Skip to content
One Fish Foundation
  • Blog
    • Aquaculture
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Policy
    • Wild Harvest
    • Fish Tales
  • About
    • About One Fish
    • About Colles Stowell
  • Education
    • Elementary School
    • Middle School
    • High School
  • KNOW FISH Dinners®
  • Resources
    • One Fish Podcast
    • One Fish Foundation in the news
    • The 7 C’s of Sustainable Seafood
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Recipes
      • Skate with Capers and Butter — Chef Rizwan Ahmed
      • Grandma Davis’ Fish Chowder — Jane Almeida
      • Ginger Garlic Tamari Scallops — Colles Stowell
      • Fish Stock — Evan Mallett
      • Mussels San Remo — Chef Rob Martin
      • Salted Pollock Croquettes – Chef Mark Segal
  • Connect
    • Contact OneFish
    • Social
      • Instagram
      • Facebook
      • Twitter
All Blog Posts

“We’ll Always Have Paris”… or not

  • June 10, 2017October 20, 2021
  • by Colles Stowell
Share it!
Share

Some interesting questions on climate change arise as I’m preparing a discussion on seafood sustainability with college students next week. The administration’s withdrawal from the landmark Paris climate accord have brought these questions to the fore, even if the underlying causes have been brewing for some time.

  1. What message are we sending high school and college students if we as a country (the largest historical contributor to climate change) step away from a global agreement on the issue?
  2. How do we convince students who may be on the fence about pursuing marine or climate science careers that we need more research, funding and more young brilliant minds to help us try to keep up with climate change if our government shows little willingness to believe in the need for, much less fund further research?

Throwing down a challenge

This spring I developed new high school lesson plans for seniors that focused on climate change impacts on seafood in the Gulf of Maine. The narrative begins with a broad view of the domestic and global seafood dynamic, and then focuses on why consumers should care, highlighting everything from bycatch to environmental impact and social ramifications.

Then we discuss the rapid temperature increase in the Gulf of Maine (faster than 99% of the Earth’s oceans), recent research on changes to global ocean currents and salinity and increasing ocean acidification due to higher absorption of man-made CO2. We talk about how fishermen are on the front lines of recognizing climate change impacts, and how they are struggling to interpret what the long-term ramifications are on their livelihoods. We discuss how researchers continue to improve our visibility into near- and long-term impacts of warming water, OA, and current and salinity changes.

We also discuss how despite these advances, we’re still often two steps behind climate change because we have much more research to do to figure out how myriad factors work in concert to change marine ecosystems where fish and shellfish try to thrive. A lot of the complex geophysical interactions demand more research so that we can have a more precise view of how we must adapt to, not fix, climate change impacts.

Then I challenge them to help find a solution. I urge any of them remotely interested in marine or climate sciences to commit to help us better understand these issues. Doing so would not just help from an environmental perspective, but an economic and social one as well. If our oceans rise by nearly seven feet by the end of the century (as some scientists now predict), water temperatures increase by several degrees and the ocean’s acidity increases just a little bit, seafood markets could suffer tremendously.

Mixed messages

So when the 2nd largest polluter in the world (China is tops by far, but the US has generated more over time) pulls out of the most significant global agreement on climate change – one that it helped coordinate – what does that say to these students? At a time when we should be doing everything to encourage young people to pursue these careers, our administration is caving to an industry that is literally fueling the problem.

The irony is staggering.

I will continue proselytizing. This is not the time to let political isolationism derail global momentum toward some semblance of unified action on climate change. Stepping away now simply cedes the leadership role to other countries that may have more to gain.

Reneging on the deal may also create another hurdle to convincing students we need their help. Why would they want to spend the time and energy diving into the issues if there isn’t going to be any money to support their efforts?

Rallying cry

Conversely, the administration’s move may have some consequences advisers may not have fully predicted ahead of time. Climate change has again become a major topic of conversation here. Individual cities and states are talking about signing on independently. Perhaps the withdrawal will, like other recent administration edicts, become a galvanizing point.

I hope so. That would make these discussions more relevant, and perhaps, more effective. I’ll have a better perspective next week after I speak with the students participating in the Sustainable Marine Fisheries Course at the Shoals Marine Laboratory hosted by N.H. Sea Grant.

 

Additional reading:

Vox overview of the Paris Accord and climate change.

The Economist view of the impact of the US withdrawal.

