American Wind Farms
Stand underneath a wind turbine and it's easy to be awestruck.
Above you is a structure as tall as a 30-story building, with turbines as large as a football field and blades rotating at over 200MPH on the tips. It is an impressive example of energy innovation, and yet one of these mammoth wind towers provides clean, renewable energy by a simple mechanical feat -- the spinning turbines turn a generator that provides power for hundreds of homes. Wind works. Over the past four decades, wind has provided an increasing amount of the energy we use. Today, wind |
farms generate about 50,000 megawatts of clean, renewable energy -- the equivalent of the energy produced by 12 Hoover Dams.
As this report illustrates, clean, renewable energy is just the start of what we get from growing the number of wind farms across the country. The wind industry now employs 75,000 Americans. U.S. companies and their workers produce approximately 65 percent of every wind turbine part. Wind energy is giving American companies the chance to participate in a new and exciting global industries, American workers the chance to apply existing skills and seek new opportunities in a growing sector, and American communities the chance to prosper from truly clean, renewable energy.
And yet all of this growth and increased employment could be stopped in its tracks if Congress allows an important wind energy incentive -– the Production Tax Credit (PTC) –- to expire. If instead Congress acts to continue the PTC, the wind industry can continue its impressive success story. The amount of wind energy generated by U.S. wind farms has nearly tripled in the past four years, and wind power has represented at least one-third of all new power added in America over the last five years. In fact, estimates show America could get 20 percent of its electricity from wind by 2030 -– about as much as we get from nuclear energy.
This report outlines just how many jobs -- and what kinds -- low from a typical wind project. It is time to dispel the myths about wind and recognize the enormous value it provides to the health of our communities and the strength of our economy. Pulling the rug out from under wind now would cost jobs today and sacrifice future good, domestic jobs for many Americans across multiple economic sectors.
The Job-Creating Potential of Wind EnergyThis report shows that workers contributing to wind energy include everyone from engineers to construction employees; from blade manufacturers to gearbox makers; from electricians to operators. And they're located all across the country.
Our research finds that just one typical wind farm of 250-MW creates 1,079 direct jobs over the lifetime of the project. Already 25 projects of similar or greater size have already been built in the U.S., and another 100 wind projects sized from 150-MW to 250-MW are in operation.
Importantly, these jobs aren't only created on the actual wind farm site during the installation of the wind turbines. These jobs are also created throughout the sizable wind farm economic "ecosystem" -- the chain of activities and businesses that, over time, comprise the many steps of building a wind farm.
Companies and Communities Also Benefit From Wind Power
In addition to jobs, wind projects boost revenues and create new markets for a wide-range of companies across many different industries. Each of the 14 steps in building a wind farm outlined in this report represents new opportunities for dozens of companies across many different cities and states.
Moreover, wind power projects offers significant benefits to entire communities where these projects are built -- from new earnings opportunities for farmers and landowners to additional tax revenues and lease payments that support other community priorities, such as better education, infrastructure, and economic development.
Unfortunately, misconceptions about the viability of wind power downplay the strong economic and employment benefits of wind power, and ignore the continued innovation in this sector. This report is ultimately an exercise in telling the story of one large wind farm -- showing the full economic impact -- to demonstrate the impressive value created by these projects, to highlight the opportunities for American companies, communities and workers, and to caution what is at risk if we don’t continue to invest in these renewable technologies.
Across America, the U.S. wind industry is exceeding expectations. This report offers a snapshot of this emerging trend, and points the way forward for a clean energy future. We must continue this momentum by promoting strong energy policies, beginning with an extension of the Production Tax Credit for wind energy, a crucial step towards building a strong, sustainable, market leading U.S. wind industry.
As this report illustrates, clean, renewable energy is just the start of what we get from growing the number of wind farms across the country. The wind industry now employs 75,000 Americans. U.S. companies and their workers produce approximately 65 percent of every wind turbine part. Wind energy is giving American companies the chance to participate in a new and exciting global industries, American workers the chance to apply existing skills and seek new opportunities in a growing sector, and American communities the chance to prosper from truly clean, renewable energy.
And yet all of this growth and increased employment could be stopped in its tracks if Congress allows an important wind energy incentive -– the Production Tax Credit (PTC) –- to expire. If instead Congress acts to continue the PTC, the wind industry can continue its impressive success story. The amount of wind energy generated by U.S. wind farms has nearly tripled in the past four years, and wind power has represented at least one-third of all new power added in America over the last five years. In fact, estimates show America could get 20 percent of its electricity from wind by 2030 -– about as much as we get from nuclear energy.
This report outlines just how many jobs -- and what kinds -- low from a typical wind project. It is time to dispel the myths about wind and recognize the enormous value it provides to the health of our communities and the strength of our economy. Pulling the rug out from under wind now would cost jobs today and sacrifice future good, domestic jobs for many Americans across multiple economic sectors.
The Job-Creating Potential of Wind EnergyThis report shows that workers contributing to wind energy include everyone from engineers to construction employees; from blade manufacturers to gearbox makers; from electricians to operators. And they're located all across the country.
Our research finds that just one typical wind farm of 250-MW creates 1,079 direct jobs over the lifetime of the project. Already 25 projects of similar or greater size have already been built in the U.S., and another 100 wind projects sized from 150-MW to 250-MW are in operation.
Importantly, these jobs aren't only created on the actual wind farm site during the installation of the wind turbines. These jobs are also created throughout the sizable wind farm economic "ecosystem" -- the chain of activities and businesses that, over time, comprise the many steps of building a wind farm.
Companies and Communities Also Benefit From Wind Power
In addition to jobs, wind projects boost revenues and create new markets for a wide-range of companies across many different industries. Each of the 14 steps in building a wind farm outlined in this report represents new opportunities for dozens of companies across many different cities and states.
Moreover, wind power projects offers significant benefits to entire communities where these projects are built -- from new earnings opportunities for farmers and landowners to additional tax revenues and lease payments that support other community priorities, such as better education, infrastructure, and economic development.
Unfortunately, misconceptions about the viability of wind power downplay the strong economic and employment benefits of wind power, and ignore the continued innovation in this sector. This report is ultimately an exercise in telling the story of one large wind farm -- showing the full economic impact -- to demonstrate the impressive value created by these projects, to highlight the opportunities for American companies, communities and workers, and to caution what is at risk if we don’t continue to invest in these renewable technologies.
Across America, the U.S. wind industry is exceeding expectations. This report offers a snapshot of this emerging trend, and points the way forward for a clean energy future. We must continue this momentum by promoting strong energy policies, beginning with an extension of the Production Tax Credit for wind energy, a crucial step towards building a strong, sustainable, market leading U.S. wind industry.
By using wind turbines to create energy we are able to reduce the use of fossil fuels, which allows for cleaner energy.
Carbon X Prize: Can We Make Carbon Emissions Green? 10/12/15
The X Prize Foundation is calling green innovators from around the globe to compete in its latest contest. To win the Carbon X Prize, teams must create usable products out of carbon dioxide gas — the same gas that's spewed from power plants and anywhere fossil fuels are burned.
"The winning team will convert the most CO2 [carbon dioxide] emissions into the highest-value products," Paul Bunje, principal and senior scientist of Energy & Environment at X Prize, said in a statement. "To be competitive, teams will have to make the business case for their approach as well as minimize their |
use of energy, water, land and other inputs that have consequences for the environment."
Carbon dioxide is a heat-trapping gas that is also the main cause of global warming, scientists agree. The more coal-based energy humans consume, the more greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide enter the atmosphere and heat up Earth. The effects of global warming are already showing up, from accelerated melting of ice sheets, to more intense and frequent storms, to wildlife having to move their ranges north as they try to beat the heat. [8 Ways Global Warming Is Already Changing the World]
"Some people may believe that any solutions we find will be too late to make a difference, but that attitude runs counter to the spirit of innovation and optimism that has driven human and economic development for centuries," Bunje said. "With the right amount of passion, focus and investment, we can and we will find the portfolio of solutions necessary to address climate change."
Whereas there have been big innovations in carbon-capturetechnology, in which CO2 from fossil-fuel power plants is taken from fossil fuels and stored so it's not released into the atmosphere, there has been little research that focuses on turning carbon dioxide into useful products, such as a fuel or new material, according to the X Prize Foundation.
"There is work, mostly in research, to turn carbon dioxide into fuels, cements and other materials like graphene and carbon nanotubes," Bunje said. "Our goal is to take [this type of innovation], really accelerate it and get it to the scale that's really necessary. To not just research how to do this, but actually employ it."
And X Prize representatives are hoping all innovative minds will step up.
"We have this phrase we use internally [at X Prize]: innovation can come from anywhere. Anywhere on the planet and from any type of background," Bunje told Live Science.
In addition to the usual suspects — scientists and innovators from start-up companies — Bunje and his colleagues also expect that garage innovators — people who've just been tinkering around on their own — will participate in the Carbon X Prize challenge. In the past, high school students have made a showing in X Prize competitions.
If you think you have something to contribute to a team to find a workable technology, even if it's not a fully formed idea, it's worth throwing "your hat into the ring," Bunje said.
Innovators who decide to compete can choose between two tracks: converting emissions from either a natural gas power plant or a coal power plant. The first phases involve getting teams together for the competition, then each team will work on and submit their technology and business plans to the X Prize judges.
Based on the teams' submissions, judges will then conduct the first round of eliminations. Only the top fifteen teams for each track will move on. A 12-month pilot-scale competition will follow, during which the remaining teams will build their technologies. Next, the judges will pick the top five contenders for each track. These top teams will receive a $5,000 prize and continue on to the final round, where they will scale up the original technology to an industrial level, to demonstrate how the technology uses carbon dioxide emissions from a power plant, straight from the source, and turns those emissions into the final product.
The winners for each track will be awarded $10 million.
