evening?
[21:31 10/09/2004] <@craig> I may have greatly over-simplified the topic, but it is/will be a good jumping off point for future reference.
[21:32 10/09/2004] <russ> I was thinking about the term precipitate
[21:32 10/09/2004] <@craig> Go on..
[21:32 10/09/2004] * Noname is filled with dizzyness at the thought that what was said was over-simplified
[21:33 10/09/2004] <@craig> Geoff, I didn't get into HC03-, CaCO3 and their roles. ;-D
[21:33 10/09/2004] <Noname> well, at least I know how to pronounce those things
[21:33 10/09/2004] * megan decides to read this chat after she knows a bit more about chemistry
[21:34 10/09/2004] <russ> I was just wondering that if something precipitates, it would be taking on additional atoms?
[21:34 10/09/2004] <@craig> Precipitation, at least in my mind, is the breaking down of a complex substance into its constituent parts.
[21:35 10/09/2004] <russ> I mean, when something 'soluable' becomes 'insoluable' and separates from a solution
[21:35 10/09/2004] <@craig> Isn't what you just said fixation though?
[21:35 10/09/2004] <russ> Hmmm, I thought it would be the oppsite
[21:36 10/09/2004] <russ> this is where those 'bunches' of variables come in:-D
[21:36 10/09/2004] <@craig> In this light, I would expect it depends on what certain element on is looking at. :-D
[21:36 10/09/2004] <russ> I think 'oxidation' would be included in there somewhere:-)
[21:36 10/09/2004] <@craig> Oxidation is easy! ;-D
[21:37 10/09/2004] <russ> in order for the bio critters to do theeir thing:-D
[21:39 10/09/2004] <@craig> So, what have I accomplished this evening?
[21:39 10/09/2004] <@craig> Other than giving us all a headache. ;-)
[21:39 10/09/2004] <russ> CO2 would be produced during decay if oxygen is present
[21:40 10/09/2004] <@craig> Which in our macro environments, it always will be except in deep substrates.
[21:40 10/09/2004] <russ> All-in-all this was a great presentaion to ponder over:-)
[21:41 10/09/2004] <russ> In deep substrates, is where some recycling occurs?
[21:42 10/09/2004] <@craig> Given that recycling is meant to be anaerobic areas, I would say yes.
[21:42 10/09/2004] <russ> Michelle would have gotten a huge kick out of this presentation:-)
[21:43 10/09/2004] <russ> Craig, yes, and also 'from' anaerobic areas
[21:43 10/09/2004] <@craig> I meant from..
[21:44 10/09/2004] <@craig> Which brings up that controversial term.... Denitrification. :-D
[21:44 10/09/2004] <russ> :-)
[21:44 10/09/2004] <russ> Oh no! Couldn't that be a speparate presentation subject?:-D
[21:45 10/09/2004] Private: <russ> Not that that is the one I volunteered for on the 24th:-D
[21:45 10/09/2004] <@craig> It needs to be, but I'll be damned if I can get any good info on it.
[21:46 10/09/2004] <@craig> I know of the process and to some extent how it occurs, but there just isn't a whole lot of published information on how it relates to aquaria.
[21:46 10/09/2004] <russ> it can get detailed also, if you count the fact that denitrification also occurs inside a fish:-)
[21:47 10/09/2004] <@craig> I googled on that very topic for weeks and couldn't find squat..
[21:47 10/09/2004] <russ> has something to do with high nitrates;-)
[21:47 10/09/2004] <russ> in their bloodstream or something like that..It has been a while:-)
[21:47 10/09/2004] <@craig> The questions it raises for me tho..
[21:48 10/09/2004] <@craig> Is it in the muscle tisssue? Blood?
[21:48 10/09/2004] <russ> me also....still
[21:48 10/09/2004] <@craig> Blood would seem an unlikely place since there is oxygen present there.
[21:48 10/09/2004] <russ> Hmmm, now I'll have to go look somewhere later:-)
[21:49 10/09/2004] <@craig> I can't see how denitrification can occur in an oxygen rich environment (which means >0ppm)..
[21:50 10/09/2004] <russ> From what I unserstand, it can occure even when there is some oxygen present. NOt much though.
[21:51 10/09/2004] <russ> 'understand'
[21:51 10/09/2004] <@craig> It would have to be at a concentration that is low enough to let the bacteria that do the nasty deed to survive.
[21:51 10/09/2004] <russ> time for a fresh keyboard:-)
[21:51 10/09/2004] <@craig> Because aerobic bacteria simpy don't have the equipment to do the job.
[21:53 10/09/2004] <@craig> But what is the catalyst that produces the process? :-D
[21:53 10/09/2004] <russ> there are several intermediate steps
[21:53 10/09/2004] <@craig> Enquiring minds want to know, ya know. ;-)
[21:54 10/09/2004] <russ> It is carried out by such bacteria as pseudomona and a couple others that I forget
[21:55 10/09/2004] <@craig> Hmm..
[21:55 10/09/2004] <russ> I think another compound that is produced is nitrous oxide(NO2)
[21:56 10/09/2004] <@craig> And N2..
[21:56 10/09/2004] <@craig> Which would kill the fish..
[21:57 10/09/2004] <russ> too many processes to remember and keep track of.:-D
[21:57 10/09/2004] <@craig> I quoted the end result earlier. ;-D
[21:58 10/09/2004] <russ> I don't know if N2 exists, but I think I know what you mean:-)
[21:58 10/09/2004] <Noname> sleep time, buy you two, dont fry your brains
[21:58 10/09/2004] <@craig> Also, those bacteria pseudomona, et al, are anaerobic..
[21:59 10/09/2004] <russ> I'm not positive, but I think they can exisist in both
[21:59 10/09/2004] <@craig> The breakdown of NO3 always has the same end result.. N20 and N2 production.
[22:00 10/09/2004] <@craig> Unless, and here's where the IF factor becomes involved, there is a consumer of one of those two agents.
[22:01 10/09/2004] <@craig> (agents meaning compounds)
[22:04 10/09/2004] <russ> I wish I could continue on this one. I've got to break for a few. Want to close this for now and move all over to the otherside?
[22:04 10/09/2004] <@craig> My head hurts too. So Yes. ;-D
[22:04 10/09/2004] <russ> :-D