Report: More acidic seawater poses risks in Alaska

Ralph Strickland guides a crab pot full of red king crabs onto the deck of F/V Frigidland during the current fishery on Nov. 6, 2005, in the waters off of Juneau, Alaska. The release of carbon dioxide into the air from factory smokestacks to the tailpipe on your car could pose a risk to red king crab and other lucrative fisheries up and down the Pacific Coast, a new report says. Associated Press file photo

QUILCENE, Wash. — For more than a century, Bill Taylor’s family has used the calm, protected waters of Puget Sound to raise oysters, planting billions of larvae in underwater beds and then harvesting them to ship to some of the finest restaurants in the world.

But then something went wrong. After the hatchery produced peak levels of seven billion larvae in 2006 and 2007, the numbers began to drop precipitously. In 2008, it had just half as many larvae. By 2009, it produced less than a third of the peak.

Up and down the Pacific Coast, from California to British Columbia to Alaska, other shellfish farms experienced the same decline: Something was happening to their larvae at the formative stage of life when they build their shells. No one in the industry knew why.

“We didn’t know that much about the water because we didn’t have any problems,” Taylor said. Once the larvae started dying off, they tested the water: It was much too acidic.

Scientists testing the water up and down the Pacific Coast found evidence of the same steep decline in pH. Studies have found more acidic water in Alaska is stunting the growth of red king crabs and tanner crabs. Plummeting pH levels across the Eastern Seaboard have been impacting the shellfish industry for decades.

The economic impacts of rising acidity can be devastating. At its peak in 1952, U.S. producers harvested 72 million pounds of eastern oysters, according to data collected by the National Marine Fisheries Service. In 2012, the last year for which data is available, farmers hauled in just 23.8 million pounds. Producers haven’t harvested more than 30 million pounds since 1996.

In a new study published online in the scholarly journal Progress in Oceanography, a team of scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found rural areas in southern Alaska are at high risk of losing hundreds of millions of dollars in commercial and subsistence fishing stocks. Declining seafood harvests will impact about 20 percent of Alaska’s population, which relies on subsistence fishing for significant amounts of their diet, the NOAA report found.

The acidification of the world’s oceans frightens scientists, who see it as evidence of a rapidly changing climate. Though not as evident as increasingly powerful storms or devastating droughts, ocean acidification may be the clearest example of man’s impact on the changing climate.

Acidification happens as a result of increased carbon in the atmosphere. The top layer of the world’s oceans, perhaps the first 100 meters, absorb the elements in the atmosphere. The more carbon, the more acidic the water becomes. Currents take that layer of surface water and plunge it into the depths of the Pacific; decades later, the water is forced back to the surface as it reaches the West Coast, a process scientists call upwelling.

Because it takes so long for water to move from surface to bottom to surface, acidification is a kind of window into the past — and a preview of the future. The upwelling happening on the West Coast today is water that last mixed with the atmosphere in the 1950s or 1960s, when far less carbon was being spewed into the atmosphere. In 50 to 100 years, when water mixing with today’s atmosphere upwells, the water will be even more corrosive.

“This bad layer is getting thicker and thicker,” Benoit Eudeline, who oversees the nursery for Taylor Shellfish in Quilcene, said of the water in Puget Sound that the hatchery treats. “People like to use the word ‘tipping point.’”

The dramatic changes to oyster farms in Washington, Oregon and California are only the beginning steps in what could be a systemic disturbance in the ocean ecosystem, a process that will only accelerate as more-acidic water upwells in the coming decades. The last time the oceans changed so dramatically, about 59 million years ago, during a geologic time known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, the rate of change was ten times slower than is occurring today.

“We’re leaving that in our wake when you compare it to the rates we’re looking at today,” said Mark Green, an oceanographer and shellfish farmer at St. Joseph’s College of Maine.



Today, during the height of the summer upwelling season, as much as 30 percent of the water on the West Coast has a pH low enough to be corrosive, said Richard Feely, a senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and the University of Washington. By 2050, 50 to 70 percent of the water will be corrosive.

On the East Coast, instead of upwelling, acidification is a result of nutrification — adding nutrients like agricultural waste, fertilizers and waste water treatment facilities. The Chesapeake Bay, which receives runoff from one of the most densely-populated watersheds in the United States, is acidifying three times faster than the rest of the world’s oceans. Long Island Sound, Narragansett Bay and the Gulf of Mexico are all showing signs of rapid acidification.

And just like on the West Coast, the increasing acidification shows up first in oyster harvests.

