Washington and Ocean Acidification: She said What?

"What do you think Governor?"

Country representatives meeting in Qatar over the past two weeks on climate change must now be asking, "She said what?" about Governor Gregoire's answer to why, if Washington was so concerned about CO2 emissions and ocean acidification, they were considering the exporting of hundreds of tons of coal to Asia. [click here for article]. An opportunity to lead the nation, if not the world, in addressing CO2 emissions and climate change fell below flat.

It's more than shellfish.

After the praising of how great the leadership was of all involved on the "Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification" finished, questions were taken. The first one, like many which followed, was directed at the Governor, asking for her opinion on the exporting of coal to southeast Asia through Washington ports. A reasonable question given that the scientists on the panel were clear about the cause of ocean acidification being CO2 emissions and that burning coal is the primary source.

It's more than "coal jobs."



Unlike the past and current Governors of Oregon who openly oppose the export of coal, Governor Gregoire did not want to "invite litigation" or "invite problems" by expressing an opinion [read article here]. Does she really think being "silent" is going to mean no lawsuits will be filed? Governor Romney discovered what not taking a firm position on controversial issues results in.

This is not leadership and not what is needed at a national level. It makes people look at Washington and ask, "What are they thinking?" It's embarrassing to everyone.

Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification: Facing Godzilla or Swatting Flies?

"The panel itself is silent on that question."

Brad Warren, panel member,

when asked about coal exports to China. 

 

"It's big! It's terrifying!"

Brad Warren* on Ocean Acidification

*Brad Warren is with Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
who, with Bill Dewey of Taylor Shellfish, helped to
create the "Blue Ribbon Panel" on Ocean Acidification.
 

On November 27, Governor Gregoire's Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification (OA) will release recommendations on what Washington should do about OA. OA was brought to the Governor's awareness by the shellfish industry's Bill Dewey with Taylor Shellfish, and Brad Warren with Sustainable Fisheries Partnership. Taylor Shellfish had been experiencing hatchery failures in producing the non-native/genetically modified triploid Pacific oyster. Brad Warren had been trying since the mid-2000's to make people aware of CO2's link to OA and, initially, its impact on the salmon industry. Oyster hatchery failures is now the conduit being used by Mr. Warren to build awareness of CO2 emissions and OA. [click here for one of Mr. Warren's first presentations].

What will the perception of the public be when the panel releases its recommendations? A truly meaningful "attack" on Godzilla or something far less? [click here]

At a meeting on OA in 2011, Norm Sims called for "actionable advice" agencies could take. Three weeks later, Mr. Dewey and Mr. Warren were able to convince Governor Gregoire OA should be made part of her "Shellfish Initiative." [hear Mr. Warren's presentation on meeting with Bill Dewey]. The "Blue Ribbon Panel" on Ocean Acidification was created and made part of the Washington Shellfish Initiative, announced in December of 2011. Its task: to create "actionable advice" on which government agencies could act to address OA, tied directly CO2 emissions, and in turn climate change. [read Charter here]

Hurricane Sandy, October 29

November 27 those recommendations will be issued. At hand is the opportunity for the panel to present actions which are truly meaningful, locally, nationally and internationally. Many people are watching. Ocean Acidification and its cause - elevated levels of CO2 emissions - is real. Tied directly to it is climate change, its effect most recently seen on the east coast.

Whether those recommendations will in fact face up to "Godzilla" or simply be perceived as swatting at flies already being dealt with remains to be seen. Will calling for further "actions" to reduce local inputs of nitrogen be more effective than those already in place? Will calling for preservation of aquatic vegetation while spraying Willapa Bay to eradicate eelgrass be taken seriously?  How does dramatically expanding shellfish grown in Puget Sound help when calcifying agents, already diminished by CO2, will be used up by them at the expense of other species? Is calling for a tax on miles driven to reduce CO2 more effective than telling China Washington will not allow hundreds of tons of coal to be exported until they limit their emissions?

The panel and incoming Governor Inslee have an opportunity to make a meaningful difference on CO2 emissions, climate change and Ocean Acidification. They risk being perceived as simply a tool to further the gains of others. When asked about their stance on coal exports to China at the Northwest Straits annual meeting, their answer: "The panel itself is silent on that question."  [hear the response to this first, difficult to hear question, here]

Norma Smith, Representative for the 10th District and also a panel member was not silent and said: "This is a global issue and we have to engage with our Pacific Rim neighbors because the problem is upwelling."

