RE: [geo] Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios Carbon emissions and their ocean impacts
Greg,Ocean Scientists need to do a better job of explaining that "hands-off-the-oceans" isn't working, ocean science and engineering is at the beginning of the learning curve with way more opportunity for Earth and Water saving results than terrestrial research. Also, ocean-based research toward greenhouse gas issues will solve more immediate needs for food, fresh water, and energy. Traditional Marine Sanctuaries are not The world’s oceans are in peril from warming, acidification, contaminants in terrestrial runoff, overfishing, etc. Of these perils, there is no prospect of marine sanctuary safe from warming and acidification, both of which result from increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Warming presents several dangers: 1) organisms are weakened or die from heat stress; 2) warmer water holds less dissolved oxygen (fish die); 3) less oxygen means less ammonia converted to nitrate (more toxins, less plant food); 4) less oxygen favors more conversion of nitrate to nitrogen gas (less plant food). Acidification weakens and kills shell-forming creatures causing mass extinctions up the food chain. Warming from increased CO2 in the atmosphere lags fossil fuel burning by a few decades and persists for a millennium. The pH reduction spreads through the oceans more quickly, but is also not instantaneous. Even if humanity stopped burning fossil fuels today, the ocean continues warming and pH dropping such that traditional Marine Sanctuaries might delay, but won’t prevent mass extinctions within and around them. Actively managed Marine Sanctuaries can be Actively managed Marine Sanctuaries, ecosystem seaweed farming, can be oases for diverse sea life with cool, oxygen-rich, higher pH.water. Seaweed absorb CO2 and emit O2 during photosynthesis. Less dissolved CO2 means higher pH water for more robust shell-forming. More dissolved O2 means fish can breathe, ammonia gets converted to nitrate, more nitrate remains to sustain plant growth. The need for cooling is temporary, perhaps a few weeks per year now, increasing to a few months per year within a century. Actively managed Marine Sanctuaries are more easily established when they address other pressing human and ocean issues: food; fresh water; excess nutrient deadzones; overfishing; etc. Some Ocean Foresters are involved in a trial of this concept with the University of Washington and the Puget Sound Restoration Fund. Other human issues put pressure on oceans Humanity already sees strife and hunger due to population increase, expectations increase, greenhouse gases, fresh water shortage, and fresh water uncertainty. While attempting to grow more terrestrial foods, humanity creates ocean dead zones and overdrafts groundwater supplies. The increased atmospheric CO2 makes it harder for terrestrial farmers to obtain bank loans because the farmers (and the banks) cannot count on historic weather. (Plant a drought tolerant crop or a flood tolerant crop?) The United Nations is predicting population will peak near 10 billion people around 2050, but with food and energy expectations nearer to the expectations of double today’s 7 billion. MarkMark E. Capron, PEVentura, Californiawww.PODenergy.org Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [geo] Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios Carbon emissions and their ocean impacts From: Greg Rau <gh...@sbcglobal.net> Date: Fri, July 03, 2015 12:20 pm To: geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>, andrew.lock...@gmail.com Cc: gatt...@obs-vlfr.fr, mark.ea...@noaa.gov, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg <o...@uq.edu.au>, rpke...@uw.edu Thanks, Andrew. From the paper: "Management options Limiting the effects of ocean warming and acid- ification is critical considering the widespread risks of impacts facing natural and human sys- tems, even under a stringent emissions scenario (RCP2.6; Fig. 2). A growing body of literature presents options for action in response to climate change and ocean acidification (143–145). Draw- ing on Billé et al. (146), these actions can be clus- tered in four groups (Fig. 4): reducing the drivers of climate change and ocean acidification (mit- igate), building or maintaining resilience in eco- systems (protect), adapting human societies (adapt), and repairing damage that has already occurred (repair). At present, only one of these (reducing CO2 emissions) addresses the fundamental prob- lem; the others merely delay or decrease impacts (e.g., protecting reefs from major disturbances such as coral mining). Some actions rely on readi- ly available technologies (e.g., sewage treatment plants to reduce exacerbating effects of coastal nutrient pollution) and socioeconomic mecha- nisms (e.g., coastal setback zones), whereas more engineering-intensive techniques are being devel- oped and will require testing (e.g., removal of CO2 from the atmosphere). These options inter