Eudeline shows off the complex system that neutralizes the acidity, a carefully monitored filter system keeps the pH of the water flowing over larvae at a healthy 8.2. He turned off the filter, letting untreated sea water into the tanks. Within seconds, the pH plunged to 7.6. He turned the filter back on, before it could fall any farther. Oysters subjected to water with a lower pH — that is, more acidic water — cannot form the calcium carbonate shells they need to survive.

Policymakers have tried to help. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., secured $500,000 in federal funding to study the impacts, and search for solutions, to the crisis threatening Washington’s oyster industry. Then-Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., who represented the Olympic Peninsula, got the Environmental Protection Agency to help clean up Puget Sound. Then-Gov. Christine Gregoire, D, established a blue-ribbon task force to make recommendations, and scientists from Oregon State University and the California Ocean Science Trust created the West Coast Ocean Acidification and Hypoxia Science Panel to craft solutions.

The impacts go far beyond oysters and crabs. In a paper published in April in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, a team of scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said it had found evidence that acidification is dissolving the shells of pteropods, tiny free-swimming marine snails, off the West Coast. Pteropods are a staple food source for salmon, mackerel and herring. When one food source disappears, the impact is felt up and down the food chain; fishing industries based on the West Coast could see their stocks move away, in search of food.

Acidification means the threads that mussels use to hold onto rocks don’t stick as well in low-pH environments. Bivalves searching for muddy ocean floors to settle upon are moving away from acidic coastal fields into deeper, less accessible water. Low-pH environments make clown fish more aggressive, and therefore more vulnerable to predators. Across the world, corals are dying at an astounding rate; they may be completely gone by 2070.

“You can’t deny it. It’s not based on these elaborate mathematical models,” Green said of the impacts of ocean acidification. To deny the evidence, he said, “is like saying you don’t believe in gravity. It’s not speculation at all.”

What scares scientists the most about the increasingly acidic oceans is that there is no obvious solution. Acidity can be mitigated in some localized areas by spreading crushed up shells, and fields of sea grass can take some carbon out of the ocean. But those are localized solutions. Even if man flipped a switch and turned off every carbon-emitting machine on earth, the higher-carbon water moving toward the Pacific Coast would mean oceans will continue the march toward acidity for the next century, at least.

“There are no switches we can flip at this point,” said Michael “Moose” O’Donnell, senior scientist at the California Ocean Science Trust.

In the long run, O’Donnell said, the carbon in the oceans will be reduced by things like rock weathering, when higher-pH particles balance out the low-pH carbon. But long run, in geologic terms, means tens of thousands of years.

“If you’ve got 20,000 years, it’s not really a problem. But of course 20,000 years ago, we were living in caves and had an ice age going on,” he said.

Without a more immediate solution, the oceans of the future will look much different than the oceans of today. “There’s going to be plenty of stuff living there, but it’s going to be different than the stuff that’s living there now,” O’Donnell said.

(7) comments

Khal Spencer

There is a compelling blog post at the following URL suggesting that in some specific instances, this acidification may have less to do with climate change and a lot to do with local conditions and marine factory farming. Beware of bandwagons in the popular press.

http://tinyurl.com/okqfbos

Coastal Ocean Acidification: Answering the Seattle TImes
Cliff Mass, Prof. of Atmospheric Sciences, U of Washington, seattle

"...The truth is that anthropogenic increases in CO2 are only having subtle impacts on our regional weather today, the big changes and impacts will occur decades into the future. Both global warming and ocean acidification are very serious issues and by the end of the century their impacts will be substantial. But exaggerating and hyping the effects today are unacceptable. Citizens and policy makers deserve the facts, not exaggerations designed to elicit the proper response. Crying wolf in the end is counterproductive and undermines the credibility of science to promote the proper actions is unacceptable.

Hopefully, I have convinced you that this is a complex issue, one deserving of additional research. We are fortunate, that with the support of the State, the UW has initiated an Washington Ocean Acidification Center, and in concert with local colleagues at NOAA PMEL, they hopefully can further unravel the science...."

Karl Anderson

lisalombs, Miner49er and HCG apparently consider themselves experts in climate science. Who should we consider more credible, them or the U.S. National Academy of Sciences? The NAS and the Royal Society of the UK, two of the world's most respected scientific societies, offer a free 36-page booklet titled "Climate Change: Evidence and Causes" that discusses 20 common questions about human-caused climate change, with answers representing the combined expertise of their distinguished members:

http://tinyurl.com/nas-rs

For example, question 15 is "What is ocean acidification and why does it matter?"

The answer starts with "CO2 dissolves in water to form a weak acid, and the oceans have absorbed about a third of the CO2 resulting from human activities, leading to a steady decrease in ocean pH levels..."

