Climate Change Has Quadrupled Ocean 'Dead Zones,' Researchers Warn

Huffington Post - By Mary Papenfuss

Suffocating oceans could lead to ecosystem collapse, the study says.

The size of oxygen-starved ocean “dead zones,” where plants and animals struggle to survive, has increased fourfold around the world, according to a new scientific analysis.
The growth of the zones is yet another consequence of global warming — including increasing ocean temperatures — triggered by greenhouse gases and, closer to the coasts, contamination by agricultural runoff and sewage.

Declining Oxygen in the Global Ocean and Coastal Waters/Science 

“Rising nutrient loads coupled with climate change — each resulting from human activities — are changing ocean biogeochemistry and increasing oxygen consumption,” says the study published in the journal Science. Ultimately, such changes are “unsustainable and may result in ecosystem collapses, which ultimately will cause societal and economic harm.”
The analysis of the oxygen-starved zones was conducted by a team of scientists from the Global Oxygen Network (GO₂NE),  created in 2016 by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the United Nations.
Researchers determined that open-ocean “oxygen-minimum” zones have expanded since 1950 by an area roughy equivalent to the size of the European Union. The volume of ocean water completely devoid of oxygen has more than quadrupled in that time, the study found. The number of hypoxic, or oxygen depleted, zones along coasts has increased up to 10 times, from less than 50 to 500.
Denise Breitburg, a marine ecologist at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center and lead author of the study, called the plunge in ocean oxygen “among the most serious effects of human activities on the Earth’s environment.” Oxygen is “fundamental to life in the oceans,” she said in a statement.
“If you can’t breathe, nothing else matters,” Breitburg told The Associated Press. “As seas are losing oxygen, those areas are no longer habitable by many organisms.”
But the threat isn’t just to life in the oceans, which account for about half of the oxygen on the planet.
“Major extinction events in Earth’s history have been associated with warm climates and oxygen-deficient oceans,” the study warns.
Consequences for ocean life can be significant even in areas where oxygen is merely low. Sea life may be stunted and immune responses impaired in such areas, resulting in poor survival rates and a decrease in healthy diversity, scientists warn.
The scientists recommend salvaging oxygen-starved areas by tackling climate change and nutrient pollution, focusing on protecting particularly vulnerable sea life with no-catch or no-fishing zones, and increasing and improving surveillance of areas where oxygen is plummeting.
Breitburg concedes that addressing global warming can seem daunting, but she says focused local efforts to protect areas can be effective. She points to changes in the Chesapeake Bay, where nitrogen pollution dropped 24 percent from its worst levels after sewage treatment and protections mandated by the Clean Air Act began. Areas of the bay with zero oxygen zones have nearly vanished, according to Breitburg.
Even with “ambitious emission reductions,” however, numerical models project “further oxygen declines during the 21st century,” the study warns.

Links

• What is a dead zone?
• Declining oxygen in the global ocean and coastal waters
• Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
• The Ocean Is Losing Its Breath. Here's the Global Scope.
• Low oxygen levels, coral bleaching getting worse in oceans
• Oceans suffocating as huge dead zones quadruple since 1950, scientists warn

Show This Cartoon To Anyone Who Doubts We Need Huge Action On Climate Change

Vox - Alvin Chang | David Roberts



This is Earth. It's a crisp fall day. So why would you believe Earth is in a dire situation?


Let's look a little deeper. The brown area below represents all the fossil fuels — oil, coal, and natural gas — that humans have identified as recoverable with current technology. The black spot is what we’re currently harvesting with mines and wells.


So what if, tomorrow, all the world leaders got together and decided to stop building new mines and wells?



And then we used all the fuel in existing mines and wells.
What would that do to Earth?


It would release about 1.1 trillion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Scientists have figured out that this scenario would almost certainly drive up the Earth’s average temperature by more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), relative to preindustrial levels. That’s not a big deal, right?