Re: [geo] Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios Carbon emissions and their ocean impacts
Thanks, Andrew. From the paper: "Management options Limiting the effects of ocean warming and acid- ification is critical considering the widespread risks of impacts facing natural and human sys- tems, even under a stringent emissions scenario (RCP2.6; Fig. 2). A growing body of literature presents options for action in response to climate change and ocean acidification (143–145). Draw- ing on Billé et al. (146), these actions can be clus- tered in four groups (Fig. 4): reducing the drivers of climate change and ocean acidification (mit- igate), building or maintaining resilience in eco- systems (protect), adapting human societies (adapt), and repairing damage that has already occurred (repair). At present, only one of these (reducing CO2 emissions) addresses the fundamental prob- lem; the others merely delay or decrease impacts (e.g., protecting reefs from major disturbances such as coral mining). Some actions rely on readi- ly available technologies (e.g., sewage treatment plants to reduce exacerbating effects of coastal nutrient pollution) and socioeconomic mecha- nisms (e.g., coastal setback zones), whereas more engineering-intensive techniques are being devel- oped and will require testing (e.g., removal of CO2 from the atmosphere). These options inter- act. For example, reducing secondary environmen- tal stressors so as to retain ecosystem resilience works over some range of PCO2 values but is ul- timately relevant only if ocean warming and acidification are drastically limited. One cannot manage coral reef resilience, for example, if there are no healthy reefs remaining (46). Importantly, some policy options are antagonistic: For exam- ple, solar radiation management could limit the increase of surface temperature but would reduce the incentive to cut greenhouse gases emissions, including CO2, thereby providing no relief from ocean acidification (147). A positive development is that a widening range of stakeholders are testing new practices or reviving old ones, including CO2 extraction from seawater (148), assisted evolution of corals (149), coral farming (150), and customary local management (151). Such field tests provide use- able information and tools for decision-makers and climate negotiators as to the costs, benefits, and timing of management options. Aquaculture, for example, has shown some potential to reduce the risk of impacts from climate change and ocean acidification through societal adaptation, such as improved monitoring and changing cultured species or farm locations (127, 152). However, the cost of adaptation measures—such as real- time monitoring of water chemistry—can be prohibitive and not within the reach of most aquaculture operations, especially those in the developing world. Ecosystem-based adaptation— or using ecosystems to reduce the vulnerability of people—appears to offer cost-efficient solu- tions bringing multiple co-benefits, especially for developing countries and marginalized commu- nities (153). Stimulating ecosystem resilience by reducing the number and magnitude of local stressors and setting up marine protected areas (154) with strictly enforced no-take areas and limited pollutant inputs also stand out as tract- able priorities. Moreover, some regions and local areas that are relatively less exposed to warming, hypoxia, and acidification could be climate change refugia, where more favorable environmental con- ditions would enable survival under CO2-driven impacts (155). Thus, identifying these climate change refugia and conserving biodiversity there contribute to building resilience to climate change (156). Nevertheless, all of these options require ap- propriate policy frameworks and financial com- mitments to cover transaction and opportunity costs, surveillance, and enforcement and moni- toring and likely offer only limited protection in the face of persistent climate change and ocean acidification. As the ocean warms and acidifies, the range of protection, adaptation, and repair options—and our confidence in those options—dwindles, while the cost of remaining options skyrockets. Lower- emissions scenarios such as RCP2.6 leave society with a greater number of effective options for safeguarding marine ecosystems and the services they provide. Therefore, actions that do not re- duce carbon emissions are meaningful ocean management options only if the future climate regime entails ambitious national contributions toward the phaseout of global CO2 emissions as well as a strong funding mechanism and a rele- vant framework to support on-the-ground imple- mentation of these options." GR - Basically downplays alternative CO2/climate management methods in order make the case that drastic emissions reduction - adhering to RCP 2.6 or better - is our only option. Instead, what needs to be said is that it is now very unlikely that we can or will achieve RCP 2.6 regardless of what happens at COP 21, that addi
