Tag Archives: water

Government reneges on ‘no fracking’ promise Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




The Government has reneged on its commitments to ban fracking near drinking water zones by amending the Infrastructure Bill at its final stage in the House of Lords today.

The change is contained in a sneaky loophole that most politicans entirely missed – but was spotted by an alert Friends of the Earth campaigner.

Most of the wording of Labour’s amendments, which prohibited fracking in national parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, ‘groundwater source protection areas’ and ‘areas of outstanding natural beauty’, remain in the current version of the Bill, Section 4A.

But instead of specifying the designations of the areas that fall under protection, the Government is leaving that to be specified in regulations in a Statutory Instrument to be issued by the Secretary of State before July 2015 – well after the general election, due in May.

This gives the Government the opportunity to weaken or fudge the definitions to the point where the protections become a dead letter – and it’s hard to see any other reason for legislating in this convoluted way.

Broken promises

Reacting to the Government’s late amendment, Friends of the Earth‘s Energy Campaigner Donna Hume, who first spotted the loophole, said: “The Government has U-Turned on its commitment to enforce regulatory conditions that would have introduced common sense measures to protect drinking water from controversial fracking.

“The Government seems determined to make fracking happen whatever the cost and people will be staggered that risky fracking will be allowed in areas that provide one third of our drinking water.

“Ministers must follow the lead of Wales, Scotland, France, Bulgaria, the Netherlands and New York State by putting a stop to fracking and instead focus on renewables and cutting energy waste.” 

In the Commons, the Government accepted the Labour Party amendment that banned fracking within groundwater source protection zones 1-3; the area around aquifers that safeguards drinking water. These collectively cover some 15% of the country – including many areas with potentially oil and gas bearing rock.

There’s only one answer now – defeat the Tories!

The ‘supplementary provisions’ in Section 4B specify that the Secretary of State must, in the statutory instrument, specify the descriptions of areas which are ‘protected groundwater source areas, and ‘other protected areas’ for the purposes of section 4A.

The statutory instrument will have to be laid before both the Commons and the Lords, and approved by a vote in each house. But if the Conservatives are re-elected with an overall majority in the May elections, they could in effect nullify the protections altogether.

Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex stated last week that in return for the support of Labour MPs for the Infrastructure Bill as a whole, and for not pressing the demands for a fracking moratorium, demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, the details of its amendment were not up for further negotiation:

“Let me make it absolutely clear that our new clause is all or nothing; it cannot be cherry-picked”, he said. “All the conditions need to be in place before we can be absolutely confident that any shale extraction can happen.”

But as the Bill will not return to the Commons, and the Conservatives enjoy an overall majority in the Lords, there is in fact nothing at all that Greatrex or his Labour colleagues can do about it.

So now we know – if the Tories win the election, we can expect ‘fracking everywhere’ – national parks, groundwater zones, nature sites, whatever. Nowhere will be safe.

 

 

Oliver Tickell edits The Ecologist.

 




389896

Government reneges on ‘no fracking’ promise Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




The Government has reneged on its commitments to ban fracking near drinking water zones by amending the Infrastructure Bill at its final stage in the House of Lords today.

The change is contained in a sneaky loophole that most politicans entirely missed – but was spotted by an alert Friends of the Earth campaigner.

Most of the wording of Labour’s amendments, which prohibited fracking in national parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, ‘groundwater source protection areas’ and ‘areas of outstanding natural beauty’, remain in the current version of the Bill, Section 4A.

But instead of specifying the designations of the areas that fall under protection, the Government is leaving that to be specified in regulations in a Statutory Instrument to be issued by the Secretary of State before July 2015 – well after the general election, due in May.

This gives the Government the opportunity to weaken or fudge the definitions to the point where the protections become a dead letter – and it’s hard to see any other reason for legislating in this convoluted way.

Broken promises

Reacting to the Government’s late amendment, Friends of the Earth‘s Energy Campaigner Donna Hume, who first spotted the loophole, said: “The Government has U-Turned on its commitment to enforce regulatory conditions that would have introduced common sense measures to protect drinking water from controversial fracking.

“The Government seems determined to make fracking happen whatever the cost and people will be staggered that risky fracking will be allowed in areas that provide one third of our drinking water.

“Ministers must follow the lead of Wales, Scotland, France, Bulgaria, the Netherlands and New York State by putting a stop to fracking and instead focus on renewables and cutting energy waste.” 

