OK, I can add the wording, but need help to make sure it's clear. I already indicate "relative" in the title so if below the first chart I say the following:
"If a number in a cell in the chart is double the amount of a number in another cell then that means that the outgassing of carbon dioxide is twice as fast and, all else equal, that twice as much acid will be needed to compensate for this over any given period of time. A value of 0.0 in a cell means no outgassing while a value of 1.0 means that there is twice as much carbon dioxide in the water as there would be if in equilibrium with the air, a value of 2.0 means there is three times as much as at equilibrium (so is twice as much "out of balance") and outgasses twice as fast as 1.0, etc."
FYI. The offset of 1 comes from the fact that the reaction rate is proportional to the concentration, but there are two reactions going on. There is movement of carbon dioxide from the water into the air and there is movement from the air into the water. The rate of movement from air into the water is fixed since the concentration in the air is constant, but the rate of movement from the water to the air varies as the concentration in the water varies. So if "1" is designated as the fixed rate of movement from air to water, then the net outgassing rate is "x*1 - 1" where "x" is the factor of the concentration of carbon dioxide in the water relative to its equilibrium concentration (which is when "x*1 = 1" or x = 1). So that's how we get "x - 1" numbers in the table and why you need to add 1 to those numbers to know how far the water is out of equilibrium (where "1" would be equilibrium), but if I used "x" instead of "x - 1" numbers in the table, then you wouldn't be able to do a simple ratio between two cells to get relative rates.
and for the second chart:
"If a number in a cell in the chart is double the amount of a number in another cell then that means that the rate of pH rise is twice as fast, all else equal. A value of 0.0 in a cell means no tendency for the pH to rise (because there is no carbon dioxide ougtassing). The absolute scale of numbers in this chart was based on using the relative rate of outgassing carbon dioxide (with 1.0 representing having twice as much dissolved carbon dioxide vs. being at equilibrium with air) and using that as a TA (ppm CaCO3) equivalent quantity of carbon dioxide that is outgassed. This chart is very approximate as it did not use incrementally small values in its computation".
At some point, I will redo the second chart using a much smaller incremental outgas amount and then will scale up the numbers and can remove that last sentence.
I think the description for the first chart sounds OK, but the second one sounds too technical. Should I just leave out the absolute scale basis info and just have the first sentence? Or if you can write something that would be easy to understand, I can add it to the charts and upload an update.
Richard
Bookmarks