Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Great Tohoku Earthquake - Tsunami Debris


I read this interesting short piece from AccuWeather.com just a few minutes ago.  We discussed earthquakes and tsunamis earlier this this year.  Well, one aspect of that terrible event in Japan is the millions of tons of debris pulled out into the Pacific Ocean.  In fact we highlighted this facet of tsunamis when we learned about ocean circulation.  Remember the image below? This is NOAA's prediction model of the debris' travels.



This issue of tsunami debris affects not only coastal communities, but also shoreline biota - flora and fauna. 


Tsunami Debris Litters Alaska Coast; Clean Up Funds Insufficient

By Jillian Macmath, AccuWeather.com Staff Writer
February 19, 2013; 7:15 AM
Photos courtesy of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
The beaches of Alaska are piled with debris from the tsunami that struck Japan on March 11, 2011, but restoration to their once pristine condition has slowed, as funding remains scarce.
"The amount of debris washing ashore has vastly exceeded most people's expectation...," said Chris Pallister, Vice President of the Gulf of Alaska Keeper, a non-profit organization dedicated to cleaning marine debris from the coastline of Alaska.
"As soon as the tsunami hit and we saw the videos, we knew the northern Gulf of Alaska shoreline was going to get inundated with tsunami debris," he said. "We said so at an international marine debris conference in March 2011. Our assertion was largely dismissed."
But Pallister's assertion has proved accurate as debris continues to wash ashore in massive quantities.
The debris is no longer only lightweight items such as water bottles and styrofoam. Beaches are now also littered with refrigerators, fuel tanks and other large objects.
Local landfills are struggling to find space for such a large volume of debris.
"We are all scrambling to come up with a solution for this," he said.
Additionally, most of the sites in need of clean up are remote and therefore more difficult and costly to tend to.
According to the Alaska Marine Stewardship Foundation, each of the five Pacific Coast states received $50,000 from the federal government for tsunami debris clean up. Additionally, the Japanese government has gifted the United States $5 million which is being administered by NOAA to individual states.
The Gulf of Alaska Keeper received $49 thousand last September from NOAA and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to remove the debris in the Prince William Sound (PWS).
The Sound clean up demonstrated how bad the situation truly is, Pallister said.
Pallister cites the arrival of tsunami debris as the third major environmental catastrophe the PWS has suffered in the past 50 years.
In 1964, an earthquake devastated PWS communities and natural habitats. The quake generated a tsunami that leveled communities and spread oil, fuel and debris throughout the sound from community crushed fuel depots and structures.
Then, in 1989, an oil spill occurred. "PWS has taken a beating to say the least," Pallister said.
NOAA has received approximately 1,519 official debris reports from across the country as of February 7, according to Keeley Belva, Public Affairs Officer at NOAA.
Only 21 of those items have been confirmed to be tsunami debris. NOAA relies on specific markings, such as japanese text, in order to identify debris. Items without such indications are not classified.
Though the amount of confirmed debris remains low, the Gulf of Alaska Keeper maintains that roughly 75 percent of the shoreline in Alaska has been impacted by tsunami debris.

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Happy Darwin Day


An excellent post from ScientificAmerican.com.



Adventures in the good science of rock-breaking.
Rosetta Stones HomeAboutContact

Darwin: Geologist First and Last



(Happy Darwin Day! I figured today of all days would be a good one for reposting this from ETEV. It’s been slightly updated and modified from the original, in case you already knew Charles Darwin was a geologist (because you’ve read David Bressan’s post, right? Right??) and wish to spend your time playing spot-the-differences. Isn’t it nice to know the biologists don’t have dibs on one of the most famous scientists in history? Read up a bit, and then go have fun telling people at Darwin Day events that they really should’ve had a rock hammer on the celebratory cake as well.)

Shall we play a word-association game? I’ll say “Darwin.” And chances are, you’ll say “Origin of Species,” or “Evolution,” or “Biology.” Charles Darwin laid the foundation for modern biology. He changed our whole conception of how species come to be, why a single simple organism could be the root of a riotously-branching tree, how “from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.” Of course we associate him with biology. Rightly so.
But I have got a different word associated with him now: “Geology.”
Darwin was one hell of a biologist. But he began and finished with geology, and geology is at the heart of The Origin.