In the Commons, the Government accepted the Labour Party amendment that banned fracking within groundwater source protection zones 1-3; the area around aquifers that safeguards drinking water. These collectively cover some 15% of the country – including many areas with potentially oil and gas bearing rock.

There’s only one answer now – defeat the Tories!

The ‘supplementary provisions’ in Section 4B specify that the Secretary of State must, in the statutory instrument, specify the descriptions of areas which are ‘protected groundwater source areas, and ‘other protected areas’ for the purposes of section 4A.

The statutory instrument will have to be laid before both the Commons and the Lords, and approved by a vote in each house. But if the Conservatives are re-elected with an overall majority in the May elections, they could in effect nullify the protections altogether.

Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex stated last week that in return for the support of Labour MPs for the Infrastructure Bill as a whole, and for not pressing the demands for a fracking moratorium, demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, the details of its amendment were not up for further negotiation:

“Let me make it absolutely clear that our new clause is all or nothing; it cannot be cherry-picked”, he said. “All the conditions need to be in place before we can be absolutely confident that any shale extraction can happen.”

But as the Bill will not return to the Commons, and the Conservatives enjoy an overall majority in the Lords, there is in fact nothing at all that Greatrex or his Labour colleagues can do about it.

So now we know – if the Tories win the election, we can expect ‘fracking everywhere’ – national parks, groundwater zones, nature sites, whatever. Nowhere will be safe.

 

 

Oliver Tickell edits The Ecologist.

 




389896

Government reneges on ‘no fracking’ promise Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




The Government has reneged on its commitments to ban fracking near drinking water zones by amending the Infrastructure Bill at its final stage in the House of Lords today.

The change is contained in a sneaky loophole that most politicans entirely missed – but was spotted by an alert Friends of the Earth campaigner.

Most of the wording of Labour’s amendments, which prohibited fracking in national parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, ‘groundwater source protection areas’ and ‘areas of outstanding natural beauty’, remain in the current version of the Bill, Section 4A.

But instead of specifying the designations of the areas that fall under protection, the Government is leaving that to be specified in regulations in a Statutory Instrument to be issued by the Secretary of State before July 2015 – well after the general election, due in May.

This gives the Government the opportunity to weaken or fudge the definitions to the point where the protections become a dead letter – and it’s hard to see any other reason for legislating in this convoluted way.

Broken promises

Reacting to the Government’s late amendment, Friends of the Earth‘s Energy Campaigner Donna Hume, who first spotted the loophole, said: “The Government has U-Turned on its commitment to enforce regulatory conditions that would have introduced common sense measures to protect drinking water from controversial fracking.

“The Government seems determined to make fracking happen whatever the cost and people will be staggered that risky fracking will be allowed in areas that provide one third of our drinking water.

“Ministers must follow the lead of Wales, Scotland, France, Bulgaria, the Netherlands and New York State by putting a stop to fracking and instead focus on renewables and cutting energy waste.” 

In the Commons, the Government accepted the Labour Party amendment that banned fracking within groundwater source protection zones 1-3; the area around aquifers that safeguards drinking water. These collectively cover some 15% of the country – including many areas with potentially oil and gas bearing rock.

There’s only one answer now – defeat the Tories!

The ‘supplementary provisions’ in Section 4B specify that the Secretary of State must, in the statutory instrument, specify the descriptions of areas which are ‘protected groundwater source areas, and ‘other protected areas’ for the purposes of section 4A.

The statutory instrument will have to be laid before both the Commons and the Lords, and approved by a vote in each house. But if the Conservatives are re-elected with an overall majority in the May elections, they could in effect nullify the protections altogether.

Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex stated last week that in return for the support of Labour MPs for the Infrastructure Bill as a whole, and for not pressing the demands for a fracking moratorium, demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, the details of its amendment were not up for further negotiation:

“Let me make it absolutely clear that our new clause is all or nothing; it cannot be cherry-picked”, he said. “All the conditions need to be in place before we can be absolutely confident that any shale extraction can happen.”

But as the Bill will not return to the Commons, and the Conservatives enjoy an overall majority in the Lords, there is in fact nothing at all that Greatrex or his Labour colleagues can do about it.

So now we know – if the Tories win the election, we can expect ‘fracking everywhere’ – national parks, groundwater zones, nature sites, whatever. Nowhere will be safe.

