The Baltic Sea blooms with algae twice yearly, once in the spring and once in the late summer. This Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer image shows the deep green swirls of the summer bloom around the Swedish island of Gotland. The summer bloom is usually caused by toxic blue-green algae growing on the surface of the water. The spring bloom is made up of nontoxic, cold-loving plants called diatoms and dinoflagellates. Though these blooms occur naturally, agricultural and industrial runoff provides additional nutrients that lead to larger, denser blooms. (Courtesy of Jeff Schmaltz/MODIS Land Rapid Response Team/ GSFC/NASA)
Ocean ‘dead zones’ growing
By Eoin O'Carroll | 08.15.08
Dead zones – areas of oxygen-depleted bottom waters – are spreading at an alarming rate in coastal waters, killing off huge amounts of marine life, a new study has found.
In a paper published today in Science, Robert Diaz, a biological oceanographer at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, and Rutger Rosenberg, a marine ecologist at Sweden’s Göteborg University, identified more than 400 dead zones worldwide, affecting an area of more than 95,000 square miles, an area roughly the size of Oregon. The number and size of these dead zones are far greater than previously estimated.
While some dead zones occur naturally, many are caused or exacerbated by chemical fertilizer runoff, fossil fuels, and rain. The fertilizer, which is rich in nitrogen compounds, is washed away from farmlands into rivers and ends up in the ocean. Burning fossil fuels produces airborne nitrogen oxides, which the rain washes into the ocean.
The nitrogen compounds feed massive algae blooms. When the algae dies, it sinks to the ocean floor where it is consumed by microbes, which also consume oxygen in the process. As the oxygen is depleted, creating a condition called hypoxia, marine life that can flee does, and life that cannot – some fish but also clams, crustaceans, and other bottom dwellers – die of asphyxiation. At that point, microbes that live in oxygen-free environments begin to thrive and produce hydrogen sulfide, a poisonous gas. Most dead zones are seasonal, as the algae thrives in warm water.
According to the authors, the number of these dead zones has doubled every decade since the 1960s.
These findings are not just bad news for sea creatures, but for those whose livelihoods depend on them as well. Diaz told the New York Times that in the Chesapeake Bay, dead zones eliminate 75,000 metric tons of fish food, enough to feed half of the bay’s annual harvest of crabs for one year.
Dead zones can bounce back. Until the 1990s, the Black Sea was the site of a major hypoxic area, but a sharp reduction in the amount of fertilizer runoff following the collapse of the Soviet Union allowed marine life to rebound quickly.
This example offers some hope for other dead zones around the world. The San Francisco Chronicle quotes Jane Lubchenco, a leading marine biologist, who says that the problem, while serious, is solvable.
“The evidence suggests that if the spigot of nutrients can be turned off, coastal systems can recover,” she said. “Doing it can be accomplished by using fertilizers more efficiently, preventing human and animal sewage from entering rivers, and replanting vegetation [along riverbanks] to absorb excess nutrients.”
But Diaz cautions that turning off the spigot won’t be so easy. “Nitrogen is very slippery; it’s very difficult to keep it on land,” he told Scientific American. “We need to find a technology to keep nitrogen from leaving the soil.”
This 2007 graphic (via Newscom), shows some of the world’s largest dead zones:
<< Are they really going to gut the Endangered Species Act? | MainComments
5. Make My Day | 08.15.08
Scientology = Science fiction
*The founder of Scientology was a science fiction writer.*
8. Eoin | 08.15.08
Well this comment thread is off to a phenomenal start. #6 could you please lay off the name calling? And Make My Day, could you please take a moment to learn the difference between Christian Science and Scientology?
9. hoboclown | 08.15.08
Uranium is way too expensive and the waste is piling up. Geothermal, wind and solar are clean and naturally abundant (not to mention free) Superconductivity and fuel cell technology are on our “time horizon”. Nuclear was (maybe) a good idea in the 1950s but not now
10. Caleb Hartz | 08.15.08
The poor author who wrote this has to deal with this blogging fiasco. That cracks me up.
Notice the dead zones are around heavy shipping areas and off shore oil areas. These dead zones need to be brought back. Put some ecologists and EPAers on it. Good article.
11. Eoin | 08.15.08
Caleb, thanks for the sympathy, and for being the first one to actually say something about the topic of my post.
13. sloLes | 08.15.08
People have long been fascinated by how a super ocean liner like the Titanic, which can do thirty knots, could be hit by an iceberg, which moves at about two knots. Just look at most of these comments for the answer.
Most people don’t know or don’t care. At the rate that we are poisoning the planet, global warming may be one of our lesser problems. Of course, all these environmental problems are connected by the same attitudes that have put man in opposition to his surroundings. And we won’t really solve any of the major problems, until we change our attitudes and bring ourselves more into harmony with our planet.
Than you for an interesting article on a lesser known problem. These dead zones are just another warning of trouble ahead. QWill we act intelligently? Who can say? But judging from many of the comments, there’s little hope ahead.