Shellfish Alchemy: Turning CO2 into Nitrogen

In December of 2011, after Bill Dewey with Taylor Shellfish commented on Govenor Gregoire having been "dressed down" by the shellfish industry for not acting on water pollution, the Governor announced the Washington Shellfish Initiative, including the formation of a "Blue Ribbon Panel" to address ocean acidification. [click here for Bill Dewey's comment] Due to the deep sea upwellings of low pH ("acidic") waters, the "natural" sets of non-native Pacific oysters in Willapa Bay have ceased and hatcheries have seen their production rates of this genetically modified non-native species of oyster drop dramatically.

Taylor Shellfish Hatchery

Dabob Bay, Hood Canal

Taylor changed their source of water to a deeper level

where typically lower pH (more acidic)

waters exist. How this helped is unclear.

 

Since March of this year the "Blue Ribbon Panel" has been meeting to determine what can be done to address CO2 and the lowering pH levels, with increasing focus on assistance for the shellfish industry. So much so that panel members have expressed varying concerns. Some are concerned of the perception that this significant effort in time and money is only for the benefit of the shellfish industry. Some question whether it is appropriate to focus on problems a non-native genetically modified (triploid) oyster has with lowering pH levels [click here for a study showing how different varieties of oyster have little trouble with lower pH levels]. Finally, some question whether the "alchametic" change in focus from CO2 to nitrogen is appropriate and whether deep sea upwellings will overwhelm any attempts made at the local level, whether it be CO2 or nitrogen. While these and other questions are appropriate, the evolving focus on whether local sources of nitrogen is the cause of lowering pH levels may be most appropriate.

There is no question CO2 is altering the world we live in. It can be clearly linked to rising temperatures and the lowering pH levels. Not so easily linked is how nitrogen decreases pH levels, and if it does, whether the local sources of nitrogen are even significant. The shellfish industry would certainly have us believe human activities along Puget Sound's shoreline are the primary source, perhaps best reflected in a sentence from an article by Jim Gibbons, owner of Seattle Shellfish: Excessive nutrients largely come from human activities that generate nitrogen, including broken or undersized septic systems, lawn fertilizers, storm water runoff, farm runoff, and pet wastes. (South Sound Green Pages, 2008) (Note: Jim Gibbons also testified before state legislators of his consideration to sue the state over "excess nitrogen.")

A matter of scale: Satellite image of the

annual algal bloom off Washington's coast.

Nutrient source: deep sea waters. When combined

with warming temperatures, large blooms result.

Algae is both a food source and absorbs CO2. Is that bad?



It appears, however, humans being the primary source of nitrogen in Puget Sound's Hood Canal is not the case. A September 14, 2012, report from the EPA and the Department of Ecology "...concluded that human sources of nitrogen contributing to low-oxygen events in the mainstem of Hood Canal were "insignificant," while evidence linking humans to oxygen problems in the more troubled area near the canal's end in Lynch Cove "is not strong."
"The overwhelming causes of fish kills, the agencies concluded, are the geography of the canal and ocean conditions." (Seattle Times, September 18, 2012)

There is little question the shellfish industry has both created the "Blue Ribbon Panel" and has moved the focus from CO2 emissions to nutrient reduction, specifically nitrogen. So doing now runs the risk of deflating the balloon which may have helped lift awareness of excess CO2 emissions and its impact. If it is perceived the majority of actions recommended only address the problems a non-native and genetically modified oyster is having in adapting to conditions which other shellfish are not having, an opportunity will have been lost, and a great deal of time and money will have been lost. The scientists and committee members are all intelligent enough to know you cannot turn lead into gold. It is unlikely CO2 can be turned into nitrogen.

Eelgrass and Ocean Acidification: Actions Based on Science or Corporate Profits?

"...the more man interferes with nature the greater become the problems he creates." (Maurice Yonge, Oysters, 1960 p. 189).

From a September 5, 2012 email from the Depatment of Ecology: "Ecology is in the process of developing a permit to allow treatment of Japanese eelgrass on commercial clam beds in Willapa Bay. The applicants [shellfish companies] have asked to treat [eradicate] the Japanese eelgrass [in Willapa Bay] with the aquatic herbicide imazamox."

For six months the Department of Ecology has been hosting the "Blue Ribbon Panel" on Ocean Acidification. Increased CO2 levels in marine waters has resulted in increased acidity (lower pH). Impacted hardest has been Willapa Bay where oysters have been unable to "set" (grow) naturally and caused a shellfish hatchery to move its facilities to Hawaii [read Seattle Times article here]. High levels of CO2 have been directly linked to the lower pH levels, in turn linked directly to why larvae are unable to survive in Willapa Bay.