 

 

Oliver Tickell edits The Ecologist.

 




389896

Government reneges on ‘no fracking’ promise Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




The Government has reneged on its commitments to ban fracking near drinking water zones by amending the Infrastructure Bill at its final stage in the House of Lords today.

The change is contained in a sneaky loophole that most politicans entirely missed – but was spotted by an alert Friends of the Earth campaigner.

Most of the wording of Labour’s amendments, which prohibited fracking in national parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, ‘groundwater source protection areas’ and ‘areas of outstanding natural beauty’, remain in the current version of the Bill, Section 4A.

But instead of specifying the designations of the areas that fall under protection, the Government is leaving that to be specified in regulations in a Statutory Instrument to be issued by the Secretary of State before July 2015 – well after the general election, due in May.

This gives the Government the opportunity to weaken or fudge the definitions to the point where the protections become a dead letter – and it’s hard to see any other reason for legislating in this convoluted way.

Broken promises

Reacting to the Government’s late amendment, Friends of the Earth‘s Energy Campaigner Donna Hume, who first spotted the loophole, said: “The Government has U-Turned on its commitment to enforce regulatory conditions that would have introduced common sense measures to protect drinking water from controversial fracking.

“The Government seems determined to make fracking happen whatever the cost and people will be staggered that risky fracking will be allowed in areas that provide one third of our drinking water.

“Ministers must follow the lead of Wales, Scotland, France, Bulgaria, the Netherlands and New York State by putting a stop to fracking and instead focus on renewables and cutting energy waste.” 

In the Commons, the Government accepted the Labour Party amendment that banned fracking within groundwater source protection zones 1-3; the area around aquifers that safeguards drinking water. These collectively cover some 15% of the country – including many areas with potentially oil and gas bearing rock.

There’s only one answer now – defeat the Tories!

The ‘supplementary provisions’ in Section 4B specify that the Secretary of State must, in the statutory instrument, specify the descriptions of areas which are ‘protected groundwater source areas, and ‘other protected areas’ for the purposes of section 4A.

The statutory instrument will have to be laid before both the Commons and the Lords, and approved by a vote in each house. But if the Conservatives are re-elected with an overall majority in the May elections, they could in effect nullify the protections altogether.

Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex stated last week that in return for the support of Labour MPs for the Infrastructure Bill as a whole, and for not pressing the demands for a fracking moratorium, demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, the details of its amendment were not up for further negotiation:

“Let me make it absolutely clear that our new clause is all or nothing; it cannot be cherry-picked”, he said. “All the conditions need to be in place before we can be absolutely confident that any shale extraction can happen.”

But as the Bill will not return to the Commons, and the Conservatives enjoy an overall majority in the Lords, there is in fact nothing at all that Greatrex or his Labour colleagues can do about it.

So now we know – if the Tories win the election, we can expect ‘fracking everywhere’ – national parks, groundwater zones, nature sites, whatever. Nowhere will be safe.

 

 

Oliver Tickell edits The Ecologist.

 




389896

Government reneges on ‘no fracking’ promise Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




The Government has reneged on its commitments to ban fracking near drinking water zones by amending the Infrastructure Bill at its final stage in the House of Lords today.

The change is contained in a sneaky loophole that most politicans entirely missed – but was spotted by an alert Friends of the Earth campaigner.

Most of the wording of Labour’s amendments, which prohibited fracking in national parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, ‘groundwater source protection areas’ and ‘areas of outstanding natural beauty’, remain in the current version of the Bill, Section 4A.

But instead of specifying the designations of the areas that fall under protection, the Government is leaving that to be specified in regulations in a Statutory Instrument to be issued by the Secretary of State before July 2015 – well after the general election, due in May.

This gives the Government the opportunity to weaken or fudge the definitions to the point where the protections become a dead letter – and it’s hard to see any other reason for legislating in this convoluted way.

Broken promises

Reacting to the Government’s late amendment, Friends of the Earth‘s Energy Campaigner Donna Hume, who first spotted the loophole, said: “The Government has U-Turned on its commitment to enforce regulatory conditions that would have introduced common sense measures to protect drinking water from controversial fracking.

“The Government seems determined to make fracking happen whatever the cost and people will be staggered that risky fracking will be allowed in areas that provide one third of our drinking water.

