Suffocating Dead Zones Spread Across World's Oceans
Critically low oxygen levels now pose as great a threat to life in the world's oceans as overfishing and habitat loss, say experts
Man-made pollution is spreading a growing number of suffocating dead zones across the world's seas with disastrous consequences for marine life, scientists have warned.
The experts say the hundreds of regions of critically low oxygen now affect a combined area the size of New Zealand, and that they pose as great a threat to life in the world's oceans as overfishing and habitat loss.
The number of such seabed zones - caused when massive algal blooms feeding off pollutants such as fertiliser die and decay - has boomed in the last decade. There were some 405 recorded in coastal waters worldwide in 2007, up from 305 in 1995 and 162 in the 1980s.
Robert Diaz, an oceans expert at the US Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, at Gloucester Point, said: "Dead zones were once rare. Now they're commonplace. There are more of them in more places."
Marine bacteria feed on the algae in the blooms after it has died and sunk to the bottom, and in doing so they use up all of the oxygen dissolved in the water. The resulting 'hypoxic' seabed zones can asphyxiate swathes of bottom dwelling organisms such as clams and worms, and disrupt fish populations.
Diaz and his colleague, Rutger Rosenberg of the department of marine ecology at the University of Gothenburg, call for more careful use of fertilisers to address the problem.
Writing in the journal Science, the researchers say the dead zones must be viewed as one of the "major global environmental problems". They say: "There is no other variable of such ecological importance to coastal marine ecosystems that has changed so drastically over such a short time."
The key solution, they say, is to "keep fertilisers on the land and out of the sea". Changes in the way fertilisers and other pollutants are managed on land have already "virtually eliminated" dead zones from the Mersey and Thames estuaries, they say.
Diaz says his concern is shared by farmers who are worried about the high cost of fertilisers. "They certainly don't want to see their dollars flowing off their fields. Scientists and farmers need to continue working together to minimise the transfer of nutrients from land to sea."
The number of dead zones reported has doubled each decade since the 1960s, but the scientists say they are often ignored until they provoke problems among populations of larger creatures such as fish or lobsters. By killing or stunting the growth of bottom-dwelling organisms, the lack of oxygen denies food to creatures higher up the food chain.
The Baltic Sea, site of the world's largest dead zone, has lost about 30% of its available food energy, which has led to a significant decline in its fisheries.
The lack of oxygen can also force fish into warmer waters closer to the surface, perhaps making them more susceptible to disease.
The size of marine dead zones often fluctuates with the seasons. A massive dead zone, some 8,000 square miles across, forms each summer in the Gulf of Mexico as floodwater flushes nitrogen-rich fertiliser into the Mississippi River.
Experts said it was slightly smaller than expected this year because Hurricane Dolly stirred up the water. Dead zones require the water to be separated into layers, with little or no mixing between.
As well as fertilisers rich in nitrates and phosphates, sewage discharges also contribute to the problem because they help the algal blooms to flourish.
Diaz and Rosenberg say: "We believe it would be unrealistic to return to pre-industrial levels of nutrient input [to oceans], but an appropriate management goal would be to reduce nutrient inputs to levels that occurred in the middle of the past century," before the rise in added nutrients began to spread dead zones globally.
Climate change could be adding to the problem. Many regions are expected to experience more severe periods of heavy rain, which could wash more nutrients from farmland into rivers.
In May, scientists reported that oxygen-depleted zones in tropical oceans are expanding. They analysed oxygen levels in samples of seawater and found the effect was largest in the central and eastern tropical Atlantic and the equatorial Pacific. The increase could push oxygen-starved zones closer to the surface and give marine life such as fish less room to live and look for food.
The scientists, led by Lothar Stramma from the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in Kiel, Germany, say the change could be linked to warming seas. At 0C, a litre of seawater can hold about 10ml of dissolved oxygen; at 25C this falls to 4ml. Stramma said: "Whether or not these observed changes in oxygen can be attributed to global warming alone is still unresolved." The reduction could also be down to natural processes working on shorter timescales, he said.
© 2008 The Guardian
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
92 Comments so far
Show AllYou think corrretly ~COCO~.
JCLIENTELLE
thank you..........(even though i'm not american.)