Called the "$20M NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE," the competition is sponsored by COSIA, Canada's Oil Sands Innovation Alliance, and NRG, a company that aims to deliver cleaner and smarter energy for the U.S. energy industry.
X Prize, an organization dedicated to creating incentivized prize competitions to encourage innovators who want to change the world for the better, has organized several such competitions in the past, including the Wendy Schmidt Oil Cleanup XChallenge and the Progressive Automotive X Prize. Registration for the Carbon X Prize has officially opened, and will close in June 2016. Interested parties can sign up on the X Prize website. The competition will run until March 2020, when the grand prize winner will be announced.
Carbon dioxide is a heat-trapping gas that is also the main cause of global warming, scientists agree. The more coal-based energy humans consume, the more greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide enter the atmosphere and heat up Earth. The effects of global warming are already showing up, from accelerated melting of ice sheets, to more intense and frequent storms, to wildlife having to move their ranges north as they try to beat the heat. [8 Ways Global Warming Is Already Changing the World]
"Some people may believe that any solutions we find will be too late to make a difference, but that attitude runs counter to the spirit of innovation and optimism that has driven human and economic development for centuries," Bunje said. "With the right amount of passion, focus and investment, we can and we will find the portfolio of solutions necessary to address climate change."
Whereas there have been big innovations in carbon-capturetechnology, in which CO2 from fossil-fuel power plants is taken from fossil fuels and stored so it's not released into the atmosphere, there has been little research that focuses on turning carbon dioxide into useful products, such as a fuel or new material, according to the X Prize Foundation.
"There is work, mostly in research, to turn carbon dioxide into fuels, cements and other materials like graphene and carbon nanotubes," Bunje said. "Our goal is to take [this type of innovation], really accelerate it and get it to the scale that's really necessary. To not just research how to do this, but actually employ it."
And X Prize representatives are hoping all innovative minds will step up.
"We have this phrase we use internally [at X Prize]: innovation can come from anywhere. Anywhere on the planet and from any type of background," Bunje told Live Science.
In addition to the usual suspects — scientists and innovators from start-up companies — Bunje and his colleagues also expect that garage innovators — people who've just been tinkering around on their own — will participate in the Carbon X Prize challenge. In the past, high school students have made a showing in X Prize competitions.
If you think you have something to contribute to a team to find a workable technology, even if it's not a fully formed idea, it's worth throwing "your hat into the ring," Bunje said.
Innovators who decide to compete can choose between two tracks: converting emissions from either a natural gas power plant or a coal power plant. The first phases involve getting teams together for the competition, then each team will work on and submit their technology and business plans to the X Prize judges.
Based on the teams' submissions, judges will then conduct the first round of eliminations. Only the top fifteen teams for each track will move on. A 12-month pilot-scale competition will follow, during which the remaining teams will build their technologies. Next, the judges will pick the top five contenders for each track. These top teams will receive a $5,000 prize and continue on to the final round, where they will scale up the original technology to an industrial level, to demonstrate how the technology uses carbon dioxide emissions from a power plant, straight from the source, and turns those emissions into the final product.
The winners for each track will be awarded $10 million.
Called the "$20M NRG COSIA Carbon XPRIZE," the competition is sponsored by COSIA, Canada's Oil Sands Innovation Alliance, and NRG, a company that aims to deliver cleaner and smarter energy for the U.S. energy industry.
X Prize, an organization dedicated to creating incentivized prize competitions to encourage innovators who want to change the world for the better, has organized several such competitions in the past, including the Wendy Schmidt Oil Cleanup XChallenge and the Progressive Automotive X Prize. Registration for the Carbon X Prize has officially opened, and will close in June 2016. Interested parties can sign up on the X Prize website. The competition will run until March 2020, when the grand prize winner will be announced.
By converting the carbon we are producing into something useful it will allow for us to tey and reduce some of the damage we are causing. Carbon is aiding in the heating of the Earth if we keep adding carbon to the atmosphere heat will continue to be trapped.
Distant Volcanic Roars Reveal Eruption Hazards
4/4/16 Live Science
The roar of a volcano erupting on a remote Alaska island reveals important details about the blast, such as its size and location, a newstudy reports.
Armed with this new information, scientists in Alaska are listening to volcanoes to better pinpoint eruption hazards.
"Sound waves are very good at telling you about how, when and where a volcano is erupting," said lead study author David Fee, a research assistant professor at the Alaska Volcano Observatory and Wilson Alaska Technical Center in Fairbanks.
he findings were published today (April 4) in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. [Big Blasts: History's 10 Most Destructive Volcanoes]
Erupting volcanoes are often compared to thundering jet engines. The sound is loud enough to shake the ground nearby, similar to how a passing garbage truck may rattle windows in an apartment or a house. Seismometers placed near a volcano can detect this shaking, called ground-coupled airwaves, Fee told Live Science. Ground-coupled airwaves (GCAs) occur when an acoustic wave in the atmosphere impacts the Earth's surface. Meteors and nuclear explosions also trigger GCAs. The signals are fairly small compared with felt earthquakes, Fee said.
The shaking pattern produced by sound waves, which travel through the air, looks different from the shaking of earthquake waves, which travel only through the ground, the study showed.
By looking at the sounds picked up by seismometers, the scientists can gather information that otherwise would not be available, Fee said. For instance, thick clouds may hide a volcano from the prying view of a satellite, but monitoring of sound and earthquakes can help determine whether or not volcanic activity is at the surface or only underground. Volcanoes unleash earthquakes and tremors before an eruption as lava and hot fluids push their way through underground fissures. The actual trembling produced by those sound waves starts only once the eruption begins.
"This study is a good example of using data beyond its initial, intended purpose," Fee said. "Due to the high number, remoteness and difficult logistics of the volcanoes we monitor, we often have less than ideal monitoring networks. In these cases, we use as many processing techniques as possible to help monitor and understand these volcanoes."
Knowing whether an eruption has started is crucial in southwest Alaska, because large ash clouds from volcanoes in the Aleutian Islands can affect international flight paths, as with the flights canceled when Pavlof volcano erupted in late March.
Pavlof volcano is one of the three fiery peaks where Fee and his colleagues tested their new technique. The other Alaskan volcanoes studied are Cleveland and Mount Veniaminof. During eruptions at Pavlof volcano in 2007 and 2013, the researchers were able to locate the source to within about 100 feet (within tens of meters).
The Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) already monitors some volcanoes in the state with infrasound — low-frequency sound waves outside of the range of human hearing. The AVO has now added sound-wave-monitoring to its arsenal of techniques, the researchers reported.
"We definitely plan on extending this type of monitoring," Fee said.
However, Alaska's volcanoes continue to hold surprises, even at closely monitored volcanoes such as Pavlof. The most recent eruption of Pavlof, in March 2016, started with essentially no warning.
Armed with this new information, scientists in Alaska are listening to volcanoes to better pinpoint eruption hazards.
"Sound waves are very good at telling you about how, when and where a volcano is erupting," said lead study author David Fee, a research assistant professor at the Alaska Volcano Observatory and Wilson Alaska Technical Center in Fairbanks.
he findings were published today (April 4) in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. [Big Blasts: History's 10 Most Destructive Volcanoes]
Erupting volcanoes are often compared to thundering jet engines. The sound is loud enough to shake the ground nearby, similar to how a passing garbage truck may rattle windows in an apartment or a house. Seismometers placed near a volcano can detect this shaking, called ground-coupled airwaves, Fee told Live Science. Ground-coupled airwaves (GCAs) occur when an acoustic wave in the atmosphere impacts the Earth's surface. Meteors and nuclear explosions also trigger GCAs. The signals are fairly small compared with felt earthquakes, Fee said.
The shaking pattern produced by sound waves, which travel through the air, looks different from the shaking of earthquake waves, which travel only through the ground, the study showed.
By looking at the sounds picked up by seismometers, the scientists can gather information that otherwise would not be available, Fee said. For instance, thick clouds may hide a volcano from the prying view of a satellite, but monitoring of sound and earthquakes can help determine whether or not volcanic activity is at the surface or only underground. Volcanoes unleash earthquakes and tremors before an eruption as lava and hot fluids push their way through underground fissures. The actual trembling produced by those sound waves starts only once the eruption begins.
"This study is a good example of using data beyond its initial, intended purpose," Fee said. "Due to the high number, remoteness and difficult logistics of the volcanoes we monitor, we often have less than ideal monitoring networks. In these cases, we use as many processing techniques as possible to help monitor and understand these volcanoes."
Knowing whether an eruption has started is crucial in southwest Alaska, because large ash clouds from volcanoes in the Aleutian Islands can affect international flight paths, as with the flights canceled when Pavlof volcano erupted in late March.
Pavlof volcano is one of the three fiery peaks where Fee and his colleagues tested their new technique. The other Alaskan volcanoes studied are Cleveland and Mount Veniaminof. During eruptions at Pavlof volcano in 2007 and 2013, the researchers were able to locate the source to within about 100 feet (within tens of meters).
The Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) already monitors some volcanoes in the state with infrasound — low-frequency sound waves outside of the range of human hearing. The AVO has now added sound-wave-monitoring to its arsenal of techniques, the researchers reported.
"We definitely plan on extending this type of monitoring," Fee said.
However, Alaska's volcanoes continue to hold surprises, even at closely monitored volcanoes such as Pavlof. The most recent eruption of Pavlof, in March 2016, started with essentially no warning.
Gasoline use contributes to air pollutionGasoline is a toxic and highly flammable liquid. The vapors given off when gasoline evaporates and the substances produced when it is burned (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and unburned hydrocarbons) contribute to air pollution. Burning gasoline also produces carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas linked to global climate change.1
Did you know?Burning a gallon of gasoline (that does not contain ethanol) produces about 19.6 pounds of carbon dioxide.
In 2014, total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline combustion were about 1,077 million metric tons, approximately 20% of total U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions.
