No good news on ocean acidification

An Antarctic marine biologist at the University of Alabama - Birmingham is talking up his research on how the increased levels of carbon dioxide that cause climate change are also bad for the oceans, specifically because of ocean acidification. One project showed that it took as little as five weeks in an acidified environment for the shells of some Antarctic invertebrates to start thinning out. Dr. McClintock warns that because the Southern Ocean is a large carbon dioxide sink, ocean acidification is a particularly serious problem for Antarctic organisms.

Below is a video about the research:

Oceans Reveal Further Impacts of Climate Change, Says UAB Expert from uabnews on Vimeo.

Antarctica - a year on ice

This video's been around a while, but it's worth watching. Through the magic of time lapse photography, you can get an idea of the changes Antarctica goes through over the course of a year.

Bluewashing and ecofraud

A blog post over at New Scientist last week highlighted the confusing, possibly inaccurate advice consumers are receiving on "sustainable" seafood, urging conscientous seafood buyers to beware of "bluewashing." Bluewashing is the equivalent of greenwashing, wherein companies or labelling programs aim to convince consumers that they are buying an environmentally friendly product, even when they're not. Say there's package of single-use cleaning cloths made with a small portion of recycled materials. Is that really environmentally friendly? Single-use items pretty much violate the whole spirit of sustainability. Remember, it's reuse, reduce, THEN recycle. But at the same time, it's unreasonable to expect consumers to be able to research on their own every facet of an item's manufacture. That's why labelling must be accurate and based on high standards.

Bluewashing similarly takes advantage of the complexity of fisheries science and management to confuse consumers - perhaps a fishing operator is abiding by quotas set by a governmental ministry, which has decreed those limits sustainable, but the stock has shrunk below levels predicted by models. Is that fishery really being sustainably managed? That's exactly what some conservationists are asking about the MSC certification of the British Columbia sockeye salmon fishery. The fishery had to be closed last year when only one million fish returned to the river instead of the expected 10 million. MSC counters that the closure of the fishery indicates that it is being appropriately managed, and that new information on the stock will be considered (MSC fisheries are periodically re-evaluated). Again, does that really represent adherence to the precautionary principle MSC professes to use? If not, MSC certification is then mostly helping certain portions of the fishing industry provide the appearance of good environmental stewardship and charge higher prices.

I find this attitude troubling. If the main goal is, as MSC says, "fish for today, fish for tomorrow," why does it seem that the process seems to be primarily concerned with making sure that fishing operators who can prove they're doing a few things right get to make more money? Consider the proposed certification of a portion of the krill fishery in the Southern Ocean. Most krill is not used for human consumption, but for feeding farmed fish or processing into nutritional supplements. Even if the harvesting of krill is sustainable (and that's highly debatable), these uses don't exactly conform with sustainability principles. Salmon aquaculture needs several pounds of feed to produce a single pound of salmon (which often retails for around $8 - $10 per pound), and produces pollution. Krill oil capsules may offer protection against heart disease. Antarctic krill capsules are $20 for 30 at one online retailer. So we're not feeding the poor here. MSC's standards should reflect a much broader view of sustainability than their current certifications suggest, both because it's the right thing to do for the world's fish stocks and because it's unfair to consumers who believe they are paying for adherence to strict sustainability standards.

Antarctica wind farm up and running

We mentioned before that a wind farm would soon be up and running in Antarctica - and now it is! You can check out some videos of the farm on our YouTube channel, provided courtesy of Cody Meyer, The Antarctic Cowboy. It's pretty nifty. Along with Belgium's zero-emissions research station, this is a great development for Antarctica, and a great example for the rest of us.

Unparalleled - it doesn't mean what you think it means

The growing tourist industry in the Antarctic has been cause for concern for ASOC for some time. As an environmental organization, we naturally focus on the environmental impacts of tourism, particularly those from ships. And as a result, we're aware of all the accidents that happen down there. So when one of our campaigners saw this article, he was quick to note that the ship mentioned, the Ocean Nova, has a little bit of a history to it. While the article notes cheerfully that "The vessel has navigated Antarctic waters with unparalleled success, including the challenging Weddell Sea," I'd have to quibble with their definition of "unparalleled." The Ocean Nova ran aground in Antarctica about a year ago. Pretty low bar for unparalleled, unless Quark Expeditions is referring to the fact that the Ocean Nova was the only ship to run aground in Antarctica in 2009. No injuries occurred, but the incident reminded us that longtime tour operators aren't immune from accidents.

Though the ship is built for the ice, unlike some of the larger cruise ships that have been heading to Antarctica in recent years, accidents do happen. Even the more experienced companies don't have a perfect track record. So when you see these nice little press release-type articles touting the wonders of the latest Antarctic tour package, remember that no matter how safe, Antarctic travel always comes with extra risk.

End of the Line

I've been reading The End of the Line by Charles Clover, about the problem of overfishing. It was made into a movie last year. It's nothing many of us who work on ocean issues don't know already; nevertheless, it provides some information I had never heard before (especially information about historical fish catches), and provides a useful overview of the state of the world's oceans and how they got that way. Highly recommended. There is a great collection of videos related to the movie up at Babelgum, like this one about MPAs. Since Netflix doesn't have the DVD of the documentary yet, you can check these out in the meantime!

Wear blue tomorrow!

If you live in the U.S., consider wearing something blue tomorrow to show your support for the National Ocean Policy the Obama Administration is developing. The policy has shown promise in that it adopts the principle of ecosystem-based management, although ASOC has found that the policy doesn't address how the administration will incorporate these national goals into its policies on Antarctica. Nevertheless, the broader goal of creating a unified policy for the ocean makes tremendous sense and is broadly supported by the ocean conservation community.