WORKRENO
with all due respect, i think that link is a 'bogus' site........
"I am no longer astonished that this CD blog response as become a personal column for the American aged"
Mean mean mean. What do you want older Americans to do - go to Florida and play canasta? Older Americans are still alive, thinking and caring what happens now and after we are gone.
I explained why I post the link I do about Phytoplankton, Elmysterio, if you don't thnk it's any good, even though it cites the NASA scientists and is easy to understand, that's Okay with me.
That one link you posted don't even say anything about how much of our oxygen is supplied by phytoplankton. Then too, we have a lot of veggies who read here and the fact that phytoplankton tablets are very good for us may be of interest to them. How many people ever heard of it? Do as you please, that's what I'll do.
The bad new is, that is not the case in spite of that link's information. I'll go with what the NOAA and the scientists who are there studying the situation have to report.
The good news is the Arctic ice appears to be growing.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/15/goddard_arctic_ice_mystery/
Kem: "he fact that phytoplankton supplies most of the oxygen on Earth that annoys you"
Nope, nothing at all... but I just think that a site devoted to the commercial purpose of selling phytoplankton capsules may not be the most reliable source of information. Not disputing the vital nature of the plankton themselves. I'm a big fan of plankton.
Hey ~IKE~. Try this. Check out the article, "WHY BEE MATTER" here, and you may see that there has been a great deal of interaction between several bloggers. It is a very good, decent, and interesting thread and is also educational and some good may come of all of the comments. Had everyone just posted a single comment, it would have been as dull as a dead bug.
We all do have our opinions do we not ~IKE~? It's likely as we age, we form more opinions about things. We also sometimes have a little fun here, like the farmers wife some of us briefly joked with. If I don't want to read someone's commets, I know how to by=pass them. Perhaps you could take some computer lessons and learn how to do that simple lesson. Then other's comments wouldn't bother you so much. Now you have poisted your opinion on YOUR issue and I posted mine. That fair?
Hey ~Ike~ instead of bloggng your opinions comments, why don't you submit articles. Many of your blogs are twice as long as the articles. Just click on contacting us and hit the how to submit article's icon and send em in for acceptance or rejection.
I find that when a denier or a troll posts and a series of comments ensue, that others join in and post links we have never kown about, which tend to increase our knowledge on the subject. So deniers and trolls are useful in a way actually, they are for me anyway. I've learned more about issues reaidng arguments here than just reading someones singel blog.
I am no longer astonished that this CD blog response as become a personal column for the American aged. A good way of venting dissatisfaction with life. The environmental issues offered for comment are simply a way for those who have overstuffed egos and self importance that exceeds the issues presented to vent their over active childish bathroom humor.
I hope someone gets wind of this comment. I will offer it to the directors of CD. It is hoped that comments or posts will be limited to one per-person. In that way those who have something to say will not have to go through the kindergarden of thought for appropriate thought- provoking posts.
The coastal areas are breeding grounds for many species and are hardest hit by de-oxygenation. So even if it is a smallish percentage of the ocean, it is a very serious situation.
Good article. The map was stunning, since it wipes out the coast where I live. Even Cape Cod, which is out a few miles in the ocean has red tides up and down.
And thanks Jason and especially Kem Patrick. Where do you get the energy?
One of the problems with replying to deniers is that it empowers them. They then feel the need to reply. There is really no need to reply to them. It's not like people here are going to be convinced by their arguments which don't contain links to scientific peer reviewed published papers.
.
Most of the people who visit CD to read these comments understand that science involves doing peer review. Any new ideas are checked by other scientists for accuracy. Can the experiment or the computer climate data run be reproduced with similar results in controlled conditions? Thousands of scientists have warned us about climate suicide. Humans are indeed pretty stupid, they'll try anything twice -- but there's only one Earth to try it on, oooops!
.
Quote:
"Again, No, I don't need to reference any scientists or intellectuals,"
Unquote
My comment: I don't need no stinkin knowledge. I just recognize an idiot when I see one.
Can anyone like Buck be taken seriously. I liken it to Bushie's remark on Osama "I don't really think about him very much. I'm not that concerned."
Of course not. Why would you?
``
Beesdes being a G/W denier ~BUCK~, you also suffer from a reading disability. I did not ask any to pray for YOU to stay away, if you read and understand what I clearly wrote.