On June 20, of the 10 recommendations on adapting to Ocean Acidification, four were specifically related to eelgrass and aquatic vegetation:

Encourage shellfish/seagrass [eelgrass] co-cultivation

Investigate and develop seaweed farming

Restore eelgrass and kelp beds

Promote community-based programs to mitigate nutrient inputs (using shellfish and seaweeds)
[See "Initial Recommendations for Managing and Adapting to the Impacts of OA here]

Notes from that presentation on Ecology's website include: "... conservation of existing eelgrass beds may be more feasible and less expensive than cultivation of new beds." [see page 6 from summary notes here]

July 20 the ability of eelgrass to absorb CO2 was stressed again, noting eelgrass "sucking up all that CO2."

August 8, "Workgroup 3: Adaptation and Remediation" of the committee produced its final four recommendations. Eelgrass or use of aquatic vegetation to lower CO2? It has apparently been absorbed by the shellfish industry, respired as how to "fund my hatcheries and industry."

Action 2.1 Continue water quality monitoring at six existing shellfish hatcheries and rearing areas.

Action 2.2 Investigate efficacy of water treatment strategies and/or hatchery design to protect larvae from corrosive seawater.

Action 2.3 Investigate potential to breed and/or select OA-tolerant strains of shellfish and other vulnerable marine species.

Action 3.1 Prioritize investment in adaptation & remediation actions that provide future shellfish habitat capable of enduring a full suite of anticipated environmental changes.

[see Priority Action Recommendations here] 
Panel members are right to question whether too much money and time is being spent on hatcheries. Concerns noted the process was spending too much time focusing on how to get shellfish to survive in a hatchery so they can survive in the water instead of putting energy into how to get the water clean so they can grow naturally.  

When the preservation and expansion of eelgrass beds are dropped by the Blue Ribbon Panel and the Department of Ecology wants to eradicate beds in Willapa Bay where ocean acidification has had the largest impact, a very real risk of a perception that science has taken a back seat to corporate profits rises. Is that what the scientists and panel members want to be remembered for?

Pickering Passage Closed to Commercial Harvesting of Oysters

Pickering Passage has been closed to commercial harvesting of oysters due to illnesses traced directly to oysters harvested from this growing area. This is now the 9th commercial growing area which has been closed because of illness caused by oysters harvested from Puget Sound. These illnesses continue a known and growing problem.

Laboratory-Confirmed cases of Vibriosis

(Note: CDC estimates for every laboratory

confirmed case >40 are not reported to CDC.)

 

The annual outbreak of vibriois caused by oysters harvested from Puget Sound is an ongoing annual problem. When the FDA attempted to deal with lowering numbers through press releases the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association reacted with complaints of "economic harm" (see Issue Paper below). Currently the "Blue Ribbon Panel" on Ocean Acidification is recommending actions specifically for the benefit of the shellfish industry with estimated costs at over $4 million (Note: A number of actions' estimates were not available, only noting they were "dependent on scale.") Decisions on the allocation of taxpayer dollars for the shellfish industry might consider the fact that warming temperatures will bring with it an increase in the naturally occurring Vibrio parahaemolyticus and most likely its more deadly cousin Vibrio vulnificus (currently found in Gulf State oysters which kills 50% of those who contract it). Allocating a portion of those taxpayer dollars to prevent outbreaks might be something for the "Public Outreach" committee and panel to consider.

 

 

PCSGA Issue Paper on FDA Press Releases

(click to enlarge)



Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification: Driving in the Fog?

Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification

Next meeting, August 8 (location tbd)

Thick fog creates dangerous driving conditions which demands slowing down, even if it means being late for grandmother's dinner. Governor Gregoire's "Blue Ribbon Panel" being faced with an October deadline for specific recommendations on actions to deal with lowering pH levels in Puget Sound is creating a similar scene.

Scientists are clearly being pressed to give answers when information and models do not yet exist to support what they are being asked to provide. Specifically, are land based nutrients having a significant enough impact on pH levels in Washington's marine waters to justify regulatory actions focused on land use issues?   (listen here to the first 10 minutes of the June 20 meeting)

For example, is the fertilizer used on lawns adjacent to Puget Sound of enough significance to restrict how large a yard may be? Does CO2 generated by driving remain in the Puget Sound basin long enough to warrant limiting how many miles residents may drive? Should you be charged each time you flush your toilet? Should inspection and compliance officers be hired to inspect farms?

Which Train is on the Right Track?

