Is global warming causing dead zones in the water off Washington and Oregon?

Question

"Peering into the murky depths, Jane Lubchenco searched for sea life, but all she saw were signs of death.

Video images scanned from the seafloor revealed a boneyard of crab skeletons, dead fish and other marine life smothered under a white mat of bacteria. At times, the camera's unblinking eye revealed nothing at all -- a barren undersea desert in waters renowned for their bounty of Dungeness crabs and fat rockfish."

"What's happening off Oregon, scientists believe, is that as land heats up, winds grow stronger and more persistent. Because the winds don't go slack as they used to do, the upwelling is prolonged, producing a surplus of phytoplankton that isn't consumed and ultimately dies, drifts down to the seafloor and rots."

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-deadzone15feb15,0,5185748.story

What do you think - valid scientific conclusion, or are those d**n scientists just trying to blame everything on global warming?

Answer 1

What volcanoes are in the area of Oregon and Washington?

Now, the dead zones may be the rising of the magma in the earth.  The ocean is big place!  With many things swimming all in there going from place to place, the penguins, the porposes, the whales. . .  If there's a dead zone, they go in but don't come out.  

Well, maybe it's not cold enough for penguins and not deep enough for the whales, but porposes are affected by sonar and there have been reports of beached porposes along the coast of these two states, haven' there?  If not there then elsewhere.  I know there has been reports of flocks of birds laying around and that is unusual.  

Could that have something to do with the shifting poles?

Answer 2

It depends on whether they have explored all other possibilities for why the dead zones are forming now and ruled them out.  Chan did some very nice work to show they are a new phenomenon not observed before, so what ever is happening is unique to recent conditions (i.e., what is happening is not some manifestation of the PDO or ENSO since there have been many cycles of each before this started happening).  Brancato's statement in the Seattle PI article concluding climate change is responsible should be taken with a grain of salt since she is a biologist without any significant training in atmosphere-ocean dynamics and probably hasn't explored any other possibilities.  

I think Ken nailed it, concluding anything about causal mechanisms at this point is going out on a limb.  But then since I am sort of like a chesire cat with a massive ego and very few friends, I'll go out on the same limb as Brancato and state h**l yeah this is probably due to climate change.

Answer 3

Don't you hate it when reality messes with your ability to remain in denial?

I've done a number of sailboat races off the shores of both states and the coastal communities have been pointing to this growing problem for years.

As several recently released reports have pointed out (see links below) we've managed to cause significant damage to every body of water on the planet to varying degrees (pardon the pun).  The bulk of that emerging from Climate Change.  Some numbers -- mostly for the oceans of the world -- indicate we've moved past the 50% mark in overall accumulated harm we've caused these ecosystems.

As bad as the situation off Washington and Oregon is, they may just be the bellweather for what is coming.

Answer 4

It strikes me as an slightly simplistic assumption.  The normal food chain would have to be considered.  Normally an ecosystem finds ways to make use of availble nutrients, so how exactly does the excess phytoplankton come to be unconsumed?  Surely there is a missing predator such as anchovies that should be there to take up the excess.  As the article notes:

"The phenomenon, he said, is complicated by decades of heavy fishing that has reduced schools of sardines to a tiny fraction of their former abundance."

Warmer waters could also have moved a missing niche species northward.

Another possibility that I'd be curious to understand why they ruled out is that a high levels of runoff washes both urban and agricultural fertilizers out to sea in high doses, often causing dead zones of decay (as cited in the article).  In high rain years the periodic overflow of municipal sewage treatment plants can contribute to the problem.  I assume that there are some fairly easy tests to determine what the water chemistry is and where the excess nutrients are coming from, but I'd like to see those common issues eliminated before assuming that it's something new or more unique.

Edit -

"To make sure the phenomenon was actually new, Oregon State marine ecologist Francis Chan reconstructed data from water sampling at 3,100 stations dating to 1950.

He found that low-oxygen areas have long existed in deeper waters, but there was virtually no evidence until recently of hypoxic waters in prime fishing waters, which extend down to 165 feet."

OK, it's new, and the article notes that it's getting worse.  That's very creepy.  What happened to global warming being bad closer to 2100, or possibly being beneficial?