“Ministers must follow the lead of Wales, Scotland, France, Bulgaria, the Netherlands and New York State by putting a stop to fracking and instead focus on renewables and cutting energy waste.” 

In the Commons, the Government accepted the Labour Party amendment that banned fracking within groundwater source protection zones 1-3; the area around aquifers that safeguards drinking water. These collectively cover some 15% of the country – including many areas with potentially oil and gas bearing rock.

There’s only one answer now – defeat the Tories!

The ‘supplementary provisions’ in Section 4B specify that the Secretary of State must, in the statutory instrument, specify the descriptions of areas which are ‘protected groundwater source areas, and ‘other protected areas’ for the purposes of section 4A.

The statutory instrument will have to be laid before both the Commons and the Lords, and approved by a vote in each house. But if the Conservatives are re-elected with an overall majority in the May elections, they could in effect nullify the protections altogether.

Labour’s shadow energy minister Tom Greatrex stated last week that in return for the support of Labour MPs for the Infrastructure Bill as a whole, and for not pressing the demands for a fracking moratorium, demanded by the Environmental Audit Committee, the details of its amendment were not up for further negotiation:

“Let me make it absolutely clear that our new clause is all or nothing; it cannot be cherry-picked”, he said. “All the conditions need to be in place before we can be absolutely confident that any shale extraction can happen.”

But as the Bill will not return to the Commons, and the Conservatives enjoy an overall majority in the Lords, there is in fact nothing at all that Greatrex or his Labour colleagues can do about it.

So now we know – if the Tories win the election, we can expect ‘fracking everywhere’ – national parks, groundwater zones, nature sites, whatever. Nowhere will be safe.

 

 

Oliver Tickell edits The Ecologist.

 




389896

California drought: rains bring scant relief Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




Doing the right thing in the environs of the University of California, Davis – one of the foremost agricultural institutions in the US – means driving a carbon efficient car. And having a lawn that’s burned dry.

California’s worst drought on record is forcing people to cut back radically on water use – and that means letting lawns die, and cars get dusty. There was considerable rainfall last month, but it was not nearly enough to replenish the badly-depleted water resources.

Higher than average temperatures – particularly during the winter months – have combined with a lack of rainfall to produce severe drought conditions across much of the state.

Water restrictions have been brought in following the imposition of a drought emergency in January last year.

Dreaming of a wet winter

“If we don’t have rain in significant amounts by early March, we’ll be in dire straits”, says Professor Daniel Sumner, director of the Agricultural Issues Center at Davis. “Historically, California’s water has been stored in the snow pack in the mountains, but warmer winter temperatures have meant the pack has been melting.”

“The agricultural sector has made considerable advances in limiting water use, and new, more drought resistant, crops and plant varieties have been introduced, but aquifers have been pumped and they are not being replenished.

“In the past, massive projects were undertaken to distribute water round the state, but now there’s not the money available to do any more big-time plumbing work. Also, the regulations on diverting water for agriculture use are very tight – rivers can’t be pumped if it means endangering fish stocks or other wildlife.”

Whether or not climate change is causing the drought is a matter of considerable debate. A recent report sponsored by the US government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says natural oceanic and atmospheric patterns are the primary drivers behind the drought.

A high pressure ridge that has hovered over the Pacific off California’s coast for the past three years has resulted in higher temperatures and little rainfall falling across the state, the report says.

However, a separate report by climate scientists at Stanford University says the existence of the high pressure ridge, which is preventing rains falling over California, is made much more likely by ever greater accumulations of climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere.

It’s not just the groundwater that’s depleted

Whatever the cause of the drought, the lack of rain is doing considerable environmental and economic damage. The Public Policy Institute of California, a not-for-profit thinktank, estimates that $2.2 billion in agricultural revenues and more than 17,000 jobs have been lost as a result of the drought.

Thousands of acres of woodland have been lost due to wildfires, while fisheries experts are concerned that severely depleted streams and rivers could lead to the disappearance of fish species in the area, such as coho salmon and steelhead trout.

The drought is not limited to California. Adjacent states are also affected, and over the US border to the south, in Mexico’s Chihuahua state, crops have been devastated and 400,000 cattle have died.

Frank Green, a vineyard owner in the hills of Mendocino County, northern California, says: “The vines are pretty robust and, despite the drought, our wines have been some of the best ever over the past two years.

