Earth Wise

A look at our changing environment.

You are here: Home / Archives for mitigation

mitigation

The World’s Largest Harmful Algal Bloom | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Brown sargassum seaweed floats in surface water in a bloom that stretches all the way from West Africa to the Gulf of Mexico.  Sargassum provides habitat for turtles, crabs, fish, and birds.

The stuff carpets beaches along the tropical Atlantic, the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of Mexico, and the east coast of Florida disrupting tourism.  Florida’s Miami-Dade County alone spends $45 million a year cleaning up sargassum.  Annual Caribbean clean-up is in excess of $120 million.

A study by Florida Atlantic University has discovered dramatic changes in the chemistry and composition of sargassum which has transformed the so-called Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt into a toxic dead zone.

The findings of the study suggest that increased nitrogen availability from both natural and human-generated sources, including sewage, is supporting blooms of sargassum and turning a critical marine nursery habitat into harmful algal blooms with catastrophic impacts on coastal ecosystems, economies, and human health.

The study found that today’s sargassum tissues compared with those of the 1980s have 35% more nitrogen content and 42% less phosphorus.  Much of the nitrogen increase is a result of agricultural and industrial runoff from the Congo, Amazon, and Mississippi Rivers. 

The fact that the bloom itself has expanded so tremendously was already suspected to be the result of significant changes in the ocean’s chemistry.  Given the negative effect that the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt is having on the coastal communities, additional research is essential to guide mitigation and adaptation efforts.

**********

Web Links

Sargassum now world’s largest harmful algal bloom due to nitrogen

Photo, posted June 5, 2016, courtesy of J Brew via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Forests And Climate Change | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

A carbon sink is anything that absorbs more carbon from the atmosphere than it releases.  Examples of carbon sinks include the ocean, soil, and plants.  In contrast, a carbon source is anything that releases more carbon into the atmosphere than it absorbs.  Volcanic eruptions and burning fossil fuels are two examples.

Forests are among the most important carbon sinks.  Trees remove carbon from the air and store it in their trunks, branches, and leaves, and transfer some of it into the soil.  But in many regions, deforestation, forest degradation, and the impacts of climate change are weakening these carbon sinks. As a result, some climate activists advocate for large-scale tree-planting campaigns as a way to remove heat-trapping CO2 from the atmosphere and help mitigate climate change. 

But according to a new study recently published in the journal Science, planting new trees as a substitute for the direct reduction of greenhouse gas emissions could be a pipe dream.  While planting trees is easy, inexpensive, and can help slow climate warming, the ongoing warming would be simultaneously causing the loss of other trees.  Instead, the research team says it makes more sense to focus on keeping existing forests healthy so they can continue to act as carbon sinks, and to reduce emissions as much as possible and as quickly as possible.        

But keeping forests healthy will require a paradigm shift in forest management.  Instead of trying to maintain forests as they were in the 20th century, the research team says forests need to be managed proactively for the changes that can be anticipated. 

One thing is clear: We cannot plant our way out of the climate crisis.

**********

Web Links

Forests and climate change: ‘We can’t plant our way out of the climate crisis’

Photo, posted August 9, 2015, courtesy of Nicholas A. Tonelli via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Blue Carbon Credits | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Carbon credits have been around since the late 1990s.  The idea is to offset carbon emissions from some carbon emitting activity – anything from a wedding in California to a factory operating in Minnesota – by buying carbon credits earned from a carbon-absorbing activity, such as planting trees in the Amazon.

Blue carbon credits are credits earned by increasing the carbon stored in coastal and marine ecosystems. Coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, tidal marshes, and seagrass meadows in fact sequester and store more carbon per unit area than terrestrial forests and are increasingly being recognized for their important role in mitigating climate change. 