Laws like the Clean Air Act reduce environmental impacts Americans used about 375 million gallons of gasoline per day in 2014. Most gasoline is used in cars, light trucks, and motorcycles, but it is also used in small aircraft, boats, and water craft, and in landscaping and construction equipment. Reducing pollution from these sources has been a focus of environmental laws in the United States.
The Clean Air Act is a law that seeks to reduce air pollution in the United States. The Clean Air Act (first passed in 1970) and its amendments have aimed to reduce pollution from gasoline use by requiring the use of less polluting engines and fuels2, among other items. To meet its goals, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented several changes following the passage of the act:
Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), one of the chemicals added to gasoline to help it burn cleaner, is toxic, and a number of states started banning the use of MTBE in gasoline in the late 1990s. By 2007, the U.S. refining industry had voluntarily stopped using MTBE when making reformulated gasoline for sale in the United States. MTBE was replaced with ethanol, which is not toxic.
Did you know?Burning a gallon of gasoline (that does not contain ethanol) produces about 19.6 pounds of carbon dioxide.
In 2014, total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline combustion were about 1,077 million metric tons, approximately 20% of total U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions.
Laws like the Clean Air Act reduce environmental impacts Americans used about 375 million gallons of gasoline per day in 2014. Most gasoline is used in cars, light trucks, and motorcycles, but it is also used in small aircraft, boats, and water craft, and in landscaping and construction equipment. Reducing pollution from these sources has been a focus of environmental laws in the United States.
The Clean Air Act is a law that seeks to reduce air pollution in the United States. The Clean Air Act (first passed in 1970) and its amendments have aimed to reduce pollution from gasoline use by requiring the use of less polluting engines and fuels2, among other items. To meet its goals, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented several changes following the passage of the act:
- Required emissions control devices and cleaner burning engines—Emissions control devices on passenger vehicles were required beginning in 1976. In the 1990s, the EPA established emissions standards for other types of vehicles and for engines used in gasoline-burning off road equipment.
- Removed leaded gasoline—Lead in gasoline proved to be a public health concern. The move away from leaded gasoline began in 1976 when catalytic converters were installed in new vehicles to reduce the emission of toxic air pollutants. Vehicles equipped with a catalytic converter cannot operate on leaded gasoline because the presence of lead in the fuel damages the catalytic converter. Leaded gasoline was completely phased out of the U.S. fuel system by 1986.
- Required the use of reformulated gasoline—Beginning in 1995, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 required the use of cleaner burning reformulated gasoline to reduce air pollution in metropolitan areas that had significant ground-level ozone pollution.
- Required the supply of low-sulfur gasoline—Since 2006, refiners have been required to supply gasoline with 90% less sulfur content than they made in 2004. More reductions in gasoline sulfur content are planned to begin in 2017. Gasoline with lower sulfur content reduces emissions from old and new vehicles, and it is necessary for advanced vehicle emission control devices to work properly.
- Reduced risk of gasoline leaks—Gasoline leaks happen at gas stations every day. As people fill up their gas tanks, gasoline drips from the nozzle onto the ground and vapors leak from the open gas tank into the air. Gasoline leaks can also happen in pipelines or in underground storage tanks4 where they can't be seen. Beginning in 1990, all underground storage tanks had to be replaced by tanks with double lining. The double lining provides an additional safeguard for preventing leaks.
Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), one of the chemicals added to gasoline to help it burn cleaner, is toxic, and a number of states started banning the use of MTBE in gasoline in the late 1990s. By 2007, the U.S. refining industry had voluntarily stopped using MTBE when making reformulated gasoline for sale in the United States. MTBE was replaced with ethanol, which is not toxic.
Having goals for reducing green house gasses is only good if companies, cities, and towns actually follow through with the plan.
New kind of Hydrothermal vent forms ghostly chimneys 12/28/15
Deep in the Caribbean Sea, researchers have discovered a new type of hydrothermal vent unlike any seen before, with huge, ghostly mounds formed from an ingredient common in baby powder.
Typical hydrothermal vents consist mostly of sulfide minerals, but these vents in the Von Damm Vent Field south of the Cayman Islands are made mostly of talc, a magnesium-silicate mineral.
"This vent site is home to a community of fauna similar to those found at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge in the Atlantic Ocean," study researcher Matthew Hodgkinson, a postgraduate scientist at the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom, said in a statement, referring to the plate boundary that slices through the Atlantic. "But the minerals and chemistry at the Von Damm site are very different to other known vents."
The underwater geography of the Von Damm Vent Field in the Caribbean.
Credit: National Oceanography Centre
Deep in the Caribbean Sea, researchers have discovered a new type of hydrothermal vent unlike any seen before, with huge, ghostly mounds formed from an ingredient common in baby powder.
Typical hydrothermal vents consist mostly of sulfide minerals, but these vents in the Von Damm Vent Field south of the Cayman Islands are made mostly of talc, a magnesium-silicate mineral.
"This vent site is home to a community of fauna similar to those found at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge in the Atlantic Ocean," study researcher Matthew Hodgkinson, a postgraduate scientist at the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom, said in a statement, referring to the plate boundary that slices through the Atlantic. "But the minerals and chemistry at the Von Damm site are very different to other known vents."
Hydrothermal vents occur in spots where tectonic forces pull the Earth's crust apart like taffy. Magma from below the surface heats water in the crust, dissolving minerals into the seawater. Bizarre ocean creatures, including tube worms, snails and eels, are often drawn to these nutrient-rich sites. [Photos: See Creatures of the Deepest Deep-Sea Vents]
The main vent at the Von Damm Vent Field south of the Cayman Islands. Vents at this field have an unusual mineral composition of 85 percent to 90 percent talc.
Credit: National Oceanography Centre
View full size imageResearchers discovered the Von Damm Vent Field in 2010. The vents are on the western side of the Mid-Cayman Spreading Center, a tectonically active area. Talc mounds up to 246 feet (75 meters) tall loom over the seafloor there.
The vent system is hotter than scientists would expect, given that it is on the edge of the spreading center rather than right in the middle of the action, researchers said. The field transfers approximately 500 megawatts of heat into the surrounding ocean. This heat comes from hot water — 392 degrees Fahrenheit (200 degrees Celsius) — flowing at a rate of about 500 kilograms (1,100 lbs.) per second from the vents, the researchers reported on Dec. 22 in the journal Nature Communications.
When this hot, subsurface water hits the cooler ocean, minerals dissolved in the hot water precipitate out, creating ghostly chimney structures. In the Van Damm vent field, these chimneys are 85 percent to 95 percent talc by volume. Silica and a few sulfide minerals make up the rest of the chimneys' volume.
"If more of these unusual sites exist, they could be important contributors in the exchange of chemicals and heat between the Earth's interior and the oceans, and may be missing from current global assessments of hydrothermal impact on the oceans," Hodgkinson said.
The Van Damm Vent Field sits on the slopes of an underwater mountain called Mount Dent, located 7,546 feet (2,300 m) below the ocean surface. Masses of shrimp crowd the vents, which also host snail species never before found elsewhere. Nearby is the Beebe Vent Field, thedeepest vent ever discovered, at 16,273 feet (4,960 m) below the ocean surface. Those vents are home to flowerlike sea anemones, as well as other deep-sea organisms.
Typical hydrothermal vents consist mostly of sulfide minerals, but these vents in the Von Damm Vent Field south of the Cayman Islands are made mostly of talc, a magnesium-silicate mineral.
"This vent site is home to a community of fauna similar to those found at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge in the Atlantic Ocean," study researcher Matthew Hodgkinson, a postgraduate scientist at the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom, said in a statement, referring to the plate boundary that slices through the Atlantic. "But the minerals and chemistry at the Von Damm site are very different to other known vents."
The underwater geography of the Von Damm Vent Field in the Caribbean.
Credit: National Oceanography Centre
Deep in the Caribbean Sea, researchers have discovered a new type of hydrothermal vent unlike any seen before, with huge, ghostly mounds formed from an ingredient common in baby powder.
Typical hydrothermal vents consist mostly of sulfide minerals, but these vents in the Von Damm Vent Field south of the Cayman Islands are made mostly of talc, a magnesium-silicate mineral.
"This vent site is home to a community of fauna similar to those found at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge in the Atlantic Ocean," study researcher Matthew Hodgkinson, a postgraduate scientist at the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom, said in a statement, referring to the plate boundary that slices through the Atlantic. "But the minerals and chemistry at the Von Damm site are very different to other known vents."
Hydrothermal vents occur in spots where tectonic forces pull the Earth's crust apart like taffy. Magma from below the surface heats water in the crust, dissolving minerals into the seawater. Bizarre ocean creatures, including tube worms, snails and eels, are often drawn to these nutrient-rich sites. [Photos: See Creatures of the Deepest Deep-Sea Vents]
The main vent at the Von Damm Vent Field south of the Cayman Islands. Vents at this field have an unusual mineral composition of 85 percent to 90 percent talc.
Credit: National Oceanography Centre
View full size imageResearchers discovered the Von Damm Vent Field in 2010. The vents are on the western side of the Mid-Cayman Spreading Center, a tectonically active area. Talc mounds up to 246 feet (75 meters) tall loom over the seafloor there.
The vent system is hotter than scientists would expect, given that it is on the edge of the spreading center rather than right in the middle of the action, researchers said. The field transfers approximately 500 megawatts of heat into the surrounding ocean. This heat comes from hot water — 392 degrees Fahrenheit (200 degrees Celsius) — flowing at a rate of about 500 kilograms (1,100 lbs.) per second from the vents, the researchers reported on Dec. 22 in the journal Nature Communications.
When this hot, subsurface water hits the cooler ocean, minerals dissolved in the hot water precipitate out, creating ghostly chimney structures. In the Van Damm vent field, these chimneys are 85 percent to 95 percent talc by volume. Silica and a few sulfide minerals make up the rest of the chimneys' volume.