I also do not have a problem of anyone posting anything here, especially when I'm probably the most prolific blogger here at C/D. I'm certainly far from the most intelligent or the most pleasant at times. However I do wish some would just quietly fade away into the lost La-la land they apparently come from. ____ Buttt, when the G/W deniers post comments here, that is most certainly their personel perogative and their God given and our government's given, so far that is, RIGHT, as it is yours ~BUCK~. You are free to do as you please in that regard, as I am free to hope and pray and write what I please.
~Mr. REDMAN~. You don't need to reference any scientists to personally and visually observe that the Arctic is thawing out at an alarming rate either. Never during the past 600,000 years has that happened within a few short years.
The world's leading climate experts on the Nobel Prize winning, "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change", state that "human activity" is responsible for most of the observed warming. That alone is a very strong consensus.
I agree with your comment that some shitheads will most certainly attempt to take advantage of the situation for personal financial gain. That possible so named "White Collar" type of criminal issue, does not have anything to do with the fact, that humanity is causng the current Greenhouse effect in our atmosphere, by burnning fossil fuels.
Any like yourself who deny that proven scientific fact, are as bad as those in power who allow it to continue. You deniers are supporting the ones who allow it and they refuse to address the most serious issue facing all life on this planet and take stong immediate action to stop it. And it does not require a "flaming liberal", or a "succor", to see what is occurring In the Arctic for one prime example, and to also study the rapid decline of the world's glaciers.
Get out and take a good intelligent, open minded look and don't worry about word usage or comments about that minor complaint about the word succor. Your prose use of the not commonly used word "SUCCOR", was confusing BTW. You might attempt to find something more important to bitch about, or seek advice on how to extract your head.
Now we all know it would be impossibe for you or anyone to shove their head up their ass. As you are well aware, that terminology is just a very catchy phrase which is easily understandable and less confusing than the word "succor" is. It is sometimes used to signffy when a person, ___ such as yourself,___ is being an obtues, and or an ignorant annoyance.
As to insults? If you would scroll back and read what you first wrote, perhaps you could see, (if yor're an honest person that is), that your comment to all here were indeed insulting and indeed it were you ~Mr. REDMAN~ who initiated the insults, ___ intended or not.
BTW ~Buck~, you are not going to win any argumets here, so don't bother, as hopefully no one else will reply to you again. The vast majority here don't appreciate or like the ignrant scumbag deniers who often come here and who support the Bush, Cheney, Rove, limbaugh, LaRouche, etc, types.
Your last post jumped in as I was typing this one. I do believe your option to just read comments here is a fine decision on your part, Evidently you're more honest and intelligent than I percieved. ___ Hope so.
To KEM PATRICK,
My apologies, Kem, I didn't mean to rain on your parade. I just assumed that this was an open forum for anyone to discuss his or her opinion.
You wrote, "___It's Sunday. ___ Let us now pray, that they continue to stay away."
Again, I'm sorry for having a different opinion, but I won't stay away. However, I will NOT write any more, I will only read because I learn more when I listen to diversified opinions and I want to read more of yours. Like you, I'm also praying; I'm praying that you continue expressing your opinions freely anywhere that you want to.
Keep The Faith,
Buck Redman
To: Buck Redman,
Why do Conservatives always resort to denying scientifically proven models, and redirecting the debate with some unrelated topic? Why do Conservatives name call, then go on to say that they are the ones being name called? Why do Conservatives most always have their head so far up their arse that they accually start believing their own lies and propaganda? Why do Conservatives do anything they can to divert and distract attention away from serious issues and always say one thing but do the exact opposite? last but certainly not least, Why do Conservatives never have any real solutions to problems, other than lip service-"there is no problem, everything is a ok" or later on when the problem can no longer be denied "we knew all along, we did everything to prevent it, it was those pesky scientists and intellectuals that had so and so model wrong is why we couldn't prevent it" or the like.
No Buck Redman, i dont think anyone on this post is going to swallow your swill.
How about you read an very telling and prophetic book written 30-40 years ago-Its called SILENT SPRING by Rachel Carson.
