Kim Bellard
Probably not on the calendar. But Monday was World Oceans Day. The day is meant to promote “collective action for healthy oceans and a stable climate” and has been around since 2002 (the UN did not officially recognize it until 2008). The website features a network of more than 2,000 organizations in 180 countries.
I wish we had more to celebrate.
Many people find it ironic that humans call the Earth “Earth.” In fact, 71% of the Earth’s surface is covered with water. What’s even more surprising is that the ocean makes up 99% of the biosphere. We come from the sea and we still owe much of our existence to the sea.
Unfortunately, these are not good times for the ocean and it is our responsibility. The UN’s most recent World Ocean Assessment highlights:
- The ocean is important to everyone, everywhere.
- The ocean is under extreme stress.
- Climate change is changing conditions.
- Biodiversity is declining in almost all marine habitats.
- Pollution is widespread and increasing.
- Marine food systems are under threat.
The report concluded: “The next decade is critical. Without rapid, coordinated global action, ocean health will continue to deteriorate, threatening climate stability, biodiversity resilience, food security, livelihoods and the well-being of billions of people.”
I think about this in light of the National Science Foundation’s announcement last month that it is “discoping” its Ocean Observatory Initiative (OOI) major facility starting next week. It is a $368 million deep-sea observation system that “provides real-time data from more than 900 instruments to address important scientific questions about the world’s oceans.” Approximately 900 instruments are scheduled to be removed from both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
Michael England, a spokesperson for the National Science Foundation, told Eric Niiler: new york times The decision “is consistent with NSF’s broader strategy to have a more agile approach to prioritizing support for evolving scientific priorities and emerging technologies and a thoughtful approach to smart life cycle management within the research infrastructure portfolio.”
That is, we (the Trump administration) did not invent it, and we do not want it because it is related to climate change.
Craig McLean, who was NOAA’s acting chief scientist during Trump’s first term, told Nealer, “This reflects a further lack of understanding by this administration that science has value and merit. By dismantling that system, we are once again putting the United States in the background in global science leadership.”
Scientists are appalled. Sabrina Speich, global ocean monitoring expert at the Ecole Normale Ecology in Paris (ENS) and chair of the Ocean Expert Panel of the Global Climate Observing System, said: guardian: “Ocean heat content is the most powerful indicator of climate change we have. It’s an indicator not just of what’s happening in the ocean, but of the entire climate system. If we lose it, we lose the ability to track not just ocean warming, but the entire climate system. It’s a proxy for a variable that becomes unusable the moment observations stop.”
John P Abraham, professor of engineering at the University of St. Thomas, called the move “a penny-pinching fool’s errand,” adding, “The US government wants to save less than a billion sensors that are the eyes and ears of the ocean. We are sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars in annual climate costs. The cost of observing systems is only a fraction of the climate costs from the hurricanes and storms that hit the US.”
Chris Robbins, deputy director of science initiatives at the nonprofit Ocean Conservancy, complained to Mr. Niiler: “It is completely short-sighted to walk away from the $368 million investment in a state-of-the-art system, a feat of engineering that the American people have already paid for.”
Democrats in Congress have pledged to fight the cuts, but lack the votes to take any action. The EU is strengthening its ocean monitoring efforts separately from U.S. measures through its OceanEye initiative, but said this would be a long-term process and would not immediately offset U.S. cuts.
Meanwhile, a new study has found that a “cold mass” in the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation could signal big changes ahead. “Further weakening of Atlantic heat transport under future climate change could have serious implications for climate and weather conditions in Europe and other parts of the world.”
Of course, it doesn’t seem like a good time to lose our ocean monitoring capabilities.
What’s worse is the Trump administration’s enthusiasm for deep-sea mining. It is well known that there are many valuable minerals at the bottom of the sea, and some mining companies are excited about the prospect of open pit mining them. NOAA has begun mapping approximately 30,000 square nautical miles in American Samoa, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is surveying several other ocean areas with the goal of allowing deep-sea mining.
The United States may also issue permits for seabed that is not owned by the United States or other countries.
“No one has ever done commercial-scale deep-sea mining,” said Becca Loomis, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This will be something very new and moving forward. Rushing this industry is really scary for the oceans, marine ecosystems and the people who depend on fisheries.”
A new review of existing research finds that we understand relatively little about the impacts of such mining. But what little we know suggests there may be large, long-term impacts on biodiversity.
“We have little understanding of how these communities function, what environmental factors influence their distribution, and how sensitive they are to human disturbance. Likewise, the discovery of several sponge species potentially new to science highlights how little is known about Arctic ecosystems,” said Dr. Julio A. Diaz, a deep-sea researcher at the Evolution Museum at Uppsala University.
“The deep-sea mining industry has not yet begun to destroy the seafloor, so we have an opportunity to prevent environmental disaster before it occurs.” said Dr. Sandra Schöttner, Chief Scientist at Greenpeace International.
You can imagine how little the Trump administration, whose creed is “train, baby, train,” cares about such implications.
I’m glad we have a World Oceans Day, but it’s hard to celebrate it with all that’s happening to damage and destroy our oceans. I am confident that the ocean will exist long after humans exist. But it is unfathomable how much damage we will do to the ocean during our existence.