"If more of these unusual sites exist, they could be important contributors in the exchange of chemicals and heat between the Earth's interior and the oceans, and may be missing from current global assessments of hydrothermal impact on the oceans," Hodgkinson said.
The Van Damm Vent Field sits on the slopes of an underwater mountain called Mount Dent, located 7,546 feet (2,300 m) below the ocean surface. Masses of shrimp crowd the vents, which also host snail species never before found elsewhere. Nearby is the Beebe Vent Field, thedeepest vent ever discovered, at 16,273 feet (4,960 m) below the ocean surface. Those vents are home to flowerlike sea anemones, as well as other deep-sea organisms.
More thermal pollution for the earths oceans. How are we just beginning to learn about this?
Transforming the Electricity Sector to Meet Our Clean Energy Goals 12/14/15
Electric and natural gas utilities account for more than half of all global- warming pollution associated with fossil fuel consumption in the United States so if we are to meet the ambitious carbon reduction goals from the Paris meeting of the United Nation's Conference on Climate Change (COP21), we must significantly transform America's electric and natural gas sectors. NRDC's new Issue Brief, "A Vision for the Future of the Electric Industry," lays out some important steps in that process.
Utilities are a critical part of the solution and remain the most important - although not the only - investors, long-term system planners, and resource integrators of our electric and natural gas system. Key changes in how they are regulated - some already underway - could significantly change the way they do business and speed up decarbonization of our energy system. And these changes must help customers get the cleaner energy, lower bills, and access to innovative technologies like rooftop solar and electric vehicles (EVs) they want.
Change is underway
The electricity sector is already transforming - led by both technology innovation and policy trends. Our electricity consumption has grown at only half the rate of the U.S. population since 2000 - largely because of energy efficiency (which reduces our need for dirty power plants); over that same period, wind and solar production have grown at a record pace, while their costs continue falling. Other technologies such as advanced energy meters in our buildings, electric vehicles, and demand response (compensating customers for altering the times of their energy use) are changing how the electric grid operates, too.
Meanwhile, new players are entering the marketplace to offer customers alternative energy services and technology options. States are increasingly taking action to curb harmful carbon pollution and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan to limit power plant emissions is expected to accelerate the trend toward cleaner, more efficient electricity. But these trends, at their current pace, will not get us far enough, fast enough.
All of these positive trends can be significantly accelerated and scaled up if utilities are properly motivated. And the best way to do that?
Diversity in Models with Common Elements
There is no single answer because America's electric utilities come in many different sizes and shapes: public (municipals, cooperatives) and private (investor-owned); vertically integrated (they own their system from generation to wires going into the home) or not; cold and warm weather and everything in between.
However, there are common elements that are necessary to ensure the cleanest and most efficient, equitable, and affordable electric system possible. These components--which establish incentives for action by utilities, customers, operators of the grid, and regulators-- along with NRDC's vision for the future of the electric industry are here.
On the right track...
We have already made significant progress with one of the most fundamental reforms - changing the utility's principal focus from primarily selling electricity to instead focusing on meeting customers' service needs and our energy and carbon reduction goals. A regulatory rate structure known as revenue decoupling makes utilities indifferent to retail energy sales by using modest annual adjustments in rates to ensure the utility recovers its authorized costs - no more, no less. This helps remove the disincentive for utilities to promote energy efficiency programs like weatherization, which save customers money but reduce utility energy sales. As of December 2015, 15 states had revenue decoupling in place for electric utilities and 22 for natural gas utilities; the number of utilities covered stood at 34 and 55, respectively (three time more than five years earlier).
Solar rooftop systems and EVs are gaining traction due to improved and cheaper technologies and supportive policies. Forty-four states (plus D.C.) have net metering policies in place that compensate customers with rooftop solar panels for sending the excess electricity they generate back to the grid, and this has contributed to a new solar project being installed every two minutes in the first half of 2015 and costs decreasing more than 73 percent from 2006. A new law in California makes replacing oil as the dominant transportation fuel a core mission of the electric industry, recognizing the expanded role utilities should play in supporting public EV charging infrastructure and ensuring EVs provide benefits to the electricity grid. Other utilities across the country are also moving forward with EV investments, including Southern Company and Kansas City Power and Light.
While most transformations are occurring one policy or rate design at a time, a few processes are tackling regulatory reform in a more comprehensive manner, looking at rate design, planning processes and performance-based incentives as a package. New York's Reforming the Energy Vision (REV), Minnesota's E21 Initiative, and California's closely coordinated proceedings are examples.
...with a couple threatened derailments
This past year has seen a threat to our transition to a clean energy future, with a proliferation of utility proposals to institute large fixed charges on customers' monthly utility bills, meaning they'll pay a specific amount no matter how much energy they use. Utilities are looking at these charges to ensure they recover adequate revenues to maintain the electric system, but there are better solutions. Fixed charges reduce rewards to customers for investing in energy efficiency and rooftop solar that can reduce their consumption and bills. At least 35 utilities requested significant increases in fixed charges in 2015, drawing widespread and vehement opposition. But at least 75 percent of the commission decisions in these cases substantially reduced or rejected those increases outright - a very good sign. These rejections are changing the conversation. NRDC's issue brief discusses some of the preferred alternatives that will better incent the efficient use and deployment of utility investments in clean energy.
There is good news in our efforts to decarbonize the electricity and natural gas sectors, but we need more, faster. Transforming the electric industry will help us kick it up a few notches.
Utilities are a critical part of the solution and remain the most important - although not the only - investors, long-term system planners, and resource integrators of our electric and natural gas system. Key changes in how they are regulated - some already underway - could significantly change the way they do business and speed up decarbonization of our energy system. And these changes must help customers get the cleaner energy, lower bills, and access to innovative technologies like rooftop solar and electric vehicles (EVs) they want.
Change is underway
The electricity sector is already transforming - led by both technology innovation and policy trends. Our electricity consumption has grown at only half the rate of the U.S. population since 2000 - largely because of energy efficiency (which reduces our need for dirty power plants); over that same period, wind and solar production have grown at a record pace, while their costs continue falling. Other technologies such as advanced energy meters in our buildings, electric vehicles, and demand response (compensating customers for altering the times of their energy use) are changing how the electric grid operates, too.
Meanwhile, new players are entering the marketplace to offer customers alternative energy services and technology options. States are increasingly taking action to curb harmful carbon pollution and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan to limit power plant emissions is expected to accelerate the trend toward cleaner, more efficient electricity. But these trends, at their current pace, will not get us far enough, fast enough.
All of these positive trends can be significantly accelerated and scaled up if utilities are properly motivated. And the best way to do that?
Diversity in Models with Common Elements
There is no single answer because America's electric utilities come in many different sizes and shapes: public (municipals, cooperatives) and private (investor-owned); vertically integrated (they own their system from generation to wires going into the home) or not; cold and warm weather and everything in between.
However, there are common elements that are necessary to ensure the cleanest and most efficient, equitable, and affordable electric system possible. These components--which establish incentives for action by utilities, customers, operators of the grid, and regulators-- along with NRDC's vision for the future of the electric industry are here.
On the right track...
We have already made significant progress with one of the most fundamental reforms - changing the utility's principal focus from primarily selling electricity to instead focusing on meeting customers' service needs and our energy and carbon reduction goals. A regulatory rate structure known as revenue decoupling makes utilities indifferent to retail energy sales by using modest annual adjustments in rates to ensure the utility recovers its authorized costs - no more, no less. This helps remove the disincentive for utilities to promote energy efficiency programs like weatherization, which save customers money but reduce utility energy sales. As of December 2015, 15 states had revenue decoupling in place for electric utilities and 22 for natural gas utilities; the number of utilities covered stood at 34 and 55, respectively (three time more than five years earlier).
Solar rooftop systems and EVs are gaining traction due to improved and cheaper technologies and supportive policies. Forty-four states (plus D.C.) have net metering policies in place that compensate customers with rooftop solar panels for sending the excess electricity they generate back to the grid, and this has contributed to a new solar project being installed every two minutes in the first half of 2015 and costs decreasing more than 73 percent from 2006. A new law in California makes replacing oil as the dominant transportation fuel a core mission of the electric industry, recognizing the expanded role utilities should play in supporting public EV charging infrastructure and ensuring EVs provide benefits to the electricity grid. Other utilities across the country are also moving forward with EV investments, including Southern Company and Kansas City Power and Light.
While most transformations are occurring one policy or rate design at a time, a few processes are tackling regulatory reform in a more comprehensive manner, looking at rate design, planning processes and performance-based incentives as a package. New York's Reforming the Energy Vision (REV), Minnesota's E21 Initiative, and California's closely coordinated proceedings are examples.
...with a couple threatened derailments
This past year has seen a threat to our transition to a clean energy future, with a proliferation of utility proposals to institute large fixed charges on customers' monthly utility bills, meaning they'll pay a specific amount no matter how much energy they use. Utilities are looking at these charges to ensure they recover adequate revenues to maintain the electric system, but there are better solutions. Fixed charges reduce rewards to customers for investing in energy efficiency and rooftop solar that can reduce their consumption and bills. At least 35 utilities requested significant increases in fixed charges in 2015, drawing widespread and vehement opposition. But at least 75 percent of the commission decisions in these cases substantially reduced or rejected those increases outright - a very good sign. These rejections are changing the conversation. NRDC's issue brief discusses some of the preferred alternatives that will better incent the efficient use and deployment of utility investments in clean energy.
There is good news in our efforts to decarbonize the electricity and natural gas sectors, but we need more, faster. Transforming the electric industry will help us kick it up a few notches.
People are now seeing the benefits of cleaner energy goals.
Hot Oceans Are Killing Coral Reefs Around the World 10/8/15
For the past year, the world’s corals have been getting increasingly pummeled by climate change. Now with El Niño kicking ocean heat into overdrive, much of the world’s oceans have turned deadly for the world’s corals.