To: Jason M
Why do Liberals always resort to; fits of rage, anal references, and name-calling? I don't know the answer to my question, but I do know that by these actions Liberals have earned the label of: Wack-O, (as is defined at http://EnvironmentalWack-O.com)
No, the correct reference is SUCCOR, not SUCKER (Succors blindly run to the aid of a preconceived ailment to offer help/succor where it isn't wanted.)
Again, No, I don't need to reference any scientists or intellectuals, I simply recognize a scam when I see one. You need to follow the money, Jason, and see who benefits from these Chicken Little scams, which is always the first ones who declare the sky is falling.
Yours Truly,
Buck Redman
This new Common Dreams denier ~BUCK REDMAN~ has only posted one comment here at C/D using that name I notice, from checking the archives. Has anyone noticed our usual gang of C/W deniers hasn't shown up here on this thread? ___It's Sunday. ___ Let us now pray, that they continue to stay away.
Thirty-five years ago, someone told me:
"The Solution to Pollution is Dilution!"
Boy are those days gone.
Just saw an old bat wearing a blond wig zip by, she's headin northwest driving a new, red vette convert. ____ Hmmmmm?
WOW Jason........That was the best I've heard in a long time.
Please stick around. The world needs you.
I normally try to ignore the "Bucks" of the world as their ignorance truly is bliss but your commentary in response was .......well, priceless!!!
Checking my local dive spot as I have done for the past 25 years I was noticing the strange absence of fish. Good article. Now I know why.
Remember your sworn marriage vows farmer gal. Nothin in them about not pissin in the sink.
Please write that once more ~JASON~ in case the Bush like mind set, foolish denier missed it. That was the best one yet. You made my year.
I personally never click onto those type of denier's websites either, in the chance they can then track back and virus my computer.
Thanks JasonM for schooling the brain-dead redneck idiot who can't even spell the word suckers.
What an oaf.
Hey Buck- When you try to pilfer from my organic farm after the collapse of civilization I will gladly feed you - to my dogs- and then I will turn your gun rack into community art for our children's center, sucker.
Bravo JasonM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey, Buck Redman Aug16 4:05PM-
Firstoff, the appropriate word is 'suckers' not 'succors,' and you're a better example of the former than informed people are of your misnamed latter.
You're right that the global ocean is huge - about 140 million square miles with an average depth of about 12,000 feet - and that the multiplying deadzones (averaging about 8,000 square miles each) are still relatively small by comparison. But that's not the end of the story, it's just the beginning - if your mind is open and fair.
Objective measurements document that the spatial sizes of these deadzones are beginning to expand beyond arithmetical increments to algorythmically-induced additions, due to increases in mean ocean surface temperatures; and because of this increasing spatial expansion, the toxic effect of the multiplying zones on oxygen-producing phytoplankton (which live and work at the surface) is to predicable to become exponential as masses of dead plankton begin to degrade adjacent, theretofore pollution unaffected ocean surface chemistries.
Redman: If you believe that your knowledge of this problem exceeds that of the majority of the world's scientists, or, that a majority of the world's scientists are conscious, dedicated, crypto-agents of a socialist conspiracy bent destroying capitalism for sheerly ideological reasons, nothing I can further say here will be of interest to you.
But likewise, if you believe such a thing, nothing that you further say here, either, will be of interest to sane people who are, in the end, only concerned about erring on the side of caution -- given that human survivability may hang in the balance.
Tell me how smart you are, now: How much do you really know about this matter, beyond your favorite conservative foghorn's blather of scientific ignorance and political propaganda?
Understand this, too: I am a forgiving person.
If you can please study further, and admit that what comes out of your brain's mouth on this issue, has unfortunately become cross-wired with what the loosening of your anal sphincter is rightly designed to make come out of your ass, then, far from being dismissed as a neuro-anatomical anomaly, you will honored by me as that rare conservative who, on evironmental issues at least, manages in the face of best-documentable fact, to extract his head from his rectum.
Hopeful Regards.
How can you divorce a farm?
I do believe some here missed something quite important that the GUARDIAN PUBLISHED and Common Dreams postd it.
They published: ___ "The TOTAL of (400) ocean dead zones,--- is--- equal--- to--- the--- size--- of--- New--- Zealand." ___ Not ONE single dead zone,___ the total of ALL of the 400.