Darwin's "Tree of Life" Sketch. Image courtesy Wikimedia Commons.
Darwin's "Tree of Life" Sketch. Image courtesy Wikimedia Commons.
“It is not too much to say that,” Cambridge geology professor John W. Judd said in his introduction to Darwin’s Geological Observations on South America, “had Darwin not been a geologist, the Origin of Species could never have been written by him.” Strong words, you say. Of course a geologist would be partial, but perhaps he overstates the case. Except. Except. Some of the most powerful arguments in The Origin are centered in geology. He understood the geologic record, and what that meant for the fossil record. He understood how geology impacted species. There, in chapters IX and X, taking center stage, is geology. No geology, no Origin – not as we know it.
Or perhaps I should say, no Lyell, no Origin. Because it was Charles Lyell and hisPrinciples of Geology that had the greatest influence on Darwin’s scientific thought. Darwin’s writings are liberally salted with paens to Lyell. In his Autobiography, he shows just how much influence Lyell had on his thinking, influence that led directly to the powerfully-organized arguments of The Origin: “After my return to England it appeared to me that by following the example of Lyell in Geology, and by collecting all facts which bore in any way on the variation of animals and plants under domestication and nature, some light might perhaps be thrown on the whole subject.”
Anyone who has read The Origin understands just how thorough Darwin was in collecting and marshaling his facts. One of the most critical facts was the immensity of the timescales involved. In Chapter IX, it becomes exquisitely clear that geology prepared Darwin’s mind for seeing those years in their uncountable millions. “It is hardly possible for me even to recall to the reader, who may not be a practical geologist, the facts leading the mind feebly to comprehend the lapse of time,” he wrote. “He who can read Sir Charles Lyell’s grand work on the Principles of Geology, which the future historian will recognise as having produced a revolution in natural science, yet does not admit how incomprehensibly vast have been the past periods of time, may at once close this volume.” Without an understanding of the age of the Earth, an understanding of evolution is impossible. We take it for granted now. Then, it was still a new idea, and without it, Darwin may have never been able to conceive of evolution as the engine of all the diversity of life.
Geology is intimately related to evolution. That is a fact that gets obscured; you don’t hear of Darwin as geologist in biology classes. He never got so much as a mention in my geology class; when I come across him in books on geology, it’s usually in reference to his work on evolution by way of explaining how fossils can be used for dating rocks. A person could be forgiven for thinking he was a biologist first and last. But his first passion was geology. Field observations on the geology he saw while sailing with theBeagle filled half his manuscript pages. Geology formed the subject for some of his first books: it comprises major portions of his Voyage of the Beagle; it helped build the foundation for The Origin; and in 1881, he returned to geology one again with his “The Formation of Vegetable Mould, through the Action of Worms” – a treatise on soils. He was a Fellow of the Geological Society of London. Geology was his first scientific love, and he returned to her again and again.
Without evolution, Darwin may not have achieved the same fame, but he wouldn’t have been forgotten. His contributions to geology were far from inconsequential. He laid some of the foundation stones for the young science. His work on coral reefs, his recognition that granitic rocks and lava rocks were essentially the same, his work on volcanic islands, and crustal movements in South America, would have ensured him a place among the giants of geology. Students may not have instantly recognized his name, and fundamentalist pastors may not have thundered against him, but he still would have been a recognized and respected scientist.
We’ll be exploring Darwin the Geologist in some depth in the future. And you can sail off on your own voyage of discovery – Sandra Herbert’s Charles Darwin, Geologistwill take you all over Darwin’s geologic world. By the end of the voyage, it’s my fondest hope that the next time we play the Darwin Word Association Game, you’ll shout “Geology!” without a second’s hesitation.
Darwin's Sketch of St. Helena Coastline, shamelessly pilfered from our own David Bressan.
Sources
Works by Charles Darwin:
Sir Archibald Giekie, Charles Darwin as geologist. The Rede lecture given at the Darwin centennial commemoration on 24 June 1909.
There’s music from Richard Einhorn’s oratorio The Origin over at ETEV, if you’d like some celebratory tunes. Gorgeous stuff!
Dana HunterAbout the Author: Dana Hunter is a science blogger, SF writer, and geology addict whose home away from SciAm is En Tequila Es Verdad. Follow her on Twitter: @dhunterauthor. Follow on Twitter @dhunterauthor.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Surf's Up!!



Given our discussion of tsunamis lately, I thought this article from Geology.com to be timely.  The article treats the 1700-foot tsunami that occurred in Lituya Bay, Alaska, in 1958.  No, that should not be 170-ft.  1700-feet!!
Read on for more...

Geology.com - Largest Wave Article

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Invasive Species Removed

File:Orthographic projection over Palmyra Atoll.pngPalmyra Atoll has finally been freed from the plague of invasive rates introduced during World War II.  Read on to discover the benefits to invasive species removal in this tiny slice of coral paradise in the Pacific ocean.


