@ Max Green, Sunday, 2 October 2016 11:36:39 AM

Photosynthesis is only part of the process that may lead to heat produced, i.e, apart from solar heat.

If nutrient was inadequate then photosynthesis in ocean cyanobacteria algae would not occur and nor would the related photo-biological process.

Nutrient comes first, then photosynthesis, then biological reaction occurs, the latter including in water, wastewater, sewage water, and I think in some areas of sewage nutrient polluted ocean and lake water.

I suggest consider biological oxidation, see -Grady, et al.
Here at page 2 & 3:

http://waterfacts.net/Review_of_Temperature_Effects_in_Biological_Treatment-web.pdf

Surely there is need to query UN science, especially about biological conversion of energy into heat and possible links to the SST data anomaly in AGW - climate science.

Correct solutions are required urgently to overcome various impact of nutrient pollution. e.g. There is the social and economic impact on people dependent on ESSENTIAL protein food from ocean seas and waterways, consequent to algae devastated aquatic food web nurseries and devastated wild fish populations.

All is not lost. There is a lot to be gained.
Clean energy is required to help overcome air pollution.

Nutrient harvesting and trading could be linked to production of algae for biofuel and fertilizer, feed and food.

World ocean and waterway health requires proper care management.

Relevant cost to manage the presently unmanaged world ocean ecosystem has to be linked to world fiscal policy.

However one thing at a time, urgently.

JF,
I applaud your concern for polluted waterways and clean energy. Really I do. But I'm not even a scientist, and yet even I can spot the first problem with the PDF you quote!

Talk about chicken and egg! What is the paper about: the temperature the algae causes, or the temperature that causes the algae? ;-) Seriously, dude, did you even READ it?

" In the mesophilic range, the rate of the biological reaction will increase with temperature to a maximum value at 31°C [87.8°F] for most aerobic waste
systems. A temperature above 39°C will result in a decreased rate for mesophilic organisms. At temperatures above 96°F (35.5°C) there is deterioration in the biological floc. Protozoa have been observed to disappear at 104°F (40°C) and a dispersed floc with filaments to dominate at 110°F (43.3°C). In the past, hot wastewaters such as those in the pulp and paper industry were pretreated through a cooling tower so that the aeration basin temperature did not exceed 35°C [95°F]. "

Also:
"Seasonal variations in temperature can markedly influence the makeup of microbial communities. Just as with pH, each species is characterized by a minimum, optimum, and maximum temperature that will support growth. "

The temperature causes the algae to grow or die! NOT the algae causes the temperature. You've quoted a paper that's back to front for your argument. Want to try again?

How would algae warm the oceans? What is the physics? What is the evidence?

Is there even a correlation? EG: Have we increased anthropogenic algae above natural algae that would account for the warming we witness in the environment? What was the original algae load in the oceans, and what is it now?

Why have 13 international studies confirmed that MORE algae would equal LESS WARMING by removing CO2 from the atmosphere?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization

Until you can answer all the questions above, you don't have a case.

Max.

I am in conversation with you involving the bacteria aspect of cyanobacteria in ocean and lake water where there is heat.

Accordingly the paper I linked is about bacteria feeding on waste in water and generating heat.

This is not just about heat from compost of waste on land.

I will try to deal with your questions tomorrow, though I think I have already answered them.

"I am in conversation with you involving the bacteria aspect of cyanobacteria in ocean and lake water where there is heat.

Accordingly the paper I linked is about bacteria feeding on waste in water and generating heat."

Comprehension is not your strong point. The paper is about how bacteria RESPOND to heat, not how they generate it. Learn. To. Read.

@ Max Green, Tuesday, 4 October 2016 9:31:11 AM

Max and others,

That Grady, et al paper is about response by bacteria to heat, including to extra heat produced by bacteria during the biological process.
I read on page 3, quote, “One of the factors that affect heat gains in biological processes is the production of heat as a result of biological oxidation” (end quote).

N.B.
Production of heat is clearly stated. Production of heat as result of biological oxidation processes, is very different to solar production of heat.

Check @ Grady et al, I suggest read down into the paragraph beginning, “One of the factors………...”.
I read that if industrial wastewater is of high temperature already, and then production of more heat occurs as result of biological oxidation, a costly biological waste treatment process could fail (due to overheating).

By pointing to the Grady, et al paper, my intent is to indicate evidence of heat produced by bacteria in water, specifically by the cyano-aspect of cyanobacteria phytoplankton in some areas of ocean and waterways worldwide.

Cyanobacteria occurs and/or is harnessed in composting on land.
Up to 100% cyanobacteria can be present in wastewater treatment. See:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21287346

Cyanobacteria nutrient-dependent phytoplankton algae is occurring in increasing mass in warm ocean and lake water where convection and evaporation can be observed forming pinpoints of cloud in atmosphere above, as NASA images indicate.
E.g here:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/view.php?id=40716
here;
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=79706&eocn=image&eoci=related_image
and here, where the Australian BOM apparently does not see the algae including in blooms near shore;
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=88389

Effects of cyanobacterial populations are yet to be unravelled, I think especially including marine and waterway cyanobacteria - algae.
It seems there are study difficulties in situ so imagine difficulties at mercy of weather while working to understand chemistry and biology of cyanobacteria ocean micro algae and MASS linked to weather and climate.

Jennifer Marohasy questions some BOM measurement sites.
I am questioning and assessing nutrient overload evidence and impact apparently associated with Sea Surface Temperature data that is an anomaly in AGW - climate science.

It’s only 2016.
However boffins should end their long holiday. TIC

“By pointing to the Grady, et al paper, my intent is to indicate evidence of heat produced by bacteria in water, specifically by the cyano-aspect of cyanobacteria phytoplankton in some areas of ocean and waterways worldwide.”
Yes, but are cyanobacteria phytoplankton? Zooplankton eat other biological critters, phytoplankton photosynthesise. It’s a bit different. So rule out the process in composts: this is *way* different.

Even if they create a tiny amount of heat in absorbing sunlight, what percentage of that sunlight was going to turn to heat because of the albedo of seawater anyway? How to plankton interact with that process? By what percentage?

How much heat EXACTLY is added to the system when plankton photosynthesise?

How much EXTRA plankton is there as a result of human activity? Does this account for 4 Hiroshima bombs EXTRA per second on the earth? By what maths?

How many plankton are there in the world’s oceans? What percentage of those oceans are actually experiencing a bloom?

“I am questioning and assessing nutrient overload evidence and impact apparently associated with Sea Surface Temperature data that is an anomaly in AGW - climate science.”
Really? SST is an anomaly? I think you’ve drunk the Marohasy flavoured cool-aid, and there’s no helping you.

You haven’t answered ANY of the questions above with ANY scientific data.

Goodbye!