New York Times analysis with compelling graphics on the implications of the withdrawal.

National Review blog showing conservative support for the administration’s decision.

Climate Nexus analysis disputing conservative claims in the president’s speech on the withdrawal.

 

Top photo credit: (NASA/NOAA/GSFC/Suomi NPP/VIIRS/Norman Kuring)

All Blog Posts

Arctic Climate Change Could Have Irreversible Global Impact

  • December 21, 2016October 20, 2021
  • by Colles Stowell
Share it!
Share

Every time I read a story with dire predictions about climate change impacts I imagine a gong the size of a barn door sending a warning echo off the mountains in the distance.

A team of scientists recently released a report stating that changes in the Arctic climate, everything from melting polar ice caps to warming waters and changing ocean salinity is happening faster than previously predicted. Currently, the atmospheric temperatures there are about 20 degrees Celsius warmer than normal and water temperatures are 4 degrees warmer than normal. The likelihood of no summer sea ice forming this century is very high.

Arctic tipping points

The Arctic Resilience Report states that all of this could push conditions in the Arctic toward 19 regime shifts or tipping points – climate situations that if reached, may prove to be irreversible. For example, the Greenland ice sheet is widely considered the Northern Hemisphere’s air conditioner. It is massive, nearly 1.1 million square miles, and it serves a critical role in keeping temperatures above the equator from getting too hot. This massive sheet of ice acts like a mirror, reflecting the sun’s powerful rays back into space and minimizing solar radiation warming.

The melting Greenland ice sheet. Photo by Marcus Carson

But as global temperatures have risen, the ice sheet has become thinner and smaller, and as waters around the sheet have become warmer, they have accelerated melting. This creates a cycle in which the sheet’s shrinking could accelerate localized climate change, which could further accelerate the ice sheet’s shrinking. If the ice sheet disappears (which could take centuries), scientists predict it could cause global sea levels to rise by more than 20 feet.

This is just one of the 19 tipping points. Others include: Arctic sea ice loss, which would have some of the same effects as the melting of the Greenland ice sheet; changes in ocean salinity and current, which could spread warmer water faster than normal, with global implications; changes in land-based ecosystems that could release more greenhouse gases and reduce ice/snow reflectivity; and changes in Arctic snow patterns, which could also increase global ocean temperatures that effect climate patterns such as the monsoon season in Asia.

Fisheries impact

And then there is the impact on fisheries. The report cites manmade climate change (greenhouse gases, warming oceans, pollution, etc.) as well as other external factors like fishing pressure, as drivers for what could result in fisheries collapses in the Arctic. This could play out in a couple of different ways. First, a combination of warming water, shifting current, salinity and acidification could alter the vital nutrient upwellings that produce the plankton forage fish feed on. If the forage fish don’t thrive, neither do commercially important species like salmon, cod, pollock and shrimp. Couple that with continued fishing pressure, and you’ve got a recipe for collapse.

Climate change could cause fisheries collapse in the Arctic and elsewhere. Photo by Marcus Carson

The question is, how could fisheries collapse in the Arctic affect fisheries elsewhere?

This is no small question.

Complex challenges

So I asked Marcus Carson, one of the lead authors of the 218-page report. He talked about what we know and don’t know about how rapidly things are changing. “Often, when we see these things, it’s really hard to set in motion the processes we need to take them back,” he said from his home in Sweden.

“The challenge is the relational understanding. We understand the silos [warming oceans, ice melt, carbon storage in peat bogs, etc.] pretty well. What we’re lacking is how these connections in these really complex systems really work.”

Marcus Carson. Photo by Mark Tozer

For example, he mentioned that ocean acidification, the process by which the overall acidity of the ocean increases due to increased environmental carbon release, was not included as one of the tipping points in the report because scientists couldn’t pinpoint how it will behave in concert with other factors like salinity, temperature, current, etc. What scientists do know is that the rate of acidification in the Arctic has increased twice as high as almost anywhere on earth, and that acidification is generally higher in colder water.

“What we don’t understand is the exact relation between climate change and ocean acidification where fisheries are involved,” he said. Many species follow temperature, which is the case with some species here in the Gulf of Maine. For example, as waters have warmed off Long Island Sound, lobsters have pushed north and east, and there is no sustainable lobster fishery there anymore.