Palmyra was this month given a rat-free bill of health more than a year after about the invasive predatory rats were killed to protect 10 nesting seabird species, migratory shorebirds and the rare coconut crab.
Palmyra
Palmyra Atoll is a group of islets (Photo by Balint Vekassy / Island Conservation)
One of the largest remaining forests of native Pisonia grandis, a rare flowering tree in the bougainvillea family, is also expected to benefit from its newly rat-free environment.
Palmyra Atoll is cooperatively managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and The Nature Conservancy as a National Wildlife Refuge and a scientific research station. The area includes 25 islets covering 580 acres of land, and thousands of acres of healthy coral reefs.
In 2009, the refuge and waters surrounding it were also included in the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument.
Non-native black rats were likely introduced to the atoll during World War II, and the population grew to as many 30,000 rats.
The invasive rodents eat eggs and chicks of ground and tree-nesting birds, particularly sooty and white terns. Rats also eat land crabs and the seeds and seedlings of native tree species.
To reverse this trend, in June 2011, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, The Nature Conservancy, and Island Conservation removed the rats from Palmyra Atoll, using a rodenticide that had been successful in similar projects on other islands.
The Palmyra rat-eradication project is the first step in the Palmyra Atoll Restoration Project, a longer-term effort to restore the atoll’s ecological balance.
coconut crab
Island Conservation researchers observe a coconut crab on Palmyra (Photo by Island Conservation)
“This wonderful atoll is again able to thrive the way nature intended—without rats. Palmyra has been infested with rats for so long, there will be benefits to wildlife we didn’t even fully anticipate – such as the explosion of the fiddler crab population that we’re seeing,” said Susan White, monument superintendent and refuge project leader, Pacific Reefs National Wildlife Refuge and Monuments Complex, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Using the same proven methods that were used years before to detect the extent of the rat problem on Palmyra, scientists conducted surveys over a month-long period this summer and confirmed that the entire atoll is currently rat-free.
In the tropical climate at Palmyra, rats reproduce every three to four months, so conducting surveys one year after the removal effort is sufficient time to detect rats remaining on the atoll. During the summer, the project partners established a network of 286 rat detection stations that covered the entire atoll. Each station was checked four times during the course of the month.
Team members also spent hundreds of hours scouring the atoll for natural indicators of rat presence, but found none. They did find signs of the recovery of native species over the past year.
fairy tern
Fairy tern on Palmyra (Photo by Erik Oberg / Island Conservation)
“Millions of seabirds, trees, crabs and other native species can now thrive in their home without the threat of being eaten by rats,” said Suzanne Case, executive director of The Nature Conservancy’s Hawaii program.
“Staff and visitors to the atoll have seen a large increase in the numbers of crabs, insects, seedlings and seabirds. Our collective efforts to bring balance back to Palmyra are working,” said Case.
“The collaborators did an outstanding job,” said Dr. George Wallace, vice president for oceans and islands at American Bird Conservancy. “The science on these efforts has been evolving, and while there have been some learning experiences along the way, the Palmyra effort stands out as a great example of how to do it right and get rid of destructive invasive species while still protecting the native wildlife.”
The University of California Santa Cruz Coastal Conservation Action Lab is monitoring Palmyra’s terrestrial ecosystem by comparing measures of seabird, shorebird, and plant populations taken before and after rat removal.
In the summer of 2012 they found a 130 percent increase in seedlings of Palmyra’s 10 locally rare native tree species, and the first record of Pisonia seedlings. No seedlings were observed in 2007 before the rats were removed.
The UC researchers found a 367 percent increase in arthropods such as insects, spiders, and crabs.
The found no change in the numbers of bristle-thighed curlews, a native bird species. Special care was taken to ensure this imperiled species was not harmed by the rat removal.
Gregg Howald, North America regional director with Island Conservation, said, “With the atoll free of rats, we are already seeing a dramatic increase in many things that rats preyed upon: nesting seabirds, migratory shorebirds, native tree seedlings, and small invertebrates like fiddler crabs. The island is truly rebounding.”

Environment News Service (http://s.tt/1zcAh)

Saturday, January 19, 2013

Wave Energy

I think the article below is rather timely, given our recent discussion of power generation in New York City's East River and our current discussion of all aspects of ocean waves.