“But there’s no doubt we need a lot more rain, and plenty more could be done on saving and harvesting water. Farmers have cut back on growing water-hungry crops like cotton, but California is still growing – and exporting – rice, which is a real water drinker. How crazy is that?”

 

 

Kieran Cooke writes for Climate News Network.

Also on The Ecologist:

 




389688

Carbon dioxide threat to mussels’ shells Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




In a new paper published today in the Royal Society’s journal Interface, researchers from the University of Glasgow describe how mussels’ shells become more brittle when they are formed in more acidic water.

The world’s oceans are becoming increasingly acidic as they absorb some of the atmospheric carbon dioxide which contributes to climate change.

The water reacts with the carbon dioxide to form carbonic acid, which is gradually lowering the pH of the oceans (indicating an increase in acidity). Scientists expect the pH of the world’s oceans to have dropped from 8 today to 7.7 by the end of the 21st century.

“What we’ve found in the lab is that increased levels of acidification in their habitats have a negative impact on mussels’ ability to create their shells”, said research team leader Susan Fitzer of the University’s School of Geographical and Earth Sciences.

As oceans get more acid, less bicarbonate for shell-making

Mussels’ shells are composites of calcium carbonate and organic material created by the mussels through a process known as biomineralisation.

Mussels draw bicarbonate ions from seawater and use proteins in their bodies to make crystals of calcium carbonate to form their two-layer shells. In more acidic water, there are less bicarbonate ions available for the mussels to make their shells.

“This could mean that mussels growing in the wild in the future could be more vulnerable to attack from predators, as well as from the effect of ocean forces”, explained Dr Fitzer.

“As blue mussels are commonly used for human consumption, it could also have an effect on the yields of mussels available for the fishing industry.”

The mussels do have way to resist the more acidic water once their shells have formed. Their shells’ outer later is composed of calcite, a form of calcium carbonate that is more resistant to acid decay. Only the inner layer is made of the more soluble aragonite.

But even that mechanism is under threat, says Dr Fitzer: “What we found was that the calcite outer shells of the mussels past a certain threshold of acidity was stiffer and harder, making it more brittle and prone to fracture under pressure, and the aragonite inner shell became softer.“

Ocean conditions replicated in the lab

The research, carried out with colleagues in our School of Engineering, was designed to examine the toughness of the shells of the mussels in the more acidic water against those in control conditions.

Common blue mussels, Mytilus edulis, were housed in laboratory tanks. The researchers controlled and altered the temperature and CO2 levels of the water in the tanks to simulate four different types of ocean waters at CO2 levels projected to occur in the coming decades (380, 550, 750, 1000 ppm).

Ocean conditions were also simulated as closely as possible by changing light levels over time to mimic the changing of the seasons.

Another finding was that the impact of the increased acidity reduced as temperatures increased: “The effect on the mussels’ shells was reduced when the temperature of the water was increased by 2°C. This might suggest that the mussels are reverting to ancestral evolutionary mechanisms to mitigate the effects of increased acidity.”

Now the team is planning to extend its research to include other marine organisms, says Dr Fitzer: “We’re planning to continue our research in this area in the future and expand its scope to look at the effects of more acidic water on the shells of other marine organisms including oysters and abalone.”

 

 

The paper: ‘Ocean acidification alters the material properties of Mytilus edulis shells‘, is published in Interface.

The research was funded by the Leverhulme Trust awarded to the research team including Professor Maggie Cusack, Dr Nick Kamenos and Dr Vernon Phoenix.

 

 




388396

Carbon dioxide threat to mussels’ shells Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




In a new paper published today in the Royal Society’s journal Interface, researchers from the University of Glasgow describe how mussels’ shells become more brittle when they are formed in more acidic water.

The world’s oceans are becoming increasingly acidic as they absorb some of the atmospheric carbon dioxide which contributes to climate change.

The water reacts with the carbon dioxide to form carbonic acid, which is gradually lowering the pH of the oceans (indicating an increase in acidity). Scientists expect the pH of the world’s oceans to have dropped from 8 today to 7.7 by the end of the 21st century.

“What we’ve found in the lab is that increased levels of acidification in their habitats have a negative impact on mussels’ ability to create their shells”, said research team leader Susan Fitzer of the University’s School of Geographical and Earth Sciences.

As oceans get more acid, less bicarbonate for shell-making

Mussels’ shells are composites of calcium carbonate and organic material created by the mussels through a process known as biomineralisation.