The author also said EXPERTS report that. The EXPERTS are NOT G/W deniers, who are worse than a melanoma cancer and should be banished to Antarctica, so they can observe the millions years old ice rapidly melt. THE EXPERTS, are people who have spent their entire adult lives studying our oceans, highly educated and trained scientists, ("oceanographers"). They are not Satanic minded type scum-bags, who are not only ignorant but also purposefully help ot create serious issues to become controversial.
Those EXPERTS are people who are dedicted to saving our oceans from mankind's ignorant and criminal pollution of the precious waters of the only water workd known to exist in the entire universe. We are stuck with it, love it or kill it.
"The total land area of New Zealand is 267990 sq km (103470 sq mi), about the same size as Japan or the British Isles." -- google search for 'new zealand size'
Or about the size of Wyoming. So why does the Guardian tell its British readers that the dead zone is the size of New Zealand?? To make sure they don't know the quantity described?
Dead Zones, Ha! This is as stupid as manmade global warming. You succors will fall for anything. Constant flow of the ocean's tides and currents has such awesome power, volume, and strength that the possibility of a so-called "dead zone" is tantamount to keeping a hot air balloon in static position. In fact, it's impossible. I only wish that these doomsday scientists bribed their funding from succors like you rather than rob us hard working taxpayers.
Buck Redman at http://EnvironmentalWack-O.com
For decent diagram of interaction of humans and the oceans, see www.StudentsForTheEarth.org/oceans.jpg
Run away to Vegas ~housewife~, buy a red corvette convertable.
Excellent points ~Simple Sause~ Right on.
Saying that dead zones adding up to the size of NZ are not that big compared to the size of the oceans is to completely misunderstand the way that oceans function.
The places in the ocean where river sediments enter sea water are the most biologically productive areas of the oceans. These are the exact places whose historic biodiversity is being completely wiped out, while the open ocean - areas with significantly less nutrients to support life - are merely being choked by massive quantities of plastic.
This is industrial civilization (and its colonized inhabitants) doing everything possible to wipe all life from the earth.
He must be good in bed, ___ it saved my marriage.
Another nail that point to industrial countries to be the worst pollutors.
If people of India and China continue to ignore the side effects of industrialization on the environment and not realign the need for industrialization and preservation of ecosystem. Majority of us will be known as smelly fellas.
He doesn't care about me as a person, he only cares about what he can get out of me. He is using me up.
Do you think we should get a divorce?
But what to do? He just wants to drill for more oil. That is all he cares about.
You better have a little talk with hubby Housewife.
Ocean dead zones remind me somewhat of a melanoma cancer spot on one's forehead. Cancer spreads, and it kills.
~KAYAKER~ That massive garbage dump of several feet deep plastic in the Mid-Pacific that Galen mentioned at 5:17am, is larger than the United States however. It's perhaps worse than the growing dead zones.
Galen: 4:31 PM post- I certainly agree. Good post.
on the dirty dishes?
At least you don't pee in the sink. Do you?
And sometimes I miss the bowl when I pee.
"Oink ___ oink".
Kem,
Well...??? How should I put this? Anyone who has co-habitated with another human (marriage, roommates, etc.) knows how difficult it can become when one member of the household leaves his or her mess for another to clean up.
In this particule post I was refering to men in the sense of Mankind, including woman kind, the general sense of the word.
The same rules apply no matter how big the "living space". Who does the laundry? Who earns the wage? Who does the dishes? Who plants the garden? Who maintains the spirital climate? Is the maid less important than the wage earner? Without one the other is less.
So yes at times I am married to a pig. And so is he. Because I am not perfect.
At least I am taking my own bags to the grocery store. LOL
These dead zones 'affect a combined area the size of New Zealand'. Have we all looked at a map of the world and seen just what the 'size of New Zealand' is? Pretty small. Not that dead zones are not something we should be concerned about, but, you can't spread New Zealand across the face of the earth. It just isn't big enough!
Hey ~FARMWIFE~ Men are pigs? Now please don't tell us that you're married to a pig.
LOL
There is a limit to how much shit a cess pool will hold and we have managed to use our precious waters, aquifers and the oceans for cess pools.