Blue carbon credit awards have to date been relatively few and far between and have mostly been granted for mangrove restoration efforts.  But mangrove projects are now ramping up dramatically in scope.  Scientists are working hard to analyze the amount of carbon in other ecosystem types – seagrasses, salt marshes, seaweeds, and seafloor sediments – so that these systems can also enter the carbon credit market.

Over the past 20 years, conservation scientists have spread over 70 million seeds in the bays of Virginia to restore over 9,000 acres of seagrass meadows that were devastated by disease in the 1930s.  The restored meadows are absorbing nearly half a ton of CO2 per acre. 

The rules to allow for blue carbon credits are recent and evolving, which is a big deal. The market may currently be small, but it is growing exponentially.  But as important as carbon credits are, it is still paramount to decarbonize before turning to offsets for existing emissions.

**********

Web Links

Why the Market for ‘Blue Carbon’ Credits May Be Poised to Take Off

Photo, posted July 2, 2009, courtesy of Nicolas Raymond via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Radar Satellites And Hazard Mitigation | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Scientists have concluded that the changing climate is primarily the result of increased human-caused greenhouse gas emissions.  Some of the effects of global climate change include melting glaciers, warming oceans, intensifying storms, and rising seas.

Another consequence of global climate change is natural disasters like floods and wildfires.  Climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of wildfires and increasing the odds of record-breaking floods in many parts of the United States and all around the world.

As a result, scientists in Australia have turned to technology for better assistance in keeping tabs on these climate change-driven natural disasters.  Researchers from Curtin University in Perth, Australia have found that satellites can improve the ability to detect, monitor, prepare for, and withstand natural disasters, including floods, wildfires, and earthquakes.

The research team used Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data, which was acquired by the European Space Agency Sentinel-1 satellite.  The researchers also used data acquired by other satellites to evaluate these Australia-specific case studies.

According to the researchers, SAR data provides remote monitoring capabilities of Earth’s surface around the clock and in all weather, which is something that traditional optical Earth Observation (EO) imagery cannot do. The ability to function through fog, clouds, rainfall, and smoke is what makes SAR so valuable.

The research team says that the data can be used to improve how people track and respond to natural disasters, by precisely mapping topography, tracking movements of the ground, and mapping damage to infrastructure. 

As the climate continues to change, the ability to mitigate hazards like floods and wildfires will be increasingly important. 

**********

Web Links

Radar satellites can better protect against bushfires and floods

Photo, posted May 11, 2007, courtesy of Bert Knottenbeld via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Air Pollution Reduction And Global Warming | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

The world is dealing with two serious problems affecting the atmosphere:  the growing levels of carbon dioxide leading to a warming climate and the effects of air pollution on human health.  It turns out that these two things are connected in complicated ways.

Countries around the world are racing to mitigate global warming by limiting carbon dioxide emissions.   The combustion of fossil fuels as well as wood and other biomass produces sulfate aerosols, which are associated with acid rain as well as many human health problems.   Air pollution causes an estimated seven million premature deaths per year worldwide, so reducing it is imperative.

The complication is that sulfate aerosols in the upper atmosphere actually have a cooling effect on surface air temperatures.  Aerosols create bigger clouds and increase light scattering, both of which result in less sunlight reaching the surface.  Large natural sources of sulfate aerosols – such as volcanic eruptions – can temporarily cool the earth until they settle out of the atmosphere.

There are many kinds and sizes of atmospheric aerosols, making predicting their effects and behavior difficult.  For example, black carbon aerosols from forest fires tend to suppress cloud formation by warming the air and making tiny water droplets evaporate.  However, sulfate aerosols from burning fossil fuels make clouds grow larger.

Analysis has shown that air pollution has actually reduced the amount of warming that has taken place to date.  A new study by Kyushu University in Japan looked at the long-term climate effects of reductions in sulfate aerosols.  The loss of cooling effect from light-scattering aerosols as emissions are reduced is a factor that cannot be ignored. 