You can read the rest of the answer and more for yourself, by downloading the PDF from the link.

Julian Grace

For Lisa and miner: the point is not that the oceans are changing but the speed at which they are changing. It's easy for us that are alive now to discount how the future will be affected but let's properly take responsibility for screwing up the ecosystem for our children and grandchildren.

HCG

I kept reading the article, waiting for an ID of the culpable acid, and a measure of the pH. The acid was never identified, but many lamentations about the evils of carbon dioxide were printed (Note: Carbon dioxide concentrations are typically measured in parts per million, because there is so little in the atmosphere. Without what little we have, all life on earth would die. We are carbon-based life forms, after all.). The article gives two pH measurements, both of which are alkaline. OK. The measurements are in a commercial nursery in Puget Sound and filtered, so maybe the water in Puget Sound is acidic, but the author and various experts couldn't afford any litmus paper. If the psuedo-scientist/fishermen were really worried about acidification of the water, the first thing to do is identify the acid, and document the pH in the open water over a period of time. Without an identification of the acid, all is speculation. Puget Sound is subject to industrial runoff, the same way that Chesapeake Bay is subject to runoff. Sorry, but this article is devoid of science.
Miner49er - two thumbs up for you!

Al Kaline

Climate change is real. I urge you to look at the actual data. A great deal of recent data on sea level, temperatures, ice melt, and forecasts for the future can be found here...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/125630565@N05/sets/72157645113383959/

As a meteorologist, I'm amazed how many people have opinions on climate change but how few have ever actually looked at any real data themselves.

Miner49er

The oceans as a whole are highly alkaline--not acidic. The degree of alkalinity has varied, but the oceans have always been alkaline. It is simply not possible for 0.04% ambient CO2 in air to acidify the oceans. It is also impossible for alkaline water to dissolve oyster shells.

At first these vapid articles about "ocean acidification" purported that "acid" waters were dissolving oyster shells. After it became evident that that is impossible, the ankle-biters switched to alleging harm to oyster larvae. So, after a hilarious false start, this meme is wearing a little thin.

While the oceans do absorb a large quantity of CO2 from the air, That CO2 is promptly converted to limestone (CaCO3) and other carbonate rocks, partly by the actions of oysters, clams, mussels, coral and other shell-forming animals, as well as direct and plant processes. Carbonate rocks are the ultimate repository of CO2 in earth's ecosystem.

Local acidification of seawater is possible. It occurs naturally because of sea floor thermal vents and volcanic eruptions. It can also occur because of human caused discharges of polluted water. Agriculture is the most common source of such discharges, followed by municipal waste. Agricultural discharges are completely unregulated and are practically invisible to the regulatory bureaucracy.

None of the articles on this subject (including the "scholarly" articles) specify what kind of acid is allegedly harming oysters. It it came from from CO2, it could ONLY be carbonic acid (H2CO3), which most people know as carbonated water. Other acids, such as nitric acid (thunderstorms & human activity), sulfuric acid (geothermal & human activity), hydrochloric (stomach) acid (industrial & human activity). One would hope that all those do-gooder researchers would at least bother to collect & analyze samples of the offending waters.

States and the oyster industry should look closer to home for their acidification problem.
LikeReplyShare

lisalombs

There's no obvious solution because there's no obvious cause, the Earth's climate is naturally proceeding in a way that is not always going to be 100% in our favor, as it has been doing for billions of years.

That last bit really kills me though.

"Without a more immediate solution, the oceans of the future will look much different than the oceans of today. “There’s going to be plenty of stuff living there, but it’s going to be different than the stuff that’s living there now,” O’Donnell said."

My GOD, you mean evolution will continue to work its evil sorcery on the natural world and the species of our planet will ADAPT to the changing climate as they've done, again, for billions of years? THE HORROR OF THE VERY THOUGHT. It's not like we have all these fossil records or anything that show off how drastically life in the ocean (and everywhere else on our planet) has changed over the course of history. There must have been an alien race here using Earth as its CO2 dumping grounds causing an early global warming crisis that "made all the stuff living here then different than the stuff living here now", it's the only explanation!!

Welcome to the discussion.

Thank you for joining the conversation on Santafenewmexican.com. Please familiarize yourself with the community guidelines. Avoid personal attacks: Lively, vigorous conversation is welcomed and encouraged, insults, name-calling and other personal attacks are not. No commercial peddling: Promotions of commercial goods and services are inappropriate to the purposes of this forum and can be removed. Respect copyrights: Post citations to sources appropriate to support your arguments, but refrain from posting entire copyrighted pieces. Be yourself: Accounts suspected of using fake identities can be removed from the forum.