On Thursday, the National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration (NOAA) announced a global coral bleaching event. This year joins the ranks of 1997 and 2010 as the only times on record that bleaching has occurred in all three of the world’s oceans that support coral at the same time. All three global bleaching events have occurred in El Niño years, and the climate phenomenon definitely has a role to play. But the ever-rising temperatures underwater and above |
due to climate change are the biggest reason corals are currently dying off across a 4,600-square mile area in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans.“The baseline temperature has heated so much that reefs are no longer able to cope with what's normal in El Niño years,” Richard Vevers, director of the XL Catlin Seaview Survey, said. “These events are going to become more and more common as climate change goes on. Coral bleaching is such a spectacle; the equivalent above water would be a rainforest turning white.”
Once ocean waters warm past a certain threshold, coral begin to die off because they can’t support the algae that sustain them. The result is ghostly forests of white coral.
Without the protection of reefs, small islands lose their first line of defense against storm surge as well as ecosystems that support fisheries and tourism for more than 500 million people. Reefs also support about a quarter of all marine species despite covering less than 0.1 percent of the world’s oceans. In addition to bleaching, ocean acidification and wild sea level swings due to El Niño are also conspiring to cripple reefs.
The current spate of bleaching began in 2014, a year that saw record warmth on both land and sea. Temperatures have since continued to climb in 2015 (and 2016 is already looking pretty hot, too), resulting in coral dying off everywhere from the Caribbean to Hawaii to the Indian Ocean’s Coral Triangle.
The die-off around Hawaii has been particularly worrisome with more than a third of the island chain’s coral experiencing bleaching since 2014, including areas that have never seen bleaching occur before. Mark Eakin, the coordinator of NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch, said that by the year’s end, more than 60 percent of the state’s corals could suffer the same fate. All told, 95 percent of the corals in the U.S. are expected to be exposed to bleaching.
Because of the magnitude of the strong El Niño and the growing climate change signal in the oceans, Eakin said that NOAA is issuing an extended forecast for reefs through May for the first time. It is not a good forecast for reefs.
“The worst part about it is if you look at Indian Ocean, its showing that the thermal stress is going to be worse in 2016 than 2015,” Eakin said.
NOAA scientists have been working with Catlin Seaview Survey to monitor reefs before, during and after bleaching events to see the impacts occurring in real time. Vevers and his team have been using high resolution, panoramic photography that provides valuable scientific information on how different species are affected by heat as well as powerful images that show the impacts of climate change on some of the world’s most delicate ecosystems.
As much as the efforts are helping scientists identify the impacts climate change is having on corals, it’s also helping them identify areas and species that can survive in ever-warming waters.
“One thing that imagery provides us with is information on places where we should be putting more investments and taking more action to protect reefs that may be resilient to climate change,” Eakin said. “The other is by demonstrating the rate at which we’re losing resources. It provides very valuable information on what we stand to lose by not addressing climate change and the importance of addressing climate change and doing it quickly. We stand to lose a lot.”
Once ocean waters warm past a certain threshold, coral begin to die off because they can’t support the algae that sustain them. The result is ghostly forests of white coral.
Without the protection of reefs, small islands lose their first line of defense against storm surge as well as ecosystems that support fisheries and tourism for more than 500 million people. Reefs also support about a quarter of all marine species despite covering less than 0.1 percent of the world’s oceans. In addition to bleaching, ocean acidification and wild sea level swings due to El Niño are also conspiring to cripple reefs.
The current spate of bleaching began in 2014, a year that saw record warmth on both land and sea. Temperatures have since continued to climb in 2015 (and 2016 is already looking pretty hot, too), resulting in coral dying off everywhere from the Caribbean to Hawaii to the Indian Ocean’s Coral Triangle.
The die-off around Hawaii has been particularly worrisome with more than a third of the island chain’s coral experiencing bleaching since 2014, including areas that have never seen bleaching occur before. Mark Eakin, the coordinator of NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch, said that by the year’s end, more than 60 percent of the state’s corals could suffer the same fate. All told, 95 percent of the corals in the U.S. are expected to be exposed to bleaching.
Because of the magnitude of the strong El Niño and the growing climate change signal in the oceans, Eakin said that NOAA is issuing an extended forecast for reefs through May for the first time. It is not a good forecast for reefs.
“The worst part about it is if you look at Indian Ocean, its showing that the thermal stress is going to be worse in 2016 than 2015,” Eakin said.
NOAA scientists have been working with Catlin Seaview Survey to monitor reefs before, during and after bleaching events to see the impacts occurring in real time. Vevers and his team have been using high resolution, panoramic photography that provides valuable scientific information on how different species are affected by heat as well as powerful images that show the impacts of climate change on some of the world’s most delicate ecosystems.
As much as the efforts are helping scientists identify the impacts climate change is having on corals, it’s also helping them identify areas and species that can survive in ever-warming waters.
“One thing that imagery provides us with is information on places where we should be putting more investments and taking more action to protect reefs that may be resilient to climate change,” Eakin said. “The other is by demonstrating the rate at which we’re losing resources. It provides very valuable information on what we stand to lose by not addressing climate change and the importance of addressing climate change and doing it quickly. We stand to lose a lot.”
Another example of climate change with the eating of our oceans our once vibrant coral reefs are beginning to die. Not only are we losing a natural beauty but a natural defense. Coral act as barriers for natural storms
Oil-Eating Microbes Threaten Shipwrecks and Ocean Life 4/7/16 Live Science
The microbes that once thrived around deep-sea shipwrecks in the Gulf of Mexico have transformed significantly after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, according to a new study. These dramatic changes to the microorganisms that live on and near historically significant vessels could wreak havoc on the vessels and ocean life itself, researchers say.
There are more than 2,000 known shipwrecks on the ocean floor in the Gulf of Mexico, spanning more than 500 years of history, from the time of Spanish explorers to the Civil War and through World War II, according to the researchers.
"The first time I saw a chart showing the abundance of shipwrecks along our coasts, my jaw dropped," said Jennifer Salerno, a marine microbial ecologist at George Mason University in Virginia. "You can't look at an image like that and not question whether or not they are impacting the environment in some way." [Shipwrecks Gallery: Secrets of the Deep]
These decades-to-centuries-old wrecks can serve as artificial reefs supporting deep-sea ecosystems, "oases of life in an otherwise barren deep sea," Salerno told Live Science. "Once you put something, anything, in the ocean, microorganisms will immediately colonize it, forming biofilms. These biofilms contain chemicals produced by the microorganisms that serve as cues for other organisms like bivalves and corals to settle down and make a living on the wreck. In turn, larger and more mobile animals like fish are attracted to the presence of the smaller organisms — that is, food — and the three-dimensional structure of the ship itself, a good place to seek refuge from predators."
The shipwrecks might also hold untold historical secrets. "The history of our species is not only encoded in our DNA; it is found in the physical remains left behind by past human populations. Archaeological sites such as historic shipwrecks — vessels that sank more than 50 years ago — represent snapshots of time from our collective human history," said Melanie Damour, a marine archaeologist at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, an agency within the U.S. Interior Department. "Each and every shipwreck is unique and has its own story to tell — from how, when, and where it was constructed and by whom, to how it participated in the activities that shaped who we are today."
A 3D laser scan of the stern section of the German U-boat, U-166, that sunk in the Gulf of Mexico during World War II. The scan shows the U-boat’s conning tower and the build-up of sediments around the hull. Scientists will use this data to document changes at the shipwreck sites, including areas of hull collapse or weakening, and other site-formation processes.
Credit: BOEM/C&C Technologies, Inc.
View full size imageIn 2010, the Gulf of Mexico experienced the worst man-made environmental disaster in U.S. history, after explosions at the Deepwater Horizon oil rig caused more than 170 million gallons (643 million liters) of oil to spill into the water. In 2014, scientists launched a project to investigate the impacts of this catastrophe on deep-sea shipwrecks and the ecosystems they support in the Gulf — an estimated 30 percent of the oil from the spill ended up deposited in the deep sea, in areas that contain shipwrecks, the researchers said.
"What we hope to learn from this study is if those impacts will affect the long-term preservation of these sites, which, in turn, has significant repercussions for their continued ecological role and the amount of time that we have left to record their archaeological information before it is lost forever," Damour, co-leader of the research project, told Live Science.
The scientists found that shipwrecks influence which microbes are present on the seafloor. These microbes in turn form the foundation for other life, such as coral, crabs and fish.
Furthermore, the researchers found the Deepwater Horizon oil spill had a dramatic effect on nearby shipwreck microbial communities even four years after the disaster. Such changes might in turn impact other parts of their ecosystems, the researchers said. [SOS! 10 Major Oil Disasters at Sea]
Specifically, in sediment layers within the Deepwater Horizon oil plume, the scientists detected "oil snow" — cell debris and other chemicals produced by microorganisms that have come into contact with oil, making the oil heavy and causing it to sink rather than float. In this oil snow, the researchers found DNA from bacteria whose closest relatives break down oil for energy.
"There are many known microorganisms that are able to consume oil for energy and metabolism. When oil is present, they have the potential to flourish," said Leila Hamdan, a marine microbial ecologist at George Mason University and co-leader of the project.
The presence of oil-eating microbes in these sediments is not surprising, because the Gulf of Mexico has plenty of natural oil seeps. "What is surprising is that we see so many of the same species in the same place at the same time," Hamdan told Live Science. "It seems that the chemicals in this oil snow material allow a handful of microorganisms to dominate these sediments. Imagine a party invitation goes out to 400 people, and one-third of them show up wearing exactly the same dress. You would wonder why and how that happened. What cue in the invitation caused them to all go choose that same outfit from their closets? It's an exciting task to find out why it happened."
By changing what microbes dominate shipwreck habitats, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill may have had untold effects on those ecosystems, the researchers said. "These communities have evolved over millions of years to be efficient and metabolically diverse," Hamdan said. "Any time a human activity changes these communities, there is potential for harm to the ecosystem." [Coral Crypt: Photos of Damage from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill]
The scientists also found that exposure to oil spurred microbes to increase metal corrosion. This suggests that the oil spill could potentially speed up degradation of steel-hulled wrecks, said Salerno, a collaborator on the research project.