**********

Web Links

Air pollutant reductions could enhance global warming without greenhouse gas cuts

Photo, posted January 23, 2021, courtesy of Wutthichai Charoenburi via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Helping Corals With Beneficial Bacteria | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

A group of researchers at the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia is exploring a novel technology to improve the health of corals.  Around the globe, corals are being stressed by pathogens, toxins, and warming waters leading to widespread bleaching events.

The new idea is to introduce beneficial bacteria to the corals, thereby boosting the strength and resilience of their symbiotic partners.  The concept is akin to the use of probiotics in plant science.  Corals rely on bacterial and algal symbionts to provide nutrients, energy (through photosynthesis), toxin regulation, and protection against pathogens.  

The researchers selected bacteria that are naturally symbiotic to specific coral species on reefs in the Red Sea, ensuring that no alien bacteria are accidentally introduced.  A probiotic cocktail comprising six bacteria strains was used in a laboratory setting.  Results in the lab have been promising so far, as they have observed dynamic and metabolic alterations to the corals that boosted their chances of survival under heat stress. 

Success in the lab will need to be translated to success in the open oceans, which is challenging.  Scaling up and seeding whole reefs might involve robots and artificial intelligence in order to deliver probiotics either into sediments or directly onto corals.

The use of beneficial microorganisms is not the solution to the global destruction of coral reefs.  Only worldwide CO2 mitigation can ultimately accomplish that.  But the probiotic approach might buy corals some time as they deal with shifting environmental pressures and try to adapt to a changing world.

**********

Web Links

Microbiome boost may help corals resist bleaching

Photo, posted March 18, 2018, courtesy of Steven dos Remedios via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Street Trees And Depression | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

According to a study published in the journal Jama Network Open last fall, the COVID-19 pandemic has tripled the rate of depression in U.S. adults in all demographic groups. 

Previous studies have demonstrated that greenspaces in urban areas can have a positive effect on those people experiencing mental ill health. But most of those studies used self-reporting measures, which makes it difficult to compare results and draw conclusions.

As a result, an interdisciplinary research team from three research organizations in Germany tried to improve upon the work by involving an objective indicator: prescriptions of antidepressants.  To figure out whether greenspaces – in this case street trees – could positively influence mental health, the researchers focused on how the number of street trees and their proximity to homes correlated to the number of prescribed antidepressants.

After analyzing data from nearly 10,000 people living in Leipzig, Germany, and combining the findings with data on city street trees, researchers were able to identify an association between antidepressant prescriptions and the number of street trees.  The results were controlled for other factors known to be associated with depression, such as employment, gender, age, and body weight.

Having more trees within 100 meters of the home was associated with a reduced risk of being prescribed antidepressants.  The association was especially strong for groups of people deprived of street trees. 

Street trees in urban cities can not only serve as a nature-based solution for good mental health, but they can also contribute to climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation.

**********

Web Links

Street trees close to the home may reduce the risk of depression

Photo, posted August 17, 2011, courtesy of Aleksandr Zykov via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

The Dangers Of Negative Emissions Technologies | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Reducing carbon emissions is not easy and there are plenty of people who don’t even want to try for various reasons, generally related to their perceived economic interests and convenience.  As a result, there is a great deal of interest in so-called negative emissions technologies or NETs.   These are methods for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.  Even the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assumes that NETs will play a role in mitigating the effects of climate change and meeting international goals.

The most widely studied approaches to negative emissions technology are bioenergy with carbon capture and storage – which entails growing crops for fuel, and then capturing and burying the CO2 produced from burning the fuel; planting more forests; and direct air capture, which involves actually pulling CO2 out of the air and storing it – probably underground. 

A new study published in Nature Climate Change points out that none of these technologies has even been tried at the demonstration scale, much less at the massive levels required to make a dent in current CO2 emissions. 

Their analysis of the biofuel and reforestation strategies show that each would take up vast land and water resources already needed for agriculture and nature.  Air capture uses less water than the other two approaches, but still uses quite a bit and even more energy, which if supplied by fossil fuels, would offset the benefits of carbon capture.