NEWPORT, Oregon, January 15, 2013 (ENS) – The nation’s first utility-scale, grid-connected wave energy test facility will be located at Newport on the Oregon coast, where powerful waves roll in from across the Pacific Ocean.
The new facility, called the Pacific Marine Energy Center, will test energy generation potential and the environmental impacts of wave energy devices, at an ocean site about five miles from shore.
Subsea cables will transmit energy from the wave energy devices to the local power grid, and data to scientists and engineers at on-shore facilities.
waves, NEwport
Waves on Newport’s Nye Beach (Photo by April Westervelt)
The Northwest National Marine Renewable Energy Center, NNMREC, based at Oregon State University, announced the selection of Newport on Monday.
In an extensive site selection process, NNMREC worked with four coastal communities to consider both technical criteria and community resources. The options were narrowed last fall to Reedsport and Newport. Site selection teams from those communities submitted proposals in December.
Belinda Batten, director of NNMREC, said the communities were similar in their capacities and capabilities, and the final choice focused on making PMEC a global competitor among international test facilities.
The selection was based on ocean site characteristics, marine and on-shore cable routes, port and industry capabilities, impacts to existing ocean users, permitting challenges, stakeholder participation in the proposal process, and support of the local fishing communities.
One of the first public wave energy testing systems in the United States has already begun operation near Newport.
The Ocean Sentinel is a $1.5 million device developed by NNMREC. It allows private industry or academic researchers to test new wave energy technology such as a “WetNZ” device developed by private industry and tested last summer.
“The Ocean Sentinel will provide a standardized, accurate system to compare various wave energy technologies, including systems that may be better for one type of wave situation or another,” said Sean Moran, ocean test facilities manager with NNMREC.
“We’re still trying to figure out what will happen when some of these devices have to stand up to 50-foot waves,” Moran said. “The ocean environment is very challenging, especially off Oregon where we have such a powerful wave energy resource.”
“We have to find out more about which technologies work best, in what conditions, and what environmental impacts there may be,” Moran said. “We’re not assuming anything. We’re first trying to answer the question, ‘Is this a good idea or not?’ And if some technology doesn’t work as well, we want to find that out quickly, and cheaply, and the Ocean Sentinel will help us do that.”
The new multi-million dollar grid-connected Pacific Marine Energy Center will be a continuation and expansion of the work of the Ocean Sentinel.
The first installment of funding for PMEC was received in September 2012, consisting of $4 million from the U.S. Department of Energy, along with a non-federal cost match. NNMREC will continue to work with a variety of partners to develop additional funding sources.
“PMEC represents a major step toward the development of energy from Oregon’s ocean waters,” said Jason Busch of the Oregon Wave Energy Trust. “I’m certain that Oregon will reap benefits from PMEC for many years to come, and the research and development performed at PMEC will help usher in this new form of reliable electricity from the sea.”
wave test graphic
The Pacific Marine Energy Center (Graphic courtesy of Oregon State University)
PMEC design and specific site characterization will begin soon, along with the permitting and regulatory process.
The exact ocean location for the PMEC site will be finalized in the next few months in a zone that has been selected in collaboration with ocean stakeholders – an area that will not impede shipping lanes and takes environmental impacts into consideration.
The Pacific Marine Energy Center will have four “test berths,” open spaces of water dedicated to testing individual devices or small arrays of devices, each of which will be connected to the community’s electrical grid. It will also collect data associated with environmental and human dimension impacts.
Completion will take several years.
“This site selection builds on the global reputation of Oregon State University in both renewable energy research and marine science,” said Rick Spinrad, Oregon State University vice president for research. “Future research results from this site will help ensure our state’s leadership in these critical areas.”
Newport is already a center for marine science and operations of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, and many other agencies.
The NOAA Marine Operations Center-Pacific, opened in Newport in 2011, is the homeport for four NOAA research and survey ships and provides administrative, engineering, maintenance and logistical support for NOAA’s Pacific fleet.
The ships in NOAA’s Pacific fleet collect data essential to protecting marine mammals and coral reefs, managing commercial fish stocks, understanding climate processes, and producing nautical charts. NOAA ships also deploy and help maintain buoys that gather oceanographic and weather information and warn of tsunamis.
The Hatfield Marine Science Center at Newport is Oregon State University’s campus for research, education, and outreach in marine and coastal sciences. It hosts Coastal Oregon Marine Experiment Station, the Cooperative Institute for Marine Resources Studies, and the Marine Mammal Institute. Onsite partners include eight state and federal agency activities involved in research and management of the marine environment.

Environment News Service (http://s.tt/1ytS8)