"We are concerned that the degradation of these sites a lot faster than normal will cause the permanent loss of information that we can never get back," Damour said in a statement. "These are pieces of our collective human history down there and they are worth protecting."
Future research into these unique shipwreck habitats could help protect and conserve both the life that lives there and the shipwrecks themselves, the scientists added.
"The microbial ecological and molecular biological datasets can help us track change over time and measure ecosystem recovery from the microscale," Damour said. "The marine archaeological data, especially the 3D laser and 3D acoustic scans of the shipwrecks and their immediate surroundings, can help us observe and measure macroscale change over time. Are the shipwrecks degrading faster in some areas? Are the wrecks within the spill-impacted areas collapsing or in danger of collapse in the near future? How are the resident biological communities affected? These are all questions that are worth asking."
There are more than 2,000 known shipwrecks on the ocean floor in the Gulf of Mexico, spanning more than 500 years of history, from the time of Spanish explorers to the Civil War and through World War II, according to the researchers.
"The first time I saw a chart showing the abundance of shipwrecks along our coasts, my jaw dropped," said Jennifer Salerno, a marine microbial ecologist at George Mason University in Virginia. "You can't look at an image like that and not question whether or not they are impacting the environment in some way." [Shipwrecks Gallery: Secrets of the Deep]
These decades-to-centuries-old wrecks can serve as artificial reefs supporting deep-sea ecosystems, "oases of life in an otherwise barren deep sea," Salerno told Live Science. "Once you put something, anything, in the ocean, microorganisms will immediately colonize it, forming biofilms. These biofilms contain chemicals produced by the microorganisms that serve as cues for other organisms like bivalves and corals to settle down and make a living on the wreck. In turn, larger and more mobile animals like fish are attracted to the presence of the smaller organisms — that is, food — and the three-dimensional structure of the ship itself, a good place to seek refuge from predators."
The shipwrecks might also hold untold historical secrets. "The history of our species is not only encoded in our DNA; it is found in the physical remains left behind by past human populations. Archaeological sites such as historic shipwrecks — vessels that sank more than 50 years ago — represent snapshots of time from our collective human history," said Melanie Damour, a marine archaeologist at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, an agency within the U.S. Interior Department. "Each and every shipwreck is unique and has its own story to tell — from how, when, and where it was constructed and by whom, to how it participated in the activities that shaped who we are today."
A 3D laser scan of the stern section of the German U-boat, U-166, that sunk in the Gulf of Mexico during World War II. The scan shows the U-boat’s conning tower and the build-up of sediments around the hull. Scientists will use this data to document changes at the shipwreck sites, including areas of hull collapse or weakening, and other site-formation processes.
Credit: BOEM/C&C Technologies, Inc.
View full size imageIn 2010, the Gulf of Mexico experienced the worst man-made environmental disaster in U.S. history, after explosions at the Deepwater Horizon oil rig caused more than 170 million gallons (643 million liters) of oil to spill into the water. In 2014, scientists launched a project to investigate the impacts of this catastrophe on deep-sea shipwrecks and the ecosystems they support in the Gulf — an estimated 30 percent of the oil from the spill ended up deposited in the deep sea, in areas that contain shipwrecks, the researchers said.
"What we hope to learn from this study is if those impacts will affect the long-term preservation of these sites, which, in turn, has significant repercussions for their continued ecological role and the amount of time that we have left to record their archaeological information before it is lost forever," Damour, co-leader of the research project, told Live Science.
The scientists found that shipwrecks influence which microbes are present on the seafloor. These microbes in turn form the foundation for other life, such as coral, crabs and fish.
Furthermore, the researchers found the Deepwater Horizon oil spill had a dramatic effect on nearby shipwreck microbial communities even four years after the disaster. Such changes might in turn impact other parts of their ecosystems, the researchers said. [SOS! 10 Major Oil Disasters at Sea]
Specifically, in sediment layers within the Deepwater Horizon oil plume, the scientists detected "oil snow" — cell debris and other chemicals produced by microorganisms that have come into contact with oil, making the oil heavy and causing it to sink rather than float. In this oil snow, the researchers found DNA from bacteria whose closest relatives break down oil for energy.
"There are many known microorganisms that are able to consume oil for energy and metabolism. When oil is present, they have the potential to flourish," said Leila Hamdan, a marine microbial ecologist at George Mason University and co-leader of the project.
The presence of oil-eating microbes in these sediments is not surprising, because the Gulf of Mexico has plenty of natural oil seeps. "What is surprising is that we see so many of the same species in the same place at the same time," Hamdan told Live Science. "It seems that the chemicals in this oil snow material allow a handful of microorganisms to dominate these sediments. Imagine a party invitation goes out to 400 people, and one-third of them show up wearing exactly the same dress. You would wonder why and how that happened. What cue in the invitation caused them to all go choose that same outfit from their closets? It's an exciting task to find out why it happened."
By changing what microbes dominate shipwreck habitats, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill may have had untold effects on those ecosystems, the researchers said. "These communities have evolved over millions of years to be efficient and metabolically diverse," Hamdan said. "Any time a human activity changes these communities, there is potential for harm to the ecosystem." [Coral Crypt: Photos of Damage from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill]
The scientists also found that exposure to oil spurred microbes to increase metal corrosion. This suggests that the oil spill could potentially speed up degradation of steel-hulled wrecks, said Salerno, a collaborator on the research project.
"We are concerned that the degradation of these sites a lot faster than normal will cause the permanent loss of information that we can never get back," Damour said in a statement. "These are pieces of our collective human history down there and they are worth protecting."
Future research into these unique shipwreck habitats could help protect and conserve both the life that lives there and the shipwrecks themselves, the scientists added.
"The microbial ecological and molecular biological datasets can help us track change over time and measure ecosystem recovery from the microscale," Damour said. "The marine archaeological data, especially the 3D laser and 3D acoustic scans of the shipwrecks and their immediate surroundings, can help us observe and measure macroscale change over time. Are the shipwrecks degrading faster in some areas? Are the wrecks within the spill-impacted areas collapsing or in danger of collapse in the near future? How are the resident biological communities affected? These are all questions that are worth asking."
We are losing a window to our past because organisms are evolving do to our own mistakes.
Endangered species killed in Savannah Harbor 2/8/16 Sand and Gravel
COLUMBIA, SC
In the past six weeks, five federally protected marine animals have been killed at Savannah Harbor as work crews dredge the shipping channel to maintain and deepen Georgia’s biggest port.
A green sea turtle, two Atlantic sturgeon and a loggerhead sea turtle have died during dredging work since Jan. 1, while a leatherback sea turtle was killed under unknown circumstances, say officials with the National Marine Fisheries Service.
At this point, federal agencies aren’t overly concerned about the deaths because they say some animals — even rare ones — are expected to be killed during dredging projects, such as the $706 million port deepening underway this winter.
But if too many federally protected species die as a result of dredging, it could affect how port deepening and maintenance are conducted in the future.
Should it become apparent the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will exceed the number of animals legally allowed to be killed during dredging, the fisheries service could require tighter controls on the dredging operations at Savannah, the fisheries service said last week.
That could range from a different dredging schedule to a temporary shut down of the work so officials can seek better ways to protect endangered species. Such measures likely would occur in extreme circumstances, federal officials said.
“If they had more takes than we anticipated, we would have a conversation, basically, on why we think that was happening,’’ said David Bernhart, a marine fisheries service protected resources administrator. “Are there any additional measures that would avoid this?’’
Savannah, like Charleston, is racing to deepen its harbor to accommodate larger ships.
The Corps’ port dredging project in Savannah finally began in the fall after more than 15 years of battles over the environmental impact the work would have on the harbor and on the Savannah River. The dredging will deepen the shipping channel from 42 to 47 feet. Charleston has had issues, as well, although dredging there has not produced the bitter fights that preceded the launch of the Savannah project.
Having a deeper channel for bigger ships is expected to keep both ports competitive — but the Savannah and Charleston dredging projects have an array of environmental rules that must be followed, including protection for endangered or threatened species such as sea turtles, fish and whales.
That includes limits on the number of animals that can be killed.
The Savannah port deepening work, for instance, allows dredges to “take,’’ or kill no more than four Atlantic sturgeon during the harbor deepening project over three winters. That leaves room to kill only two more Atlantic sturgeon during the dredging project over its three-winter schedule. The two sturgeon that died Jan. 26 were discovered by an independent contractor assigned to the dredge, according to the Corps of Engineers.
Atlantic sturgeon are among the most recent additions to the federal Endangered Species Act list. In 2012, the federal government declared Atlantic sturgeon as endangered and in need of protection because populations are declining. A large, prehistoric-looking fish covered in bony plates, the Atlantic sturgeon can grow to 16 feet. Their numbers have dwindled because of overfishing and habitat loss.
Dredges in Savannah also aren’t allowed to kill more than three green sea turtles while the work continues over three winters. That leaves only two more green turtles that can be killed during the harbor deepening work.
Green sea turtles are large reptiles that can grow to 4 feet long and weigh up to 440 pounds, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The federal government listed them under the Endangered Species Act in 1978 as the loss of nesting habitat, entanglement in fishing nets and other factors took their toll on the sea reptiles. Their populations have rebounded in recent years and federal officials are considering loosening some restrictions. Still, green sea turtles remain protected and are not common in Georgia or South Carolina during the winter.
The marine fisheries service “is always concerned about the loss of (endangered or threatened) species, but we recognize that sometimes losses are unavoidable due to the type of action being performed,’’ service spokeswoman Kim Amendola said, noting that “the use of hopper dredges as a part of the Savannah Harbor deepening is essential to completing the work safely in a reasonable time frame.’’