Answer 5

I do not know about Oregon or Washington but the huge dead zone in the gulf of Mexico is due to fresh water being dumped in by the Mississippi.  It is man made.  To much water is flowing down the river do to heavy rains.   This water would normally flood out through the flood plain.  However do to the levy system it had nowhere to go

Fresh water is lighter than salt so it flows over the salt water this creates a barrier that makes it difficult for oxygen to diffuse in the salt water.  

It is becoming a yearly event affecting the fishing industry.

This is just another cause for  a simulator event.  As to the cause who knows but low oxygen caused by bacteria and algae booms is well documented.

Answer 6

oh my god,  yet another natural random, anecdotal event for them to throw global warming at...

Soon, all of the university shootings will have a link to global warming.

Are you serious, global warming is causing strong winds that somehow kill the fish,  shut the **** up.

Answer 7

Yes, this sounds very viable.  It's akin to the same thing that happens off of the coasts of both Northern California and Ecuador/Peru regions with coastal winds that generate ocean current circulation and upwelling near the shores.  This creates a very rich, nutrient dense base for fish and other marine life.  However, when the El Nino, La Nina phenonmena occur (at a much more frequent rate as a result of global warming) the wind currents change and the upwelling can cease.  This can lead to large die-offs of marine creatures who are not large enough to escape to a different ecosystem where there is food.  Therefore, it isn't a long stretch at all to assume that the reverse effects of overabundant phytoplankton can also occur, and yes, if not consumed, rot on the sea floor and cause hypoxia resulting in a dead zone.

Answer 8

When I read that story, it seemed to me that the scientists were trying NOT to attribute this to anything other than "Extraordinarily low oxygen levels were to blame -- swept up from the deep ocean into normally productive waters just off the Pacific Northwest coast by uncharacteristically strong winds."  It is the writers that seem to be pulling the GW cards. The scientists are doing what scientists do: record facts and analyze data, it is the media that usually interprets the information.

Answer 9

Personally i believe the answer is yes, at least in part. Yet other man made (i.e. over fishing and the dumping of pollutants) & possibly natural causes may be at work in conjunction with the effects of global warming.

Again, personally I believe man to be an incredibly destructive creature, especially when coupled with dangerous technologies. Basically we have the cunning to develop such tools which can also be used for a greater good.

But the real question is do we have the wisdom & moral fortitude to use them for the greater good, or will mankind continue to not be as mindful as we should for shall we say lazy, egoist (selfish), and or just plain old ignorant reasons? This truly is the choice we are facing in essence?

I do recognize there are many people out there who want to do good works. And yet the question here is, can we reach the critical mass of individuals working together needed to turn the daunting tidal wave of environmental catastrophe that is slowly building?

God will help us all if we will only do our the part which is solely our own to do.

Answer 10

The latter.

Answer 11

The surplus of phytoplankton is not caused by global warming.

It is caused by the large Japanese Taiwanese and Korean fishing fleets that operates about 200 to 600 miles off of the coast of Oregon and Washington.

This has long been known by the US fisherman that were put out of business

http://www.american.edu/TED/driftjap.htm

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13...

The large amount of overfishing off Oregon and washington by the fishing fleets of Japan Korea and Taiwan

has greatly reduced the fish that feed off the phytoplankton

this lead to the surplus and die-off.

Just another card carrying environmentalist TREE HUGGER scientist try to blame global warming.

http://www.motherjones.com/radio/2006/08...

http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work.aspx?c...

She is another of the payed by the pro global warming environmental movement scientists

http://www.coloradocollege.edu/Publicati...

You will note she was payed just like NASA's James Hansen

$250,000 Heinz award.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hanse...

The environmental movement pays there scientist under the table.

And at the same time claims the oil companies are paying the anti global warming people.

WHO SAYS THAT YOU CAN NOT ANY BUY RESEARCH VIEW YOU WANT.

Answer 12

Actually Kim Z is surprisingly close to correct.  The only four things locked up solid about global warming are:

it's real, mostly caused by us, a serious problem, and capable of being fixed by us.

Things like global warming's effects on hurricanes are far less clear.  The ice cap melting is pretty surely global warming, and many species declines have been fairly strongly linked.