Negative emissions technologies may well play an important role in combating climate change, but it is essential that we understand what the consequences will be from implementing them.  We need to know the pitfalls that could arise.  It would be a major mistake to simply count on NETs to be some kind of silver bullet.

**********

Web Links

Remove CO2 from the air? Don’t bet on it before examining costs, researchers say

Photo, posted January 11, 2008, courtesy of Al Pavangkanan via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Family Forests And Climate Change | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Climate experts consider sequestration and storage of carbon in trees to be among the most affordable and scalable natural climate solutions.  If implemented globally, trees could provide a third of the near-term climate change mitigation needed to meet the terms of the Paris Agreement.

Small family-owned forests make up 38% of U.S. forests, a total area 1.5 times the size of Texas and more than any other ownership type.  Most small landowners want to do right by their land, but they rarely have access to the expertise or resources needed to optimize their forests for carbon sequestration.

This spring, the Nature Conservancy, the American Forest Foundation, and the Vermont Land Trust announced two new programs, funded in part by a $10 million grant by Amazon, that will provide funds to small landowners to grow larger, healthier forests.

Few forests are managed for carbon sequestration.  Practices like fast logging rotations, so-called high-grading that strips out the largest, most valuable trees, and rampant invasive species all compromise the ability of a forest to lock away carbon.  It turns out that most small landowners would like to do better, but they don’t have the expertise or the financial resources to implement sustainable management.

Existing carbon markets are not geared towards small forest owners.  Their payments are tiny and the required contract terms are onerous.  The Family Forest Carbon Program commits landowners for only 10 to 20 years.  Typical landowners won’t get a windfall.  A 100-acre landholding would stand to earn around $24,500 over 20 years. 

If these programs can sign up 20% of U.S. forest landowners, it could offset the emissions from 6 million cars.

**********

Web Links

How Small Family Forests Can Help Meet the Climate Challenge

Photo, posted July 14, 2013, courtesy of Joshua Mayer via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Planting Trees and Climate Change | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Forests are among the most important natural carbon sinks.  Trees remove carbon from the air and store it in their trunks, branches, and leaves, and transfer part of it into the soil.  But in some regions, these natural carbon sinks are starting to weaken due to deforestation, forest degradation, and the impacts of climate change.  This problem has led some climate mitigation projects to focus on increasing the overall number of trees on the planet. 

But, according to a paper recently published in the journal Science, “we can’t plant our way out of climate change.”  That’s the simple message from Restoration Ecologist Karen Holl and University of São Paulo Professor Pedro Brancalion to anyone who thinks planting one trillion trees will reverse the effects of climate change.  They say planting more trees is only one piece of the puzzle.  Any initiatives like 1t.org or the Trillion Tree Campaign must be done carefully and be accompanied by commitments to long-term management.

Tree plantings can provide many environmental benefits, including improving water quality, biodiversity, and increasing shade.  But trees can sometimes have undesirable impacts, such as harming native species and ecosystems or reducing water availability, depending on where and how the trees are planted.

The authors suggest four principles that should guide forest enhancement initiatives: reduce forest clearing and degradation, balance ecological and social goals, view tree plantings as one part of a multifaceted solution, and plan, coordinate and monitor the work. 

While tree plantings can clearly be part of the solution, slowing the pace of climate change requires a comprehensive approach that must start with burning less fossil fuels.

**********

Web Links

Challenges in tree-planting programs

Planting trees is no panacea for climate change

Photo, posted December 1, 2019, courtesy of Akuppa John Wigham via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Protecting Fresh Produce | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Fresh fruits and vegetables can sometimes become contaminated by microorganisms during their long journey from fields to restaurants and grocery stores.  Contaminated produce can spoil other produce, which increases the number of fruits and vegetables in the supply chain that can cause illnesses. 