14. Lee | 08.15.08
Great article. I didn’t know there was hope by reversal of runoff. That’s good to hear. Also heard of a seasonal dead zone off the Oregon coast. Northern, I believe.
What a telling photograph, as well.
I would think that dead zones are more of a threat to areas with coral reefs also, since aren’t most reefs near land.
Again, interesting article.
15. Eoin | 08.15.08
Seana, sloLes, I hear you. I’ve been blogging here for a few months now, and I’m still continually astonished at how dumb and abusive some of the comments to my posts are. But then again, I also get a lot of great feedback for some posts. On balance, I think it’s worth reading the comments section.
16. 3 foxcubs | 08.15.08
I notice that all the dead zones indicated on the map are in the so-called developed world. I find it very hard to believe that similar damage is not occurring, or in any case progressing at high speed, in places like Argentina, where vast areas of forest continue to be razed for transgenic soybean production, fertilized with industrial chemicals that run off into the Paraná and Uruguay rivers, thence to the River Plate and the Atlantic ocean. Flying over the Paraná river delta, the swirls and patterns of algae are quite as impressive as those in your photograph of the Baltic.
18. Duran Atkins | 08.15.08
I agree, those who don’t know the difference between the very reputable Christian Science Monitor (not at all about religion…rather a very unbiased newspaper) and Scientology, better educate themselves. Without education on topics such as these we are doomed.
19. Peter | 08.15.08
The ethanol policy that we are following in this country is aiding in overuse of fertilizers…corn uses allot of fertilizer. With the prices of commodities rising, more marginal land will be put into production requiring more fertilizer. Currently, US farmers are gaining a windfall with high commodity prices and generous farm subsidies. Why is the Clean Water Act not reducing the amount of runoff or is the Clean Water Act not being enforced? We cannot keep treating our ecosystem like a giant waste can and need to begin reverse engineering and starting at the end point…a clean environment and working backwards designing products and systems that provide for a healthy environment
20. Keith Terry | 08.15.08
We all know that the true power and energy is within th [Eoin’s Note: Yeah I’m going to go ahead and delete the rest of this one.]
21. Canuckistani | 08.15.08
Keith, why don’t you just get down to it then and stop blogging about it?
To Eoin, I thought this was an excellent piece. Writing about environmental issues in a straightforward manner while retaining the complexity that goes with these problems is tough.
22. jon | 08.15.08
What I’d like to see, are more Evangelicals getting involved with Environmental concerns. Of course, that would probably mean voting for Democrats. The thing is, there are Conservative Dems, too. And while many Dems may be Pro-Choice, there are still a lot of Anti-Choice Dems. (I say Anti-Choice, because I’ve never met a Pro-Choice person, that wasn’t Pro-Life, nor anyone that is Pro-Abortion).
I think the GOP uses Evangelicals, then once elected, they never pay them any mind.
For anything to get done environmentally, it aint going to happen, as long as so many good-hearted people, continue to vote against their own best interests, just because of a couple of moral/religious issues. The important thing to remember, is that as more conservative Dems get elected, their will be compromises within the Party. Whereas, the likelihood of compromise between the two Parties, in the current highly-partisan atmosphere, is impossible.
In other words… open your minds, People. Listen to the policy platforms of all candidates, then make an informed decision. Our Country & the Planet is pretty messed up now… we can’t afford to continue the path we’re on.
23. Steve | 08.16.08
San Antonio has a reasonable solution. It has a mix of nuclear, coal, natural gas, wind, and currently adding solar. The nuclear component has provided cheaper and reliable energy.
24. Richard Harris | 08.16.08
For many decades us humans have been dumping deadly toxic waste into the oceans with not a thought as to what that means. We are killing the planet and within around 400 years human race will be sterile thru chemical polluted
waste which has entered the food chain causeing lower fertility/sperm counts and also DNA damage. Don’t be suckered by the chemical industry and the bought FDA who say “don’t worry”. You can read the eviidence for yourself by reading the book Our Stolen Future: Are We Threatening Our Fertility, Intelligence, and Survival?–A Scientific Detective Story (Paperback)
by Theo Colborn (Author), Dianne Dumanoski (Author), John Peter Meyers (Author)
avisalable from; http://www.amazon.com/Our-Stolen-Future-Threatening-Intelligence/dp/0452274141/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218905128&sr=1-1
25. Erik | 08.16.08
Never read blogs in response to an article before. Interesting. Never posted my own response before. There is quite a mix. I agree with the choir of “green-minded” voices. I also believe we need a substantial third political party. Not a “spoiler” party. Maybe even a fourth party. The Canadians, Europeans, Japanese and English seem to govern well enough with more than two parties to choose from. Without term limitations or greater restrictions on lobbying, very few things will change. Money will continue to buy campaigns and profit will influence everything. Corporations run this country. Let me cut this short. I recommend a book titled ARE WE ROME? The answer is, we better start brushing up on our Chinese. And for all the advocates of nuclear power, I want to remind them that the poisonous radioactive afterlife of nuclear waste (rods, water, fuel, ect.) is 25,000 years. That is twice the length of time “man has been out of the cave.” I suggest that people who are interested in nuclear power review the case of three-mile island (here in the USA), and the mutations that can be found in Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl in the Ukraine. All sites of radiation leaks or poisoning. Read the book Hiroshima. Then remember it was merely an atomic bomb. We have dozens of nuclear bombs hundreds of times more destructive than the atomic Hiroshima bomb. That person who claimed to not have to worry because he or she wasn’t a fish has plenty to worry about. Loose nukes. Meltdowns. We need to stay away from splitting the atom. We overstepped. We can’t yet neutralize the highly dangerous, potent, poisonous by-product.