Mussels draw bicarbonate ions from seawater and use proteins in their bodies to make crystals of calcium carbonate to form their two-layer shells. In more acidic water, there are less bicarbonate ions available for the mussels to make their shells.

“This could mean that mussels growing in the wild in the future could be more vulnerable to attack from predators, as well as from the effect of ocean forces”, explained Dr Fitzer.

“As blue mussels are commonly used for human consumption, it could also have an effect on the yields of mussels available for the fishing industry.”

The mussels do have way to resist the more acidic water once their shells have formed. Their shells’ outer later is composed of calcite, a form of calcium carbonate that is more resistant to acid decay. Only the inner layer is made of the more soluble aragonite.

But even that mechanism is under threat, says Dr Fitzer: “What we found was that the calcite outer shells of the mussels past a certain threshold of acidity was stiffer and harder, making it more brittle and prone to fracture under pressure, and the aragonite inner shell became softer.“

Ocean conditions replicated in the lab

The research, carried out with colleagues in our School of Engineering, was designed to examine the toughness of the shells of the mussels in the more acidic water against those in control conditions.

Common blue mussels, Mytilus edulis, were housed in laboratory tanks. The researchers controlled and altered the temperature and CO2 levels of the water in the tanks to simulate four different types of ocean waters at CO2 levels projected to occur in the coming decades (380, 550, 750, 1000 ppm).

Ocean conditions were also simulated as closely as possible by changing light levels over time to mimic the changing of the seasons.

Another finding was that the impact of the increased acidity reduced as temperatures increased: “The effect on the mussels’ shells was reduced when the temperature of the water was increased by 2°C. This might suggest that the mussels are reverting to ancestral evolutionary mechanisms to mitigate the effects of increased acidity.”

Now the team is planning to extend its research to include other marine organisms, says Dr Fitzer: “We’re planning to continue our research in this area in the future and expand its scope to look at the effects of more acidic water on the shells of other marine organisms including oysters and abalone.”

 

 

The paper: ‘Ocean acidification alters the material properties of Mytilus edulis shells‘, is published in Interface.

The research was funded by the Leverhulme Trust awarded to the research team including Professor Maggie Cusack, Dr Nick Kamenos and Dr Vernon Phoenix.

 

 




388396

Carbon dioxide threat to mussels’ shells Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




In a new paper published today in the Royal Society’s journal Interface, researchers from the University of Glasgow describe how mussels’ shells become more brittle when they are formed in more acidic water.

The world’s oceans are becoming increasingly acidic as they absorb some of the atmospheric carbon dioxide which contributes to climate change.

The water reacts with the carbon dioxide to form carbonic acid, which is gradually lowering the pH of the oceans (indicating an increase in acidity). Scientists expect the pH of the world’s oceans to have dropped from 8 today to 7.7 by the end of the 21st century.

“What we’ve found in the lab is that increased levels of acidification in their habitats have a negative impact on mussels’ ability to create their shells”, said research team leader Susan Fitzer of the University’s School of Geographical and Earth Sciences.

As oceans get more acid, less bicarbonate for shell-making

Mussels’ shells are composites of calcium carbonate and organic material created by the mussels through a process known as biomineralisation.

Mussels draw bicarbonate ions from seawater and use proteins in their bodies to make crystals of calcium carbonate to form their two-layer shells. In more acidic water, there are less bicarbonate ions available for the mussels to make their shells.

“This could mean that mussels growing in the wild in the future could be more vulnerable to attack from predators, as well as from the effect of ocean forces”, explained Dr Fitzer.

“As blue mussels are commonly used for human consumption, it could also have an effect on the yields of mussels available for the fishing industry.”

The mussels do have way to resist the more acidic water once their shells have formed. Their shells’ outer later is composed of calcite, a form of calcium carbonate that is more resistant to acid decay. Only the inner layer is made of the more soluble aragonite.

But even that mechanism is under threat, says Dr Fitzer: “What we found was that the calcite outer shells of the mussels past a certain threshold of acidity was stiffer and harder, making it more brittle and prone to fracture under pressure, and the aragonite inner shell became softer.“

Ocean conditions replicated in the lab

The research, carried out with colleagues in our School of Engineering, was designed to examine the toughness of the shells of the mussels in the more acidic water against those in control conditions.

