National Research Council Recommends Climate Change and Other Research Plans for the Oceans

The National Research Council (NRC), part of the National Academies of Sciences, has issued a report recommending several actions related to ocean research.  According to the report, "the United States has jurisdiction over 3.4 million square miles of ocean in its exclusive economic zone," which "represents a prime national domain for activities such as maritime transportation, national security, energy and mineral extraction, fisheries and aquaculture, and tourism and recreation." But the NRC notes that "the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami are vivid reminders that ocean activities and processes have direct human implications both nationally and worldwide, understanding of the ocean system is still incomplete, and ocean research infrastructure is needed to support both fundamental research and societal priorities."

The report, Critical Infrastructure for Ocean Research and Societal Needs in 2030, "identifies major research questions anticipated to be at the forefront of ocean science in 2030 based on national and international assessments, input from the worldwide scientific community, and ongoing research planning activities." It "defines categories of infrastructure that should be included in planning for the nation's ocean research infrastructure of 2030 and that will be required to answer the major research questions of the future."

Ocean research infrastructure supports both fundamental and applied scientific research that addresses urgent societal concerns such as climate change, human health, domestic offshore energy production, national security, marine shipping, tsunami detection and severe storm tracking, sustainable fisheries and aquaculture growth, and changes in marine ecosystem services. However, significant components of national infrastructure are aged, obsolete, or insufficient to meet growing societal demand for scientific information to enable safe, efficient, and environmentally sustainable use of the ocean. A comprehensive range of ocean research infrastructure will be needed to overcome these challenges, and more interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research will require a growing suite of infrastructure.

The report can be ordered from the National Academy Press.  A summary and a "report in brief" can also be read online or downloaded as a PDF file.

If Corexit is so bad, why is BP using it as a dispersant in the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf

Okay, I suppose "spill" isn't the right word, given that the well head continues to gush oil. Maybe leak. I've heard some say "volcano." In any case, they first have to stop the oil from flowing. But while crews are working on what I think is now Plan F or G (or perhaps U or V), other crews are dumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of dispersant into the Gulf. Word is that they will reach a million gallons shortly, with much of it being sprayed on the surface and at least 100,000 gallons injected a mile deep underwater at the well head.

But the EPA and NGOs are concerned that the dispersant of choice, Corexit, is both less effective and more toxic to aquatic life than alternatives. So why choose that one instead of something else?

In large part it is because they have lots of it on hand. And they don't have lots of whatever might be used to replace it. Even White House energy advisor, and former EPA Administrator, Carol Browner has acknowledged that "there are not as many being manufactured as people thought in the quantities" needed.

Which raises two questions. First, shouldn't this remind us that there are significant dangers to an oil-based economy, both economically and environmentally (not to mention from a national security standpoint)? And second, shouldn't companies and agencies ensure that they have on hand adequate supplies of emergency response gear and chemicals? As oil exploration goes into deeper and deeper waters the risks of catastrophic failures such as the Deepwater Horizon are likely to become more frequent.

And the dispersants don't actually get rid of the oil, just disperse it. Which means make it into smaller droplets that in theory can either degrade quicker or dilute out in a wider area. Unfortunately, these droplets actually make the oil more bioavailable to aquatic organisms. Not to mention the impact on the fishing, shellfishing, beaching, and tourist industries of the Gulf region, in particular Louisiana.

And did I mention that hurricane season is just beginning?

Are biodegradable plastics the answer to the Pacific gyre?

Not long ago I posted here about a continent of plastic circulating in the Pacific gyre, and how slow degradation of some plastics may actually be releasing toxins. Since then a great deal of discussion has taken place as what might be possible solutions. Some have suggested biodegradable materials, including biodegradable plastics, while others suggest that just adds to the problem.

The American Chemistry Council (ACC), the primary organization for large chemicals manufacturers in the United States, including the plastics industry recently issued a press release entitled "Degradable Materials Hold Great Promise, But Not a Current "Solution" to Preventable Marine Litter." In it they first argue that it is all marine debris, not just plastics, that are the problem. The then note that there isn't any one easy answer, but that most agree that "recycling, coupled with tough litter abatement laws, well-run municipal waste management systems, and behavioral changes," are needed.

The idea of biodegradable plastics and other materials has been met with mixed reviews. In general these degrade into less harmful materials, and if fully biodegradable, into carbon dioxide and water. But as the ACC release notes, Keep Los Angeles Beautiful has suggested that the perception of biodegradability actually leads people to litter more, as they think the litter will "just go away."

Another concern is that "biodegradable" is often defined broadly to include plastics that break down into smaller particles but retain much of the original chemical composition. Small particles are mistaken by marine life as food and ingested, which presents both the risk of possible leaching of materials into the bloodstream but also the risk of blockage, which keeps animals from eating normal food, extracting nutrition, and eliminating waste. Another option are bioplastics, which are actually created from renewal biomass sources such as vegetable oil and corn starch (normal plastics are derived from petroleum based sources).

So the jury is still out on what to do, but clearly the process begins with each of us, including limiting our plastic (e.g., less bottles of water and soda), recycling, and not tossing out trash into the environment.

Our Floating Plastics Legacy

At a recent meeting of the American Chemical Society, the worlds largest professional scientific society, a researcher from Japan presented a paper demonstrating that plastics floating in the ocean break down faster than expected. Previously it was thought that plastics broke down very slowly (hundreds of years) and at very high temperatures.

Normally we like chemicals that break down, that is, degrade into smaller chemicals and eventually (hopefully) into carbon dioxide and water. But the study by Dr. Katsuhiko Saido of Nihon University suggests that when the plastics break down they release contaminants - some of them potentially very toxic.

The problem is more urgent because the oceans are now filled with plastic, which the New York Times called in a recent editorial, "...an amorphous, floating mass of waste plastic trapped in a gyre of currents..." Dr. Saido reports that these floating masses of plastic are releasing similar contaminants in seawater samples collected near Malaysia and the Pacific Northwest in addition to the northern Pacific between Hawaii and Japan. The northern Pacific patch is estimated to be on the order of twice the size of the state of Texas and may contain as much as 100 million tons of plastic debris.

Since plastic waste has long been known to trap up to a million seabirds every year and some 100,000 marine mammals, the discovery that degradation of the plastic releases contaminants is an added concern.

A video of the north Pacific gyre and plastic can be seen here.

[Note: Photograph by René Ehrhardt: attribution license]