Actually, it would be a massive catastrophe. The human suffering would be unthinkable.
When most of us think about Earth warming by 2 degrees, we think about it being, well, 2 degrees warmer.


But that's not quite right. First of all, it means Earth would get an average of 2 degrees warmer. This means some regions, especially on land, will get much hotter — far more than 2 degrees.
The Arctic, which houses much of the world’s ice, would warm by almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit.
The US Southwest, already suffering from increased drought, could warm by almost 10 degrees Fahrenheit, enough to create near-permanent "superdroughts."


The other problem is that Earth’s ecosystems would behave differently. For humans, it would mean rising sea levels, freshwater shortages, reduced agricultural productivity, food stress, and the conflicts and emigration that come in their wake.


A lot of people will die, and not because they burn to death. It'll be because we don't have enough food and water.
It would be like slightly heating up a fish tank, which is okay for the fish but kills the algae the fish eats.


All of this will be well underway by the time we hit 2 degrees — and the further we go past it, the worse it will get.
So we all agreed, in Paris, not to let it happen.
About 200 countries, including all the world’s major emitters, agreed at a summit in Paris in 2015 that letting the planet warm beyond 2 degrees is unacceptable, and even 2 degrees is awful. We vowed to do our best to stop warming at 1.5 degrees — although most climate researchers believe that target is no longer realistic.


That’s why we hear so much about efforts to stop warming at 2 degrees.
But how do we do it?
First, we figure out how much carbon dioxide we’re allowed to emit.

When we burn fossil fuels, we emit several harmful gases. But we focus on carbon dioxide for one reason: It stays in the atmosphere for centuries, accumulating and trapping heat.
This means we can calculate how much carbon dioxide it would take to warm the Earth a certain amount.
According to our best calculations, it would take about 843 billion tons of carbon dioxide to warm Earth about 2 degrees.


If we decide to keep using fossil fuels at the same rate, we’ll hit our limit in 21 years.
Currently we emit about 39.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year — and that number is only rising. But if we were able to keep it at that amount, what would happen?
After one year, our mug would look like this:


It’s not a huge hit. But after 21.5 years, we’d be here:


That’s the year 2037.
If we reduce emissions until we get to zero in the year 2065, we still need to invent world-changing technology.
Let’s say that over the next 49 years, we drive down our use of fossil fuels all the way to zero.
It’s an optimistic long shot. But this is the scenario climate scientist Joeri Rogelj proposes:


The kicker is that even in this crazily ambitious scenario, we have to rely on "negative emissions" technologies that pull carbon out of the air and bury it.
The problem: We have no clue if that’s even possible.
Negative emissions technologies have not been tested or proven at any scale. We are literally gambling our species’ future on the idea that we’re going to be able to invent it and scale it up to enormous size ... by 2065.


Let’s say, somehow, we get to no emissions in 2065 — and we invent this world-changing technology.
We’ve saved the world, right?
Not definitely. It would only give us a 66 percent chance at staying under 2 degrees.


Remember when we all agreed in Paris that 2 degree warming cannot happen? This long shot is what they were committing to.


Given the evidence, the global community has committed not to let the Earth warm by more than 2 degrees. In doing so, countries committed to rapidly reducing and eliminating all production and use of coal, oil, and natural gas and to inventing and scaling up negative emissions technology.
The problem is they don’t seem to realize that’s what they committed to.
No country is taking this long shot seriously. This means Earth will probably warm past 2 degrees. It’s terrifying.
Right now, the cool fall wind is flowing through windows, and everything feels fine. Nothing seems dire. So it’s understandable why many of us don’t feel this is an urgent political priority.


But here’s the reality: We're heading toward a global catastrophe that will cause unthinkable human suffering. The data is clear: We need to turn the ship now — or else we’ll never be able to avoid disaster.


But no country is taking this 2 degree goal seriously. It hasn’t even been mentioned in a presidential debate.
Instead, we’re focusing on threats that feel more imminent. It's just the way most humans are calibrated. So our true test is figuring out a way to comprehend that a mortal threat is on the horizon, and act accordingly.