But yes, lots of details need to be settled.  Because the data is nowhere near as strong as it is for the Big Four.

Answer 13

It is pretty easy to debunk IMO.  They claim the winds don't go slack as the used to which is obvous nonsense.  This is obviously a case where some scientists are trolling for funding and is typical of nonsensical claims from "left" field.

Answer 14

It may be right or may be wrong. I have usually heard scientists claim that dead zones were caused by pollution like sewage or toxic chemicals from coastal cities draining into the ocean. The idea that it is upwelling caused by wind caused by land heating caused by global warming seems like a stretch to me. The article does not say they had weather records showing more wind really existed and did not say they had tested for toxins and failed to find any. So it seems as if they just picked global warming for lack of knowing the real reason. Kind of like how us computer guys always say it is a network problem if we can't find the cause of the trouble. Well, it COULD be the network. It often IS the network. But not always.

And this is not a scientific paper. The problem with news paper articles is they never give enough information to make a judgment as to the correctness of the story. They just make their own judgment and print that.

Answer 15

My layman's thoughts are that when too much ice is gone ,this will affect  the cold currents as a whole ,probably lessen them.

Because most currents are single bodies that are connected in series the warm currents will also have changes with movements and stagnant situations can result ,

because Cold water sinks until it hits 4 Degrees centigrade and warm water rises ,

Add this to warmer shore lines and Overall water temperatures will rise ,killing micro organisms and making others invasive.

Big changes are inevitable

Maybe Washington and Oregon are part of this ,could it also be pollution maybe .either foreign such as chemicals coming from humanity

or organic that has developed because of the changes such as the red tide

Oops part of that blames Global Warming and aren't you one of these d**n scientists ?

Answer 16

Not really, or yes. The dead zone could have come into existence without global warming. The circumstances that cause global warming are circumstances that will produce dead zones.

That is, carbon dioxide has to be readily available in the rest of the ocean in order for dead zones to have any significance in a tidal zone. When surrounding water content of CO2 is high, then having a local area that has large volumes of plant matter settling into the ocean and decomposing will produce a dead zone.

Increasing CO2 levels tend to reduce calcium content in ocean water, and with declining calcium content we see rising phosphate levels.

Phosphate is normally precipitated as calcium phosphate in the oceans as long as the calcium level is normal. Increasing CO2 (ion) implies rather than suggests that the phosphate level will rise.

Phosphate can be a growth limiting plant nutrient. When we have elevated phosphate we first see increased plant growth, then plant growth appears to go ballistic. As plant matter decomposes all the nutrients it needed to grow are released for further plant growth.

But also as the plants decompose the free oxygen in the water is all used up... hence the dead zone.

This eutrophication  had been studied in inland waters, and good conclusions pointed to phosphates from washing compounds and fertilizer. In inland waters when we stop supplying excess phosphate, the phosphate level in the water declines fairly rapidly, because new water if diluting it all the time.

Out in the ocean there is new water coming in, but it does not remove phosphate. It evaporates leaving the  incoming phosphate in solution until it is precipitated by calcium (or magnesium).

So the critical factor in the ocean is that the calcium and magnesium content must be high enough to cause precipitation.

Nitrate, another major plant nutrient, likewise does not flush out.. no outflow from the oceans, but it never precipitates except as sodium nitrate and potassium nitrate. There is almost always enough nitrate to promote rapid plant growth, but just to seal the deal, several plants capture nitrogen from the air for their own and other plants' use.

Potassium is never a growth limiter in the ocean.

Iron appears to be a limiter to growth, so that where sands from the Sahara seed the oceans with Iron we get increased plant growth, increased risk of dead zones.

Now nothing in this is directly linked to global warming except for the fact that both global warming and dead zones are aided by CO2.

Answer 17

These marine dead zones are happening in my area and they've been an increasingly huge concern over the past few years as they continue to grow.  Changes in ocean circulation patterns certainly seems like a feasible explanation.  But before attributing it to the global warming or other atmospheric changes attributed to human activity, I'd want to see more independent research published in the journals.

Answer 18

Global warming is a myth.

Most of the planet is getting colder.

Climate Change is a better term.

And, no, it's not causing dead zones.