We also know as we dump more carbon into the atmosphere and put more chemicals into our estuaries, the acidity goes up. But as Carson said, we don’t yet know how changes in acidification from these types of drivers will work in concert with temperature, salinity, current to affect marine food webs. Species that are more tolerant of some or all of these drivers will likely thrive more in a changing Arctic climate than others.

We need to better understand how all climate change factors could affect entire food webs. Photo by Mark Tozer

“There may be some biological variability that might get species competing with each other moving into the same space,” he said.

When it comes to impact on climate change in the Arctic affecting fisheries there and elsewhere, we still have to take a broad view. There will undoubtedly be an impact, especially when considering how currents will channel warmer, denser water globally.

A global climate

“There’s a saying around the working groups of the Arctic Council. ‘What happens in the Arctic doesn’t stay there.’ A lot of changes beyond seasonal fluctuations aren’t generated there. They start outside the Arctic, and get in there,” he said. And the changes in the Arctic may have global impacts.

“The implication with these 19 potential shifts … is that when these things start interacting with one another, the concern is that we could be setting forces in motion that are wildly out of our control,” he said.

The cycle continues. Melting ice sheet allows more solar rays to warm oceans and atmosphere, accelerating ice melt. Photo by Marcus Carson

Not surprisingly, almost every response option cited in the report for the 19 tipping points calls for some form of reducing global greenhouse gases and shifting toward renewable energy.

This is the same message a majority of scientists have been saying in ever growing numbers and volume. However, the incoming administration has virtually declared war on climate change science.

Asked about threats to defund NASA’s climate science regimen, Carson used the analogy of “tearing the instrument panel out of your plane while in flight. It’s like you want to poke our eyes out while we’re heading into these big changes.”

Indeed.

That gong is getting louder. Do you hear it?

 

All Blog Posts

Climate Change: Setting the Wrong Records

  • October 29, 2015October 20, 2021
  • by Colles Stowell
Share it!
Share

Not surprisingly, the latest global climate stats are discouraging. Last September was the warmest September of combined global land and ocean temperatures during the 136-years of recorded climate history. According to the report from the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, this is the fifth consecutive month of setting such an ignominious record.

Here are a couple of “high”lights:

  • 2015 was 1.62°F above the 20th century average of 59.0°F. The previous record was Sept. 2014.
  • 2015 was the highest departure from average for any month in 1,629 months since the record began in January 1880.
  • Global sea surface temperatures were 1.46°F above the 20th century average of 61.1°F, the highest departure for September on record. Scientists attribute this to powerful El Niño conditions.
  • The first nine months of 2015 comprised the warmest such period on record across the world’s land and ocean surfaces, at 1.53°F above the 20th century average, surpassing the previous records of 2010 and 2014 by 0.21°F.
  • Precipitation varied widely globally, with some places like Australia getting much less rain than normal, while some areas in Northwest Africa and Eastern Europe getting 200% of normal rainfall.

What does all of this mean? It means the climate is warming faster than we’ve anticipated in the past, particularly as the range of temperature increases above normal are getting higher. It means this global warming trend is going to continue unless we take some serious steps to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and other manmade climate change factors.

Warming oceans could change how, where and even if we find traditionally local seafood here in New England. The Gulf of Maine is warming faster than most ocean areas on the planet. This trend could force lobsters to move farther north and east to cooler waters, making it more expensive and time-consuming to fish them. Lobster fisheries could effectively shut down in some areas, as has been the case in Long Island sound and around Cape Cod.

I attended a workshop last year about how to better predict climate change impacts on fisheries. The upshot? We need to act now, and collaboratively among scientists, policy makers, fishermen and community activists to figure out a plan to adapt to climate change, and perhaps slow its progress.

Here are some additional resources about the trend:

NOAA Climate Science Strategy

Union of Concerned Scientists: Climate Hot Map

NOAA: What is El Niño?

Climate Nexus

 

Photo: Calving glaciers are telltales of global warming.

Credit: NOAA

Recent Posts

  • Hurricane Ida wreaks havoc on Louisiana’s seafood industry
  • EPA Should Use Clean Water Act To Kill Zombie Mine
  • Slow Fish 2021: Relationship Matters
  • Faith, Façades, and Futility
  • Pebble Permit Paused: Politics at Play

Archives

  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • April 2021
  • December 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • July 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
Theme by Colorlib Powered by WordPress