In order to prevent this cross-contamination between produce, researchers from Texas A&M University have designed a coating that can be applied to food-contact surfaces, like buckets, rollers, and conveyor belts.  The newly-created dual-function coating is both water-repellent and germicidal.  In other words, it can both repel and kill.  Without water, the researchers say bacteria can’t stick or multiply on surfaces, drastically reducing contamination.

To make this dual-function coating, the researchers chemically-attached a thin layer of silica to an aluminum sheet.  They then added a mixture of silica and lysozyme, a naturally-occurring germicidal protein found in egg whites and tears.  Together, the silica-aluminum and the silica-lysozyme formed microscopic bumps and crevices.  According to the research team, this rough texture, albeit microscopic, is the key to the coating’s superhydrophobic properties.  

The researchers tested the coating’s effectiveness at curbing the growth of two strains of disease-causing bacteria:  Salmonella and Listeria.  Upon review, the number of bacteria found on the dual-coating surfaces was 99.99% less than what was found on the uncoated surfaces. 

Despite the success in preventing bacterial spread, the research team said more research needs to be done to see how well the coating works for mitigating viral cross-contamination.  Since the coating would need to be reapplied after a certain amount of use, the researchers also plan to develop more permanent, dual-function coatings. 

**********

Web Links

New dual-action coating keeps bacteria from cross-contaminating fresh produce

Photo, posted April 14, 2012, courtesy of U.S. Department of Agriculture via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Benefits Of A Zero-Emissions Boston | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Many countries, states, and cities around the world have set goals to become carbon neutral, typically by the year 2050.  These goals are based on the desire to mitigate the effects of climate change that are steadily increasing as a result of the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  But reducing emissions is not just a way to combat climate change, it can also be a major contributor to improved public health.

The City of Boston has set a goal to become carbon neutral by 2050.  A new study by the School of Public Health at Boston University published in the journal Environmental Research Letters looked at the consequences of eliminating fossil fuel emissions in the greater Boston area.

According to their modeling, eliminating emissions would save 288 lives a year by reducing fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses.   The resulting decrease in medical costs and lost and reduced work could save $1.7 billion a year in Suffolk County and $2.4 billion a year for the entire 75-square-mile zone modeled in the study.

The study looked at the amounts of two air pollutants known to harm human health:  PM2.5 (particulates with a diameter of less than 2.5 microns) and ozone.  They compared the current levels of these pollutants to what would be present when contributions from motor vehicles, generators, rail, industry, oil- and gas-burning, shipping and boating, and residential wood fires were eliminated.

The study focused on the City of Boston’s climate action plan, but actions taken by Boston will not take place in a vacuum.  Many cities across the region are taking similar actions.  The overall results will come from the collective actions across New England.

**********

Web Links

A Zero-Emissions Boston Could Save 288 Lives and $2.4 Billion Annually

Photo, posted August 31, 2019, courtesy of Eric Kilby via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

The Danger Of Relying On Future Technology | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

The need to mitigate the effects of climate change has been a global focus for about 40 years and has seen ever-changing views on what actions are needed.  The historical record has been defined by over-reliance on promises of new technology to solve climate change.  Looking to future technology to save the environment has been an excuse to postpone necessary action and avoid inconvenient changes in how we do things.

A study at Lancaster University in the UK published in Nature Climate Change exposes how such promises have raised expectations of more effective policy options becoming available in the future and have enabled the continued politics of inadequate action and skirting around the truth.

Even after four decades, rather than acting forcefully to reduce emissions, we are hoping that nuclear fusion power, giant carbon sucking machines, ice-restoration using vast numbers of wind-powered pumps, and spraying particulates into the atmosphere can address the climate crisis rather than dramatic changes in fossil fuel use.