Links

• Does hope inspire more action on climate change than fear? We don’t know.
• China is methodically building the world’s most ambitious carbon market
• Trump thinks climate change isn't real because it's cold out. This map proves him wrong.
• The White House says climate change isn't a national security threat. The military says it is. 
• Greenland’s ice sheet is key to sea-level rise. And it’s melting terrifyingly fast.

Three New Year’s Resolutions That Can Help Fight Climate Change

New York Times - Kendra Pierre-Louis

Simone Noronha

Here are three things you can do to help reduce your personal contribution to climate change while pursuing goals you might already have, like moving more, spending less and tracking your progress.

Walk the walk

If your goals for 2018 include getting more exercise, consider committing to walking or bicycling distances under a mile.

Roughly 20 percent of car trips in the United States fall into this category, and the average car produces 411 grams of carbon dioxide per mile. That’s the equivalent of the weight of a football or a can of soup.

Walking that mile instead of driving not only cuts emissions but also contributes to the 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity that the Centers for Disease Control recommends adults get each week. Bicycling is about twice as fast as walking, so if you’re biking you might want to commit to cycling distances under two miles. Want to track your activity? Try downloading a fitness tracking app to your smartphone.

One economist caused a stir in a 2013 article by suggesting that driving could account for fewer emissions than walking because of the agricultural emissions that are generated while producing the food that fuels the walking. But the author assumes that a car gets 40 miles per gallon, not the 25 m.p.g. that is the current United States average.

And even if you drive a hybrid, it’s still worth it to walk. While the author assumed that people would need to eat more to make up the extra calories burned off while walking, Americans already eat more calories than we need. Walking is as much a doughnut offset as a carbon offset.

Waste not

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care about food-related emissions. Worldwide, agriculture accounts for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Luckily, we can help slash emissions — and save money — without drastically altering our diets.

One way is to waste less food. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, about a third of the food produced worldwide never gets eaten. Throughout the world, some of that waste happens during production and distribution. But consumers and restaurants in North America throw away almost 40 percent of available food.

Geremy Farr-Wharton, a researcher at the Queensland University of Technology, found that color-coding our refrigerator contents (green for fresh produce, red for meat) can reduce food waste. There are even refrigerator management apps like FridgePal and Best Before that track the food in your fridge and when it will spoil. If apps aren’t your thing, a weekly refrigerator check — preferably before grocery shopping — can also help, as can monthly fridge eat-downs where you spend the last few days of the month using up everything that’s left in your fridge.

A number of businesses are also stepping up to cut waste on the production side by selling ugly produce. Producers toss about half of all fruits and vegetables in the United States, in part because they think we won’t buy “imperfect” produce that fails to meet aesthetic standards. Businesses like Imperfect Produce hope to bridge that gap by selling ugly but otherwise normal produce at a discount of 30 to 50 percent.

Measure up

There’s some truth to the saying “What gets measured gets managed,” and quantification has become something of a cultural obsession. Oroeco, an app available on both Android and iOS, takes that zeal and applies it to tracking personal carbon emissions.

Oroeco helps quantify the carbon emissions associated with purchases, investments, dietary choices and preferred modes of transport. It allows users to set goals, track performance and even compare their performance with friends. The app is still relatively new, and it isn’t perfect, but it can be a useful tool to get you moving in the right direction.

Other apps can help you lower your carbon footprint, too. My colleague Hiroko Tabuchi recently detailed the apps that she uses to stay aware of her personal contribution to global warming. The list includes the CO2 app from the International Civil Aviation Organization that she uses to track her greenhouse-gas emissions when she flies so she can invest in carbon offset credits. You can check out Hiroko’s full list here.

Links

• Current Physical Activity Guidelines
• Your Phone Can Help You Get Fit
• Key facts on food loss and waste you should know!
• How colour-coding your fridge can stop your greens going to waste
• Track your climate footprint
• Using Technology to Be Environmentally Friendly