The scientist, explorer, inventor, navigator, seaman, pilot and author, ~Jacques Costeau~ warned us as far back as 1960 and he was ignored. Top level scientists are still being ignored.
Thanks to modern science and technology, we can now destroy the worlds oceans in our pursuit of comfort, convenience and consumer goods.
Well, humankind could learn a lot from the South American jaguar. He's been a top-predator for longer than humans have been top-predators. You'll never see a jaguar unless you're about to become his lunch.
publius perfidius August 15th, 2008 9:16 pm
Great point!
May I quote from a stupid movie? Coneheads:
Men are pigs. Pig, a domesticated ominivore that deficates in the same place in consumes. Exactly.
It seems almost cruelly ironic that this earth's lower apes instinctively know how to avoid fouling their own nests, while we higher apes have lost those same smarts; that the price we humans must pay for becoming more creative and complexly prosperous than gorillas - is not knowing where or how to sensibly shit anymore.
Apparently, anything is allowed to happen in this universe.
I don't like that too much.
But I still believe that Creation intends Good for us humans, and that those of us who can see the oceans for their waters, and the forests for their trees, are expected act on that premise - against those humans who greedily produce harm to what sustains the human experiment.
I think you're right. It is too late. Most people around here just keep their TVs running all the time staring vacantly at car chases and sex scandals. If you try to get into a serious conversation with someone, anyone, within one minute they are asking if you are a veteran, as though non-vets aren't even allowed to have an opinion on anything. So I tell them that I am a veteran, and I don't agree with their opinion, and they start comparing how many years they were in the military to how many years I was in the military. And if I was only in for five years and they were in for twenty four years, they walk away with little triumphant smiles on their faces.
Galen August 15th, 2008 7:44 pm
Thank you for educating me. The information I had didn't include how regulated it was, but just that it was allowed. A poster on CD just the other day said one state (sorry I can't remember which one, maybe Kentucky) is now allowing hemp cultivation. I imagine it must be a similar nightmare for the growers.
I might add at this point that part of the problems we have with run off from farms is allowing cultivation right up to the very edge of streams and rivers. Common sense would suggest that keeping trees, grass, and other ground covers close to steam and riverbank areas would impede run off of chemicals (which I do not endorse) and land erosion. Also as other posters have noted, chemicals leak into ground water. Urban lawns are also part of the problem, it is not just agriculture.
FREEQUARK
DEAD OCEANS PLUS DEFORESTATION
EQUALS NO OXYGEN EQUALS SUFFOCATION
that's a poem, you maybe didn't realise. and it would be a good ad to educate people. but i agree, it's probably too late already.........
Farmwife - Add Canada to the list of countries that do not allow the widespread cultivation of hemp. The (VERY) few operations there are are heavily licensed, paranoically monitored by the RCMP, and subject to random search and testing. As well, all product has to be meticulously accounted for and monitored. Most of the early operations have shut down due to all of this invasive policing.
Fertilizer run off from suburban lawns contributes too. We fertilize lawns, mow them with more fossil fuels and then haul clippings to landfills instead of composting or grass cycling. This is idiotic. Use grasscycling- leave clippings on the lawn to recycle nutrients or compost. Better yet change your lawn to a kitchen garden. Put in drip irrigation and grow veggies and reduce your carbon footprint and pollution of the rivers and oceans.
homeward-angel August 15th, 2008 5:46 pm
You are SO right!!!! Hemp makes a great linen type paper, ropes, clothes, the list goes on and on. Germany is even making car body parts from hemp. A totally renewable resource.
Industrial hemp could save the american family farm if we can keep Monsanto away from the seed.
The US is the only industrial nation in the world to not allow hemp cultivation.
It is easy to create planted areas that will catch runoff then measure the effectiveness. All easy, we don't care.
Rule; "No one changes the path they are on until they get in enough pain."
We are not in enough pain!