Common blue mussels, Mytilus edulis, were housed in laboratory tanks. The researchers controlled and altered the temperature and CO2 levels of the water in the tanks to simulate four different types of ocean waters at CO2 levels projected to occur in the coming decades (380, 550, 750, 1000 ppm).

Ocean conditions were also simulated as closely as possible by changing light levels over time to mimic the changing of the seasons.

Another finding was that the impact of the increased acidity reduced as temperatures increased: “The effect on the mussels’ shells was reduced when the temperature of the water was increased by 2°C. This might suggest that the mussels are reverting to ancestral evolutionary mechanisms to mitigate the effects of increased acidity.”

Now the team is planning to extend its research to include other marine organisms, says Dr Fitzer: “We’re planning to continue our research in this area in the future and expand its scope to look at the effects of more acidic water on the shells of other marine organisms including oysters and abalone.”

 

 

The paper: ‘Ocean acidification alters the material properties of Mytilus edulis shells‘, is published in Interface.

The research was funded by the Leverhulme Trust awarded to the research team including Professor Maggie Cusack, Dr Nick Kamenos and Dr Vernon Phoenix.

 

 




388396

Carbon dioxide threat to mussels’ shells Updated for 2026

Leave a reply




In a new paper published today in the Royal Society’s journal Interface, researchers from the University of Glasgow describe how mussels’ shells become more brittle when they are formed in more acidic water.

The world’s oceans are becoming increasingly acidic as they absorb some of the atmospheric carbon dioxide which contributes to climate change.

The water reacts with the carbon dioxide to form carbonic acid, which is gradually lowering the pH of the oceans (indicating an increase in acidity). Scientists expect the pH of the world’s oceans to have dropped from 8 today to 7.7 by the end of the 21st century.

“What we’ve found in the lab is that increased levels of acidification in their habitats have a negative impact on mussels’ ability to create their shells”, said research team leader Susan Fitzer of the University’s School of Geographical and Earth Sciences.

As oceans get more acid, less bicarbonate for shell-making

Mussels’ shells are composites of calcium carbonate and organic material created by the mussels through a process known as biomineralisation.

Mussels draw bicarbonate ions from seawater and use proteins in their bodies to make crystals of calcium carbonate to form their two-layer shells. In more acidic water, there are less bicarbonate ions available for the mussels to make their shells.

“This could mean that mussels growing in the wild in the future could be more vulnerable to attack from predators, as well as from the effect of ocean forces”, explained Dr Fitzer.

“As blue mussels are commonly used for human consumption, it could also have an effect on the yields of mussels available for the fishing industry.”

The mussels do have way to resist the more acidic water once their shells have formed. Their shells’ outer later is composed of calcite, a form of calcium carbonate that is more resistant to acid decay. Only the inner layer is made of the more soluble aragonite.

But even that mechanism is under threat, says Dr Fitzer: “What we found was that the calcite outer shells of the mussels past a certain threshold of acidity was stiffer and harder, making it more brittle and prone to fracture under pressure, and the aragonite inner shell became softer.“

Ocean conditions replicated in the lab

The research, carried out with colleagues in our School of Engineering, was designed to examine the toughness of the shells of the mussels in the more acidic water against those in control conditions.

Common blue mussels, Mytilus edulis, were housed in laboratory tanks. The researchers controlled and altered the temperature and CO2 levels of the water in the tanks to simulate four different types of ocean waters at CO2 levels projected to occur in the coming decades (380, 550, 750, 1000 ppm).

Ocean conditions were also simulated as closely as possible by changing light levels over time to mimic the changing of the seasons.

Another finding was that the impact of the increased acidity reduced as temperatures increased: “The effect on the mussels’ shells was reduced when the temperature of the water was increased by 2°C. This might suggest that the mussels are reverting to ancestral evolutionary mechanisms to mitigate the effects of increased acidity.”

Now the team is planning to extend its research to include other marine organisms, says Dr Fitzer: “We’re planning to continue our research in this area in the future and expand its scope to look at the effects of more acidic water on the shells of other marine organisms including oysters and abalone.”

 

 

The paper: ‘Ocean acidification alters the material properties of Mytilus edulis shells‘, is published in Interface.

The research was funded by the Leverhulme Trust awarded to the research team including Professor Maggie Cusack, Dr Nick Kamenos and Dr Vernon Phoenix.

 

 




388396