Does the science create a clear enough vision to justify making recommendations beyond improved monitoring and modeling? Is growing the shellfish industry important enough to rush to a decision on actions based on a feeling? If the public does not become involved this may be how regulatory actions affecting Puget Sound will be decided. Get involved. Shellfish lobbyists are in more ways than you know.

Science: Not Feelings

Ocean Acidification: What Washington Can Do To Show It's Serious About CO2 Emissions

Governor Gregoire's "Blue Ribbon Panel" has held 3 meetings to try and understand CO2 and ocean acidification, and what meaningful steps might be taken, based on facts. A fourth meeting is scheduled for June 20, 9AM to 4PM, at the Center for Urban Horticulture, 3501 NE 41st Street. Access is also available through the internet by registering for the "webinar" here. The June 20 meeting agenda is available here.

What Washington Can Do

Is the Governor really serious about doing something? Are the current candidates serious about doing something?  Is the panel serious about suggesting something? If so, all should consider this paragraph - especially the last sentence - from "The Greenhouse Gas Impact of Exporting Coal from the West Coast" (click here for entire paper):
This paper concludes that the proposed coal export facilities in the Northwest will result in more coal consumption in Asia and undermine China’s progress towards more efficient power generation and usage. Decisions the Northwest makes now will impact Chinese energy habits for the next half-century; the lower coal prices afforded by Northwest coal exports encourage burning coal and discourage the investments in energy efficiency that China has already undertaken. Approving proposed coal export facilities would also undermine Washington State’s commitment to reducing its own share of greenhouse gas emissions.

Committees sometimes accomplish great things if they take bold steps based on facts. China's growing CO2 emissions is the single largest source of CO2 now entering the Pacific Ocean, resulting in lower pH levels. Is Washington really serious about doing something? The panel and the Governor can show just how serious Washington State is about CO2 emissions to the nation and the world, as can the current candidates, and not approve export terminals.

April 25th Blue Ribbon Panel Meeting: The Million Dollar Questions

(Or why driving a car fast at night with the lights off may not be a good idea.)

Washington State's Blue Ribbon Panel on ocean acidification met on April 25th and has had powerpoint slides and verbal presentations posted to YouTube. (click here)

As the meeting unfolded it became clear these questions were important to answer (not necessarily in this order):

1.  How did molluscs survive during the last rapid rate of change in pH levels 300 million years ago and how have they survived in estuaries all these years when they encounter freshwater systems with an average pH of 7?  As noted in the first Blue Ribbon Panel meeting, not all shellfish react adversely to ocean acidification.  Currently, the non-native Pacific oyster from Japan is the primary species bred in the hatcheries which are not adapting to lowering pH levels.  Added to this is genetic manipulation creating triploid/tetraploid Pacific oysters which are even more specialized to their environment, less able to adapt to changes.  Native Olympia oysters and even geoduck appear to be far less susceptible to the changes in pH levels, most likely through natural selection from past ocean upwellings in Puget Sound.

2.  What are the drivers (sources) of ocean acidification and of those what can effectively be addressed?  Unless this question is answered based on accurate information the returns from regulations created and/or enforced may have unintended environmental and economic consequences.  As noted in the presentation, current monitoring is not accurate enough to show what level of impact the upwelling of deep sea water is having on pH levels in Puget Sound and Willapa Bay.  Few dispute there is a problem, but what additional impact power generating plants in Washington using coal or what additional impact nitrogen from waste water treatment plants plays is simply unknown.  Acting on the unknown is like driving your car at night with the headlights off on a country road.

3.  What industry other than the shellfish industry is going to be impacted by lowering pH levels?  The Blue Ribbon Panel was created because the shellfish industry found itself with a species unable to survive the hatchery environment and which was not naturally setting in Willapa Bay.  Whether any other industries are impacted by ocean acidification is important to know, whether it be directly through ocean acidification or indirectly through regulations implemented for the benefit of the shellfish industry.

Ocean acidification is a real problem.  The Blue Ribbon Panel's recommendations on source reduction, remediation and adaptation needs to be made with accurate monitoring and a clear understanding of the problem, perhaps noting this quote from Sir Maurice Yonge (1899-1986), a distinguished marine zoologist of his day on the future of oyster culture: “...the more man interferes with nature the greater become the problems he creates." (Oysters, 1960 p. 189). 

Driving a car in the dark without the lights on creates problems in decision making.  Driving it faster to meet an artificial deadline created by Governor Gregoire's leaving office only increases the risk of a poor decision leading in turn to a bigger problem.  The Blue Ribbon Panel should not be rushed into making recommendations without accurate information, something which may take more than three months to gather.