Call this growing ocean die off just one more aspect of Great Downward Spiral. It works this way: The growing world economy is making ever increasing demands on a Ecosystem increasingly unable to meet those demands. But this is not a problem, if the oil is running out, start turning food into fuel, plow down your Appalachian mountains for coal, strip Alberta's Boreal forest for oil sands, and plan to do the same out West to extract the oil shale. If you find fish are harder to get out of the Ocean, build bigger fishing ships with more sophisticated technology. And when you have stripped the Oceans go find yourself some toxic Talapia from China at WalMart or Safeway. Oh I almost forgot the American fish farms shutting down because the feeds are now too expensive. But don't worry, we are cutting down the Everglades not only to drill for more energy but also to produce more soybeans for the soybeans displaced in this county by the corn to power your (and my) car back and forth between work, school, the big box stores, and our suburban homes. Meanwhile, we have only increased hunger by an extra 100 million people just to keep our vehicles going. And so the cycle goes as we spend down the would be Ecologic Inheritance of future generations in order to keep afloat this grand, but very brief, illusion of our independence of Earth Systems.
For a rigorous presentation of man's spending down of the natural capital, see WWF's Living Planet Report at http://www.panda.org/news_facts/publications/living_planet_report/index.cfm
www.StudentsForTheEarth.org
Dead oceans + deforestation = no oxygen = suffocation.
Unfortunately, human beings - especially Americans - will only react when dead zones appear and people start suffocating, but by then it will be too late.
It's probably too late already, as there's no way to significantly reduce the human population or restore the oxygen supply.
But to get the important point across that the phytoplankton are vital for all life and the very basis for life on Earth, I find that the link I offer is much easier to read and the fact that it quotes NASA scientists I felt helps enhanse the understanding more so than the very lengthy Wikipedia links. So I'll stick to my links ~Elymesterio~ and won't criticize any which you may offer.
P/S, I don't do smiley faces.
Good links Elmo thanks again.
No ~Elmystero~ I don't get anythng for posting that link, nor do I use the capsules. Is there something in that link about the fact that phytoplankton supplies most of the oxygen on Earth that annoys you? I only post it to help inform just how important the Phytoplankton are for life to survive on Earth and there are icons in that link that also offer other importnant information.
Surprisingly, many people don't realize that most of our oxygen is supplied by the microscopic plant life in our oceans and we are destroying that plant life, or phytoplankton, with man made pollution.
Does my posting it cause you to have some personal problem? I wish that you had not made a comment that might tend to discredit my honesty or integrity and then add a smiley face to show that you're a nice guy. What good did you derive by asking it of me? And thank you for giving the other links you posted about it, I didn't have those.
there should be a massive effort to plant industrial HEMP along streams and rivers that eventually pour into the oceans. It is unbelievable that more people are not speaking up about how much of a difference it would make if industrial hemp is legalized. The federal government needs to stop the maddness known as the 'war on drugs' as it really is a war on people. INDUSTRIAL HEMP should be every american farmers right to grow. within 2 years of legalization, it would infuse the economy with BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of dollars and thousands of good jobs. NO more cutting down old growth forests so the rich can wipe their asses with virgin pulp. NO more wastefull corn ethanol when you can make twice as much on half the land without using these caustic fertilizers!! HEMP has Sooooo many uses, thats why it has so much opposition. The OWNERS dont want a plant that can replace all that plastic crap out there. The PEOPLE must start demanding their right to this worldsaving plant. Wilmore has the right idea, HEMP IS THE ANSWER!!!!!!
And what about the Great Plastic Whorl in the Pacific?
Simple Sauce says "Policy could address this problem easily by setting standards for erosion buffers surrounding agricultural fields, catching the majority of the runoff during heavy precipitation events, thereby keeping fertilizer trapped in soils rather than pouring into rivers."
That would make a big difference. But there's still all the fertilizer, pesticides, and other poisons that leech into the soil and end up in underground water sources, that also end up in the ocean.
GWNorth said: "If you look at the map, the area around the arctic is all but pristine."
Well, the map doesn't indicate "pollution levels", it's an indication of levels of dissolved O2. Considering that colder water can hold more O2, it's logical that the Arctic doesn't have a dead-zone... yet.
Just another example of the results of our environmental neglect. The longer corrective measures are delayed, ther worse things will become and the rates of decline will accelerate. The mentality of this administration and their war on science has contributed largely to this condition.
The bad news just keeps pouring in.
We are the masters of arrogance and supreme, scary fools! It's like watching the fall of the roller coaster - just going along for the ride ...
This is nothing more than the logical outcome of the so-called 'Green Revolution'.