26. MC | 08.16.08
To those dissatisfied with the comments here - just remember most people writing these comments cannot/do not understand basic science; history; economics; & etc. and get most of their information about the world from TV snippets (and not documentaries or intelligent commentary), commercials, and etc. They do not understand the world based on logic & evidence (reality). Unfortunately, they choose to voice their opinion rather than educating themselves.
As Mark Twain said, “You’re entitiled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.” As the article shows, dead zones are a phenomenon whose sicentific causes are fairly well known, including runoff of nutrients from fertilizers, whose basic chemistry has been well known for over 100 years.
I advise these people - put down your remote control, turn off your right-wing/left-wing/religious fanatic/etc. media, and educate yourself, or at least do something more worhtwhile that spouting on these types of websites.
27. Rosemarie Cardoso | 08.17.08
Hi Eoin!
I would like to thank you for the scary news; things are most serious than our “advanced ” society/life make us believe…I think that people who don’t care for those issues of damaging the environment is because they didn’t learn enough about it….
I would like to share this with YUNITI.com , but din’t find it on the “Share this” list.How could I add it to YUNITI.com?
28. Doug in Denver | 08.17.08
Excellent article Eoin.
I always enjoy reading the quality journalism of the Monitor.
Reflecting on our options in cleaning up the mess, the frightening implication is that economic collapse may be the most direct answer to the pollution problem.
I’m not suggesting this, but it seems foolhardy to expect industry or individuals to spontaneously regulate themselves, (Like having the tobacco industry regulate itself, or the Television networks). Governments generally get a solid ‘C’ in dealing with such problems, at a time when we need an ‘A’ solution to the problem.
Until there’s a crisis big enough to cause us to realize that we are all in this together,(again, not a suggestion, just an observation), I remain pessimistic. I will, however keep riding my bike or working from home, picking up litter, planting trees, saving water, and omst of all telling my 2 children what a miracle life on this planet truly is. Appreciate all of it, rain or shine.
29. Olivia | 08.17.08
Eoin, I love that you are truly committed to educating yourself with facts and to sharing what you’re learning with your readers. Perhaps without your passion for the planet — and your laconic humor — you’d be committed to something else, like an insane asylum, after having to put up with some of these nut cases. At least the sane, logical, caring ones among us give you hope, huh?
What I’d ask of one post-er I admire — diligent Doug in Denver — is: Are you also aware of how each consumer’s purchase of animal products supports an industry that causes massive environmental destruction, on land, in the air and in the ocean? Translated: You aren’t still eating flesh, eggs and dairy products, are you? If so, quitting that conditioned habit is another painless way (like litter-pickup, bike-riding to work, water conservation) that you and your family can control your impact on the earth. In fact, you and your kids might enjoy reading a new book that explains the interconnectedness of our land-flesh and sea-flesh eating habits: Karen Dawn’s “Thanking the Monkey.” Chapter Five, “Deconstructing Dinner,” has a section on “Eating Nemo — Fish” and Chapter Seven is devoted to “The Greenies.” As you can see by those titles, the author employs wit to get across her serious message. (Of course, there are many other books and websites that show how human hearts deadened to caring about the lives of all living beings bring about the very dead zones this piece describes.)
30. Ptrick | 08.18.08
Actually this is great news…
http://earth2tech.com/2008/03/27/15-algae-startups-bringing-pond-scum-to-fuel-tanks/
31. Patrick | 08.18.08
Great news…
http://earth2tech.com/2008/03/27/15-algae-startups-bringing-pond-scum-to-fuel-tanks/
32. crisha | 09.01.08
hey guys! i have a project to do.. and i was wondering if u could help me with this question.. what are the possible solutions for the ocean dead zones? thanks!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Environmental News - August 16, 2008 « Clearviews - A fresh look at what really matters in the news | 08.16.08
2. Business,Uncategorized,science | Texas to review arson case that ended in execution — Recycle Email | 08.16.08
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Daniel | 08.15.08
I think we should get off of coal and shale… LETS GO NUCLEAR!!!! Way cleaner… And Far cheaper…. Uses the least amount of space to. NUCLEAR! NUCLEAR! NUCLEAR!!! Yeah!