The researchers mapped the history of climate targets in five phases.  Early on, the focus was on improved energy efficiency, large-scale enhancement of carbon sinks, and nuclear power.  Next, the focus was on cutting emissions with efficiency, fuel switching, and carbon capture and storage.  After that, bioenergy was the major focus.  Then, global carbon budgeting and potential negative emission technologies.  Currently, the focus is on temperature outcomes rather than emission targets.

Each novel promise competes with existing ideas and downplays any sense of urgency.   The researchers conclude that putting our hopes on yet more new technologies is unwise.  The time to act is now.

**********

Web Links

Why relying on new technology won’t save the planet

Photo, posted February 13, 2019, courtesy of Jonathan Cutrer via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Methane-Eating Bacteria And Greenhouse Gas Emissions | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

One of the great concerns about the warming Arctic temperatures is that thawing permafrost will release alarming amounts of methane into the atmosphere.  Organic material in the permafrost begins to decompose when temperatures rise, and methane is released in the process.

Methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.  Methane’s lifetime in the atmosphere is much shorter than carbon dioxide, but it is more efficient at trapping radiation.  Pound for pound, the comparative impact of methane is more than 25 times greater than carbon dioxide.

A new study, published by scientists at Purdue University, has discovered a type of methane-oxidizing bacteria living in upland Arctic soils that could potentially be reducing the amount of methane emitted by decomposing permafrost.

The findings of the research indicate that the net greenhouse gas emissions from the Arctic may be much smaller than previously modeled because of the increased productivity of a type of bacteria known as high affinity methanotrophs, or HAMs.  This group of bacteria uses atmospheric methane as an energy source.  The emissions from wetlands will potentially be very large, but the contribution from the uplands will be mitigated by the bacteria.

Organic-rich soils, including permafrost, comprise only 13% of the Arctic land area and are the major source of methane emissions.  The other 87% of the region is dominated by mineral-rich soils that support HAMs.  Because of this, overall methane emissions continue to be less than climate models have predicted.

While this is good news, the researchers warn that Arctic emissions overall will continue to increase as shown in other studies.

**********

Web Links

Methane-Eating Bacteria Could Help Decrease Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Thawing Arctic Tundra

Photo, posted July 12, 2016, courtesy of Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

The Rising Threat Of Rising Seas | Earth Wise

By Leave a Comment

Global sea level rose by about 6 inches during the 20th century.  It is currently rising more than twice as fast and accelerating.  The rate of rise was 2.5 times faster from 2006 to 2016 than it was for nearly all of the 20th century.

Sea level rise occurs when glaciers and ice sheets lose mass.  Much of that meltwater comes from Greenland and Antarctica.  But levels also rise because, as water warms, it expands.  Added to that are the effects of human activities such as groundwater depletion and a geological phenomenon called isostatic adjustment that is going on in parts of the East Coast where the land is actually sinking.

In Atlantic Canada, sea level rise is outpacing the global average and has already led to boardwalks swamped by swelling tides, drowned forests, submerged wharfs, and threatened historic shoreline buildings.

Recent research suggests that globally, land now occupied by 300 million people could be affected by floods at least once a year by 2050 unless carbon emissions are significantly reduced, and coastal defenses strengthened.  (This new figure is more than three times higher than earlier estimates).

Researchers at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia are studying nature-based strategies for mitigating the effects of the rising seas.  These include conserving or restoring coastal ecosystems like dunes, wetlands, and reefs which could provide protection at a lower cost than building seawalls and other man-made obstacles.  Wetlands, for example, can reduce the force of waves and act as obstacles to storm surges, while also trapping sediment and stemming erosion.  Wetlands also serve as important carbon stores, but it is estimated that roughly half of the world’s coastal wetlands have been lost over the past 100 years to human activity and extreme weather events.

**********

Web Links

The Looming Threat of Rising Sea Levels – And What We Can Do About it

Photo, posted February 14, 2015, courtesy of Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

A Powerful Case For Protecting Whales

By Leave a Comment

Efforts to mitigate climate change typically face two major challenges.  One is to find effective ways to reduce the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide.  The other is how to raise enough money to implement climate mitigation strategies. 