When you over use chemical fertilizers, the run off flows into streams and rivers which lead eventually, to the sea. During the most recent episode of flooding in the US Midwest, in the weeks that followed the Texas Gulf dead zone exploded in area.
You want to stop the spread of dead zones?
Go to local (Hundred Mile Diet) organic gardening. For everyone. Break the agri-corp monopolies. AND STOP BLOODY USING OIL BASED FERTILIZERS!
zaz said: "To clean a river you simply stop polluting it. To clean the ocean you stop polluting it.
And this will happen just as soon as there are no 'future generations' to continue polluting.
If you look at the map, the area around the arctic is all but pristine.
But for how long. ? Will we wake up and try and preserve THAT ara before it too late or will this mad rush to develop its resources take hold once again.?
The oceans are dying and you know what they're doing in Cumberland, MD? This evening they are having 500 Harley-Davidson motorcycle riders at the downtown business mall, revving up their bikes at the same time and going off on a long ride in the country.
You know, this is one of those things that's actually a lot simpler to solve than people assume. It's not even about stopping the use of fertilizers - synthetic or "organic." It's about stopping these things from washing down into the waterways and being emptied into the oceans.
Policy could address this problem easily by setting standards for erosion buffers surrounding agricultural fields, catching the majority of the runoff during heavy precipitation events, thereby keeping fertilizer trapped in soils rather than pouring into rivers.
This is one of the many issues that require good governance, which much of the world is lacking. So the politicians keep lying, the corporate agribusiness giants keep profiting, and the oceans keep dying.
Here is a great article by Jensen:
http://www.alternet.org/story/95126/the_delusion_revolution%3A_we%27re_on_the_road_to_extinction_and_i...
KEM PATRICK: Why do you keep posting the link to the site to buy plankton capsules? Do you get a kickback or something? ;)
More useful information would be:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoplankton
this reminds of the soylent green movie starring chuck pry-that-gun-from-my-cold-dead-hand heston
also it was the last movie edward g robinson was in
the secret report in that movie had to do with the death of the oceans - then, as we know, they started to make food out of dead people
one thing i hope for, if we survive the looming nuclear war with the russians, is that i don't get a burger made out of recycled cheney
man, talk about heartburn
zaz said: "To clean a river you simply stop polluting it. To clean the ocean you stop polluting it. We know what the solutions are. We need regulations and enforcement. We can assume how mccain stands on the issue. What is obama's position?"
Please inform all the farmers east of the Continental Divide that you want them to stop using fertilizer so that we can stop the annual killing a New Jersey size portion of the Gulf of New Mexico.
wwww.StudentsForTheEarth.org
To clean a river you simply stop polluting it. To clean the ocean you stop polluting it. We know what the solutions are. We need regulations and enforcement. We can assume how mccain stands on the issue. What is obama's position?
What is left to say? We in the west, especially the US, flaunted our affluent lifestyles in front of the whole world and now they want what we have.
McDonalds, for example, intends to build a huge amounts of new stores in China. Market research must indicate then that the Chinese want McDonalds, which shows that they are as susceptible to being brainwashed into the corporate-consumer reality-tunnel as Americans were and still are for the most part.
How could anyone see the proliferation of Mcdonalds as a sign of "the good life?"
I'd love to see rich businessmen and political leaders in the West stand up and say to the world, "We were wrong, our way of life and our life-philosophy of endless cancerous corporate proliferation and the consumer lifestyle are dead ends."
Plus, how many people would be willing to forego having children? How many would be willing to accept the proposition that, yes, all those who came before them had children but that now they are going to have to refrain from doing so so that humanity can reduce the population to a sustainable level which i would imagine would be no more than 3 billion people.
but both of the above will never happen. an intelligent global dialogue about all of theis wont happen because human beings are just not mature enough to do it.
'future generations are going to look back on us and they are going to think of us as barbarians, the same way we think of the slave traders. they're going to look at us as barbarians for what we are doing, the fact that we're burning all the fossil fuels in a few generations, that we wiped out the oceans, that we've driven species to extinction, and worse, this is the worst part, we know what we are doing. the scientists know, the environmentalists know, the companies know, and the general public knows, and yet we are allowing ourselves to do it'
- rex wyler, founder greenpeace international, author