Deaths ‘alarming’Jaclyn Lopez, an endangered species lawyer with the Center for Biological Diversity, called the deaths of five rare animals in six weeks “alarming.’’ While the fisheries service doesn’t think the deaths will hurt overall efforts to replenish turtle and sturgeon populations, Lopez said the loss of a single animal shouldn’t be ignored.
“It does seem alarming that you would lose five of these individuals,’’ Lopez said. “We are not talking about pigeons. We are talking about animals that in some cases are very rare and in other cases have been placed on the precipice of extinction because of different combined factors that have mostly humans behind them.’’
When animals are protected under the Endangered Species Act, specific plans often are developed to help species recover from years of population declines.
Corps officials in both Savannah and Charleston said they are committed to following rules to protect rare animals and fish. Sometimes, for instance, that involves measures to frighten sea turtles so they will move out of the path of dredges, said Savannah Corps spokesman Billy Birdwell.
“We can’t see the bottom of the ocean out there,’’ Birdwell said, noting that the Corps doesn’t have cameras to look for turtles in the murky water. But he said “We do what we can to basically scare the turtles away. Sometimes we’ll drag something along in front of the dredge that moves them out of the way, that stirs them up or wakes them up.’’
Glenn Jeffries, a spokeswoman for the Corps in Charleston, said her agency will follow a plan to protect sea turtles when dredging starts at the South Carolina port, a major competitor to Savannah for business. That $521 million project is expected to begin in about two years. Channels would be deepened from 45 to 52 feet.
Fisheries service officials said the green sea turtle and the two sturgeon may have died because they were near the bottom of the harbor and in the path of hopper dredges, considered more dangerous to some marine life than other types of dredges.
As opposed to some dredges, a hopper sucks material from the bottom with the use of machinery that is dragged across the harbor floor, according to the Corps. But the dredges move faster than some marine life that lie in their path — and that can be lethal. From 2000 to 2010, for instance, hopper dredges killed 10 sea turtles in Savannah Harbor’s navigational channel.
As a result, hopper dredging is to occur only from mid-December through March, when sea turtles are less likely to be in the area, the Corps says. Hopper dredging has been in the harbor’s outer channel this winter, the Marine Fisheries Service says.
Still, it’s not common for hopper dredges, the preferred machinery used by Corps contractors, to kill either green sea turtles or sturgeon.
The juvenile green turtle that died Jan. 5 in Savannah is only the second known green sea turtle to have been killed during a dredging operation in the history of the Georgia port, Bernhart said. One was killed four years ago during a maintenance dredging job, records show.
Loggerheads and leatherbacksIn addition to the green sea turtle and two sturgeon that died from the harbor deepening project, a maintenance dredge killed a loggerhead sea turtle Jan. 1, according to the marine fisheries service.
Loggerhead sea turtles, which can grow to three feet long and weigh 250 pounds, are more common on the Georgia and South Carolina coasts than green sea turtles. Loggerheads were listed as threatened in 1978 under the Endangered Species Act. The maintenance dredging operation that killed the loggerhead is not connected to the dredging to deepen the harbor.
Federal officials say they do not think the recent death of a leatherback sea turtle, reported Jan. 11, was related to dredging because the animals are not typically found near the bottom of harbors and in the path of dredges. Officials are unsure what killed the sea turtle, but say it may have been a ship strike. Leatherbacks are the largest of sea turtles, growing to up to 6 feet and weighing as much as a ton. They are known to migrate great distances. They are listed as endangered under the law.
But federal officials think warmer weather is why some sea turtles, particularly cold-intolerant green sea turtles, lingered in the area longer than they normally would have. Water temperatures along the coast remained in the 60s through much of December and early January, according to federal and state data.
On New Year’s Day, for instance, the water temperature reached 67 degrees in Charleston Harbor, according to the S.C. Department of Natural Resources.
With cooler weather recently, water temperatures along the South Carolina-Georgia coast have dropped into the upper 40s and low 50's. That gives hope that green sea turtles have moved back toward Florida while this winter’s dredging continues, state and federal officials said.
In the past six weeks, five federally protected marine animals have been killed at Savannah Harbor as work crews dredge the shipping channel to maintain and deepen Georgia’s biggest port.
A green sea turtle, two Atlantic sturgeon and a loggerhead sea turtle have died during dredging work since Jan. 1, while a leatherback sea turtle was killed under unknown circumstances, say officials with the National Marine Fisheries Service.
At this point, federal agencies aren’t overly concerned about the deaths because they say some animals — even rare ones — are expected to be killed during dredging projects, such as the $706 million port deepening underway this winter.
But if too many federally protected species die as a result of dredging, it could affect how port deepening and maintenance are conducted in the future.
Should it become apparent the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will exceed the number of animals legally allowed to be killed during dredging, the fisheries service could require tighter controls on the dredging operations at Savannah, the fisheries service said last week.
That could range from a different dredging schedule to a temporary shut down of the work so officials can seek better ways to protect endangered species. Such measures likely would occur in extreme circumstances, federal officials said.
“If they had more takes than we anticipated, we would have a conversation, basically, on why we think that was happening,’’ said David Bernhart, a marine fisheries service protected resources administrator. “Are there any additional measures that would avoid this?’’
Savannah, like Charleston, is racing to deepen its harbor to accommodate larger ships.
The Corps’ port dredging project in Savannah finally began in the fall after more than 15 years of battles over the environmental impact the work would have on the harbor and on the Savannah River. The dredging will deepen the shipping channel from 42 to 47 feet. Charleston has had issues, as well, although dredging there has not produced the bitter fights that preceded the launch of the Savannah project.
Having a deeper channel for bigger ships is expected to keep both ports competitive — but the Savannah and Charleston dredging projects have an array of environmental rules that must be followed, including protection for endangered or threatened species such as sea turtles, fish and whales.
That includes limits on the number of animals that can be killed.
The Savannah port deepening work, for instance, allows dredges to “take,’’ or kill no more than four Atlantic sturgeon during the harbor deepening project over three winters. That leaves room to kill only two more Atlantic sturgeon during the dredging project over its three-winter schedule. The two sturgeon that died Jan. 26 were discovered by an independent contractor assigned to the dredge, according to the Corps of Engineers.
Atlantic sturgeon are among the most recent additions to the federal Endangered Species Act list. In 2012, the federal government declared Atlantic sturgeon as endangered and in need of protection because populations are declining. A large, prehistoric-looking fish covered in bony plates, the Atlantic sturgeon can grow to 16 feet. Their numbers have dwindled because of overfishing and habitat loss.
Dredges in Savannah also aren’t allowed to kill more than three green sea turtles while the work continues over three winters. That leaves only two more green turtles that can be killed during the harbor deepening work.
Green sea turtles are large reptiles that can grow to 4 feet long and weigh up to 440 pounds, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The federal government listed them under the Endangered Species Act in 1978 as the loss of nesting habitat, entanglement in fishing nets and other factors took their toll on the sea reptiles. Their populations have rebounded in recent years and federal officials are considering loosening some restrictions. Still, green sea turtles remain protected and are not common in Georgia or South Carolina during the winter.
The marine fisheries service “is always concerned about the loss of (endangered or threatened) species, but we recognize that sometimes losses are unavoidable due to the type of action being performed,’’ service spokeswoman Kim Amendola said, noting that “the use of hopper dredges as a part of the Savannah Harbor deepening is essential to completing the work safely in a reasonable time frame.’’
Deaths ‘alarming’Jaclyn Lopez, an endangered species lawyer with the Center for Biological Diversity, called the deaths of five rare animals in six weeks “alarming.’’ While the fisheries service doesn’t think the deaths will hurt overall efforts to replenish turtle and sturgeon populations, Lopez said the loss of a single animal shouldn’t be ignored.
“It does seem alarming that you would lose five of these individuals,’’ Lopez said. “We are not talking about pigeons. We are talking about animals that in some cases are very rare and in other cases have been placed on the precipice of extinction because of different combined factors that have mostly humans behind them.’’
When animals are protected under the Endangered Species Act, specific plans often are developed to help species recover from years of population declines.
Corps officials in both Savannah and Charleston said they are committed to following rules to protect rare animals and fish. Sometimes, for instance, that involves measures to frighten sea turtles so they will move out of the path of dredges, said Savannah Corps spokesman Billy Birdwell.
“We can’t see the bottom of the ocean out there,’’ Birdwell said, noting that the Corps doesn’t have cameras to look for turtles in the murky water. But he said “We do what we can to basically scare the turtles away. Sometimes we’ll drag something along in front of the dredge that moves them out of the way, that stirs them up or wakes them up.’’
Glenn Jeffries, a spokeswoman for the Corps in Charleston, said her agency will follow a plan to protect sea turtles when dredging starts at the South Carolina port, a major competitor to Savannah for business. That $521 million project is expected to begin in about two years. Channels would be deepened from 45 to 52 feet.
Fisheries service officials said the green sea turtle and the two sturgeon may have died because they were near the bottom of the harbor and in the path of hopper dredges, considered more dangerous to some marine life than other types of dredges.
As opposed to some dredges, a hopper sucks material from the bottom with the use of machinery that is dragged across the harbor floor, according to the Corps. But the dredges move faster than some marine life that lie in their path — and that can be lethal. From 2000 to 2010, for instance, hopper dredges killed 10 sea turtles in Savannah Harbor’s navigational channel.
As a result, hopper dredging is to occur only from mid-December through March, when sea turtles are less likely to be in the area, the Corps says. Hopper dredging has been in the harbor’s outer channel this winter, the Marine Fisheries Service says.
Still, it’s not common for hopper dredges, the preferred machinery used by Corps contractors, to kill either green sea turtles or sturgeon.
The juvenile green turtle that died Jan. 5 in Savannah is only the second known green sea turtle to have been killed during a dredging operation in the history of the Georgia port, Bernhart said. One was killed four years ago during a maintenance dredging job, records show.