Many proposed solutions to climate change, like carbon capture and storage, are complex, expensive, and in some cases, untested.  What if there was a low-tech solution that was effective and economical?

Well, it turns out there is one, and it comes from a surprisingly simple, “no-tech” strategy to capture CO2: increase global whale populations. 

According to a recent analysis by economists with the International Monetary Fund, whales help fight climate change by sequestering CO2 in the ocean. 

Whales sequester carbon in a few ways.  They hoard it in their fat and protein-rich bodies, stockpiling tons of carbon apiece.  When whales die, they turn into literal carbon sinks on the ocean floor.  While alive, whales dive to feed on tiny marine organisms like krill and plankton before surfacing to breathe and excrete. Those latter activities release an enormous plume of nutrients, including nitrogen, iron, and phosphorous, into the water.  These so-called “poo-namis” stimulate the growth of phytoplankton, microscopic marine algae that pull CO2 out of the air and return oxygen to the air via photosynthesis.  Phytoplankton are responsible for every other breath we take, contributing at least 50% of all oxygen to the atmosphere and capturing approximately 40% of all CO2 produced. 

With other economic benefits like ecotourism factored in, economists estimate that each whale is worth $2 million over its lifetime, making the entire global population possibly a one trillion dollar asset to humanity.

*********

Web Links

How much is a whale worth?

Photo, posted June 12, 2013, courtesy of Gregory Smith via Flickr.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

New Membranes For Carbon Capture

By Leave a Comment

Drastically reducing the amount of carbon dioxide being emitted into the atmosphere is an essential goal in the effort to mitigate the effects of climate change.  While the ultimate solution is to avoid combustion of fossil fuels by the use of clean alternative energy sources, that transition will take time – possibly more time than we have.  As a result, there is a great deal of effort underway to develop techniques for capturing the carbon emitted by fossil fuel combustion and either recycling it or storing it.

There are multiple ways to capture carbon emissions, but the ultimate goal is to find a technique that is both inexpensive and scalable.  One promising technique involves the use of high-performance membranes, which are filters that can specifically pick out CO2 from a mix of gases, such as those coming out of a factory smokestack.

Scientists at a Swiss laboratory have now developed a new class of high-performance membranes that exceeds the targeted performance for carbon capture by a significant margin.  The membranes are based on single-layer graphene with a selective layer thinner than 20 nanometers – only about 40 atoms thick. The membranes are highly tunable in terms of chemistry, meaning that they can be designed to capture specific molecules.

The membranes are highly permeable – meaning that they don’t impede gas flow too much – but highly selective.  The CO2/N2 separation factor is 22.5, which means that 22.5 times more nitrogen can get through the membrane than carbon dioxide.

The work is just at the laboratory stage at this point, but it is a very promising step towards developing a practical scheme for keeping carbon dioxide from escaping from power-plant and factory smokestacks.

**********

Web Links

Next-gen membranes for carbon capture

Photo, posted December 28, 2010, courtesy of Emilian Robert Vicol via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Deepwater Impacts Lingering

By Leave a Comment

On April 20, 2010, an explosion on the BP-owned Deepwater Horizon drilling rig released an estimated 210 million of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.  Some of the oil was recovered, burned, or dispersed at sea, while some washed up onto coastal shorelines. 

Now, more than nine years later, a long-term study suggests the oil is still affecting the salt marshes of the Gulf Coast.  A multi-institutional research team began sampling in the region once the spill was contained and continue their work to this day.

The researchers found that heavily-oiled marsh areas remained less healthy than less polluted sites more than six years after the spill.  They fear that complete recovery of these oil-soaked regions will likely take more than a decade. 

But the researchers also discovered that salt marsh grasses play a key role in coastal wetland recovery.  Two plants dominate healthy salt marshes in the Gulf: smooth cordgrass and black needlerush.  Single-celled, plant-like organisms known as benthic microalgae also abound in healthy salt marshes, as do many small invertebrates. 

