Mississippi runoff expands Gulf 'dead zone'

[swag]

Source: TG Daily

The so-called Gulf Dead Zone is looking set to be the biggest ever this year.

It's currently about 3,300 square miles, or roughly the size of Delaware and Rhode Island combined, but researchers at Texas A & M University say it's likely to become much larger.

The dead zone is caused by hypoxia, whereby oxygen levels in seawater drop to dangerously low levels. Severe hypoxia can potentially result in widespread fish kills.

During the past five years, the Gulf dead zone has averaged about 5,800 square miles and has been predicted to exceed 9,400 square miles this year.



Read more: http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainability-features/57323-mississippi-runoff-expands-gulf-dead-zone

[Devil_Fish]

1. A cancer on this planet. NT

[defendandprotect]

2. Could this much destruction be accidental? Capitalism is suicidal -- !!

[awoke_in_2003]

3. A lot caused by BP...

but how much of this is due to nitrogen runoff (fertilizer)

[Viva_La_Revolution]

4. kick and rec

:hi:

:hug:

[izquierdista]

5. What's the fix for this?

Oxygenate the water. If every oil rig out in the Gulf was required to have regenerative blowers pumping thousands of cubic feet of air into the water column beneath it, it would have an impact. Those companies that feel it too burdensome a requirement to get a permit, well, maybe they can find some less strenuous line of business.

[kentauros]

8. The real fix is to let the hurricanes do it.

They churn up plenty in the water (it's not just the surface that gets beaten up by the winds and low-pressure zone.) Even if all of the rigs did the fix you suggest, it would never compare to one CAT-3 storm roaring through.

The other problem is where those rigs are located. I seriously doubt enough of them are in the dead zone or "up-current" from it to help.

[izquierdista]

9. You never know til you try.

Environmental remediation technologies are so far behind. They need to be mandated to go along with extraction of environmental resources just to have a chance of mitigating human caused environmental degradation.

[kentauros]

11. It's a matter of scale in this case.

There just aren't enough offshore platforms to have the kind of effect you're suggesting when a hurricane can do it far more efficiently and cover a larger area. Sure, you can add certain kinds of naturally-occurring bacteria to that remediation, but it's still going to take more time than just one medium-force hurricane. Nature will balance things out. We may get pounded physically by it, but it will do a better job of this kind of remediation.

At the same time, Nature is the cause of the dead zone (too much flood-water that hasn't gone through enough turbulence and sufficient oxygenation.) While global climate change is what we caused, what Nature does to counter it will at times be what we're seeing here. And on a scale with which we simply cannot compete nor compare.

[izquierdista]

12. It's a matter of doing nothing vs. doing something

Until you can manufacture a CAT-3 hurricane and direct it (I don't think even Kirk and Spock can do that), you have to settle for actions that don't cover a large area. Take a look at this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P1rPnVUME4 and you will see how individual small actions and projects can take a dead zone and bring it back to life. If you need another example, here's another video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9dhtu15DXY&feature=related

The problem of global warming is due to millions and millions of cars belching out excess CO2 into the atmosphere. The problem of fertilizer runoff in the Mississippi is due to millions and millions of acres of fertilized crops. The only way to counteract these environmental imbalances is to find a way to make millions and millions of small, environmentally beneficial actions.

[kentauros]

13. Look at it this way:

What you're proposing would have to be implemented right now to have any measurable effect on it as it grows. At the same time, we are just beginning this year's hurricane season (a month and a half into it and we've already had two named storms in the Atlantic and four named in the eastern Pacific.) We're slated to get quite a few more before the season ends October 31st.

Although it might seem this way to you, I am not against remediation. I just don't see your proposal to use offshore platforms even getting off the ground without legislation dictating that the oil companies do something that way (because they won't on their own.) And that could take years to implement. In the meantime, how many tropical depressions, tropical storms and hurricanes will the same area receive?

As I understand the article, too, there hasn't been an increase in the amount of fertilizers, pesticides and so forth. It's still the same amount as any other time. What is the problem this time around is that the flood waters aren't oxygenated. A normal river gets plenty of that through the simple action of rapids and turbulence through shallower waters. Flood-stage is too high for that kind of action, even though the waters are turbulent. They just aren't pulling in the atmosphere like when they are shallow. So, the flood-water coming out of the rivers is pretty much "dead". Even if all of our agriculture was organic, that water will still be oxygen-poor.

Here, quoted from the article. Bolding is mine:

The largest areas of hypoxia are still around the Louisiana coast, he says, thanks to the huge amounts of fresh water still coming down from the Mississippi River. The hypoxic area extends about 50 miles off the coast.

The Mississippi is the US' largest river, draining 40 percent of the land area of the country. It also accounts for almost 90 percent of the freshwater runoff into the Gulf of Mexico.

[izquierdista]

14. No time like the present

This should have been done 40 or 50 years ago, when it was first realized that there were hypoxic areas that could benefit from it. You are right that trying to do it now is neigh impossible, given the state of Congress. But I do remember a time, when I was a teenager, that there was support in Congress for environmental legislation.

There are also things that can be done to counteract global warming, reduce dependence on nuclear power, and develop renewable power. Unfortunately, they are not going anywhere either.

[kentauros]

15. I agree with you on all of those points.

I try to buy organic produce when I can, not because of the immediate benefits like better taste and such, but because I know that kind of farming improves soil health. That improves many things, including the prevention of desertification. But most people don't think of it that far when they're buying some organic celery. Yet they are helping without knowing it. Maybe that's the kind of tactic we need to develop in implementing this stuff :)

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, swag.

7. Our gulf is FUCKED.

It's sustained more man-made abuse than it will ever be able to recover from.

I won't touch seafood from the gulf, unless it's Texas seafood... this since the BP rig explosion and oil leak. Texas may have toxic stuff in their portion of the gulf, but there's no way I'll eat seafood that was fished from the Northeastern Gulf.

[lonestarnot]

10. smell that smell.

[killbotfactory]

16. Send the bill to the parties responsible

Oh, it's priceless? Nevermind then, let's just eat the cost and continue on business as usual. It's the free-market way.