Loggerheads and leatherbacksIn addition to the green sea turtle and two sturgeon that died from the harbor deepening project, a maintenance dredge killed a loggerhead sea turtle Jan. 1, according to the marine fisheries service.
Loggerhead sea turtles, which can grow to three feet long and weigh 250 pounds, are more common on the Georgia and South Carolina coasts than green sea turtles. Loggerheads were listed as threatened in 1978 under the Endangered Species Act. The maintenance dredging operation that killed the loggerhead is not connected to the dredging to deepen the harbor.
Federal officials say they do not think the recent death of a leatherback sea turtle, reported Jan. 11, was related to dredging because the animals are not typically found near the bottom of harbors and in the path of dredges. Officials are unsure what killed the sea turtle, but say it may have been a ship strike. Leatherbacks are the largest of sea turtles, growing to up to 6 feet and weighing as much as a ton. They are known to migrate great distances. They are listed as endangered under the law.
But federal officials think warmer weather is why some sea turtles, particularly cold-intolerant green sea turtles, lingered in the area longer than they normally would have. Water temperatures along the coast remained in the 60s through much of December and early January, according to federal and state data.
On New Year’s Day, for instance, the water temperature reached 67 degrees in Charleston Harbor, according to the S.C. Department of Natural Resources.
With cooler weather recently, water temperatures along the South Carolina-Georgia coast have dropped into the upper 40s and low 50's. That gives hope that green sea turtles have moved back toward Florida while this winter’s dredging continues, state and federal officials said.
Large companies aren't worrying about whats below them if they were they'd be more cautious of their surroundings
Great Barrier Reef Devastated by Coral Bleaching 4/21/2016 live science
We knew coral bleaching was a serious issue in the Great Barrier Reef, but the scope of just how widespread it was has been unclear — until now.
Extensive aerial surveys and dives have revealed that 93 percent of the world's largest reef has been devastated by coral bleaching. The culprit has been record-warm water driven by El Niño and climate change that has cooked the life out of corals.
The unprecedented destruction brought leading reef scientist Terry Hughes, who runs the ARC Center of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, to tears
"We've never seen anything like this scale of bleaching before. In the northern Great Barrier Reef, it's like 10 cyclones have come ashore all at once," Hughes said in a press release.
The Center conducted aerial surveys and dives at 911 sites spanning the full 1,430-mile length of the reef. They show the hardest hit areas are in the northern part of the reefs, which have also endured some of the hottest water temperatures for prolonged periods.
More than 80 percent of reefs surveyed there showed signs of severe bleaching. The southern end of the reef fared better, but overall the bleaching represents a massive blow to biodiversity at the UNESCO World Heritage Site.
The Great Barrier Reef also faces pressure from ocean acidification and fishing impacts, ramping up concerns over how to protect one of the most unique ecosystems on the planet
Beyond its beauty, the Great Barrier Reef also has a huge economic benefit on the Australian economy. It generates $4.45 billion in tourism revenue annually and supports nearly 70,000 jobs, according to theGreat Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.
The damage caused by this round of bleaching will be felt for decades, but it's not the only reef around the globe to feel the heat of climate change. 2015 marked the third global coral bleaching event ever recorded. This one been the longest of the three as hot ocean temperatures fueled by El Niño and climate change have caused reefs to suffer across every ocean basin.
While every basin has been hit, some reefs and coral species have survived through the event. That has scientists trying to quickly understand why the survivors made it through. That knowledge could be crucial to ensure reefs continue to survive as oceans temperatures continue their inexorable rise and water becomes more acidic due to climate change.
"We can't afford to sit by and watch climate change drive all the world's coral reefs to extinctions by the end of the century," Julia Baum, a reef researcher at the University of Victoria, said
Extensive aerial surveys and dives have revealed that 93 percent of the world's largest reef has been devastated by coral bleaching. The culprit has been record-warm water driven by El Niño and climate change that has cooked the life out of corals.
The unprecedented destruction brought leading reef scientist Terry Hughes, who runs the ARC Center of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, to tears
"We've never seen anything like this scale of bleaching before. In the northern Great Barrier Reef, it's like 10 cyclones have come ashore all at once," Hughes said in a press release.
The Center conducted aerial surveys and dives at 911 sites spanning the full 1,430-mile length of the reef. They show the hardest hit areas are in the northern part of the reefs, which have also endured some of the hottest water temperatures for prolonged periods.
More than 80 percent of reefs surveyed there showed signs of severe bleaching. The southern end of the reef fared better, but overall the bleaching represents a massive blow to biodiversity at the UNESCO World Heritage Site.
The Great Barrier Reef also faces pressure from ocean acidification and fishing impacts, ramping up concerns over how to protect one of the most unique ecosystems on the planet
Beyond its beauty, the Great Barrier Reef also has a huge economic benefit on the Australian economy. It generates $4.45 billion in tourism revenue annually and supports nearly 70,000 jobs, according to theGreat Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.
The damage caused by this round of bleaching will be felt for decades, but it's not the only reef around the globe to feel the heat of climate change. 2015 marked the third global coral bleaching event ever recorded. This one been the longest of the three as hot ocean temperatures fueled by El Niño and climate change have caused reefs to suffer across every ocean basin.
While every basin has been hit, some reefs and coral species have survived through the event. That has scientists trying to quickly understand why the survivors made it through. That knowledge could be crucial to ensure reefs continue to survive as oceans temperatures continue their inexorable rise and water becomes more acidic due to climate change.
"We can't afford to sit by and watch climate change drive all the world's coral reefs to extinctions by the end of the century," Julia Baum, a reef researcher at the University of Victoria, said
This is an example for people to see that climate change is actually really and is already starting to cause problems in the world. Seeing stories like this makes in hard to think that climate change isn't real.
Solutions to Plastic Pollution in our Oceans
We're treating the oceans like a trash bin: around 80 percent of marine litter originates on land, and most of that is plastic. Plastic that pollutes our oceans and waterways has severe impacts on our environment and our economy. Seabirds, whales, sea turtles and other marine life are eating marine plastic pollution and dying from choking, intestinal blockage and starvation. Scientists are investigating the long-term impacts of toxic pollutants absorbed, transported, and consumed by fish and other marine life, including the potential effects on human health.
|
Marine life need our help to clean and help prevent harmful substances and objects from entering the water.
The pumping of wastewater underground is not only causing earthquakes but could be harming the land
Acid Test
Thawing permafrost, climate change's ticking time bomb? 11/20/15
On the front line of climate change in the Canadian Arctic, scientists are hunting for clues to a potentially catastrophic global warming trend: melting permafrost, a layer of soil or rock that is - or should be - frozen all year round. Video provided by AFP
By taking this class and completing this scrapbook, I learned to observe the environment in a whole new light. I have realized that new environmental issues develop every day. This class has taught me that there are many issues that occur due to both natural and human forces. Some of the natural forces that impact our environment are ones like the death of coral reefs do to the increase in the temperature of the Earth’s oceans and the shrinking snowpack of the Sierra Nevada. Some human forces which impact the environment issues and are relevant in our modern society are the decreasing amount of potable water available, the pros and cons of certain waste management systems, and the need to develop clean energy sources. However, the most important lesson that I learned through taking this environmental science class is how much I realized how applicable environmental science is to everyday life.
Through the media and popular culture today, there is a strong effort to promote an eco-friendly lifestyle. By taking this environmental science class, I was given the knowledge that helped me understand what an eco-friendly lifestyle actually is. I learned that not every decision is as simple as choosing this product or that one. Sometimes decisions are much more complex. When it comes to environmental issues, economics is a major factor for consumers, manufacturers, businesses, and even governments. Protecting the environment without causing financial stress on consumers or businesses is a difficult balance. It is easy to be anthropocentric and make decisions that only favors humans. It is just as easy to be ecocentric and favor the environment. I learned through this class that the challenge is finding the balance between the two points of view.
Finally, by completing this scrapbook, I learned that we live in a small world. Everything is connected to everything else. Decisions that we make every day can either help or hurt our ecosystems. For example, we can choose to use paper instead of plastic bags and recycle the plastic bags we do use. One might think that only one person will not make much of a difference, but choosing not to use plastic will reduce the amount of plastic that ends up in our oceans and this will cause a ripple effect. Less plastic in the ocean means less plastic that can kill fish by creating a choking hazard. It also means less plastic that fish and marine mammals consume. Healthier fish and marine mammals will create a healthier ocean environment. So something as small as one person deciding to use paper instead of plastic can have a significant impact on the environment. Small changes in my daily routine can help the environment and a small group of like-minded people can come together to change the world.
Through the media and popular culture today, there is a strong effort to promote an eco-friendly lifestyle. By taking this environmental science class, I was given the knowledge that helped me understand what an eco-friendly lifestyle actually is. I learned that not every decision is as simple as choosing this product or that one. Sometimes decisions are much more complex. When it comes to environmental issues, economics is a major factor for consumers, manufacturers, businesses, and even governments. Protecting the environment without causing financial stress on consumers or businesses is a difficult balance. It is easy to be anthropocentric and make decisions that only favors humans. It is just as easy to be ecocentric and favor the environment. I learned through this class that the challenge is finding the balance between the two points of view.
Finally, by completing this scrapbook, I learned that we live in a small world. Everything is connected to everything else. Decisions that we make every day can either help or hurt our ecosystems. For example, we can choose to use paper instead of plastic bags and recycle the plastic bags we do use. One might think that only one person will not make much of a difference, but choosing not to use plastic will reduce the amount of plastic that ends up in our oceans and this will cause a ripple effect. Less plastic in the ocean means less plastic that can kill fish by creating a choking hazard. It also means less plastic that fish and marine mammals consume. Healthier fish and marine mammals will create a healthier ocean environment. So something as small as one person deciding to use paper instead of plastic can have a significant impact on the environment. Small changes in my daily routine can help the environment and a small group of like-minded people can come together to change the world.