In heavily-oiled areas, the researchers found that nearly all the plants died, and benthic microalgae and small invertebrate populations declined significantly.  Importantly, however, they also found that it was only after smooth cordgrass started its comeback in these areas that invertebrate populations began to recover.  They noted that these salt marsh grasses provide habitat, bind soil, slow water, facilitate colonization, and fuel the food web. 

Plants are the foundation of and play a crucial role in salt marshes.  The researchers hope these findings will help shape the mitigation strategies of any future oil spills. 

**********

Web Links

Continuing impacts of Deepwater Horizon oil spill

Photo, posted April 21, 2010, courtesy of Deepwater Horizon Response via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Natural Climate Solutions Are Not Enough

By Leave a Comment

A new policy perspective published in Science by researchers at seven prestigious institutions looked at the role of natural science solutions in stabilizing the Earth’s climate for people and ecosystems.   While they asserted that it is imperative to ramp up natural climate solutions, they also concluded that natural solutions alone will not be sufficient.

Natural science solutions include such things as enhancing carbon sinks from forests, agriculture and other lands.  Doing these things are very beneficial in their own right as they lead to improved forests, croplands, grazing lands, and wetlands.

However, these things will not be enough to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and must be combined with rapid efforts to decrease emissions from the energy and industrial sectors.  Among their various findings, the researchers warn that a ten-year delay in emissions reductions from these sectors could completely negate any potential benefits of natural climate solutions.

As has become increasingly clear, there is not an either-or situation with regard to the actions that need to be taken with respect to climate change.

Maximizing natural climate solutions and reducing emissions from the energy and industrial sectors will provide broad benefits beyond climate change mitigation.  Doing these things will improve forests and habitats, reduce the risk of wildfires, and decrease air and water pollution thereby improving human health and well-being.

Of course, to reduce cumulative emissions and put a cap on the warming of the planet, there will need to be policy mechanisms and incentives in place that support both natural climate solutions and increasing mitigation efforts across the energy and industrial sectors.

**********

Web Links

Natural Climate Solutions Are Not Enough

Photo, posted February 11, 2012, courtesy of Joao Andre O. Dias via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Support For A Green New Deal

By Leave a Comment

Shortly after the November election, activists held a sit-in at Nancy Pelosi’s office calling for a Green New Deal – a plan to transform the U.S. energy economy in order to mitigate the effects of climate change as well as address various issues of economic justice.   While a number of Congress people have pledged to back the creation of a select committee to develop such a plan, it remains a political football and it remains to be seen whether anything will come of the idea.

There appears to be much less reticence on the part of voters, at least according to a survey conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication at the end of November.  The survey gave a brief explanation of the Green New Deal and asked respondents “How much do you support or oppose this idea?”

The result was that 81% of registered voters either “strongly” or “somewhat” supported it.  Support was stronger among Democrats at 92%, but a majority of Republicans were also in favor.  Some 57% of self-identified conservative Republicans even thought it was a good idea.

The Green New Deal would accelerate the transition from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy.  The goal would be to generate 100% of the nation’s electricity from renewable sources within the next 10 years; upgrade the nation’s energy grid, buildings, and transportation infrastructure; increase energy efficiency; invest in green technology research and development; and provide training for jobs in the new green economy.

Even though most Americans have strong support for the ideas of the Green New Deal, it is quite uncertain whether such an initiative could become a reality, given that very influential special interest groups – notably the fossil fuel industry – will be fighting it tooth and nail.

**********

Web Links

81% of Voters Support a Green New Deal, Survey Finds

Photo, posted March 19, 2012, courtesy of Kate Ausburn via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

WAMC Northeast Public Radio

WAMC/Northeast Public Radio is a regional public radio network serving parts of seven northeastern states (more...)