From the NOAA “Oceans and Human Health Initiative” website and press release, comes this warning that the algae, Moroccan dust, desertification, bacteria, bad seafood, heavy rainfall, old sewers, climate change is gonna get ya.
Climate projections show human health impacts possible within 30 years
New studies demonstrate potential increases in waterborne toxins and microbes
A panel of scientists speaking today at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) unveiled new research and models demonstrating how climate change could increase exposure and risk of human illness originating from ocean, coastal and Great Lakes ecosystems, with some studies projecting impacts to be felt within 30 years.
“With 2010 the wettest year on record and third warmest for sea surface temperatures, NOAA and our partners are working to uncover how a changing climate can affect our health and our prosperity,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “These studies and others like it will better equip officials with the necessary information and tools they need to prepare for and prevent risks associated with changing oceans and coasts.”
In several studies funded by NOAA’s Oceans and Human Health Initiative, findings shed light on how complex interactions and climate change alterations in sea, land and sky make ocean and freshwater environments more susceptible to toxic algal blooms and proliferation of harmful microbes and bacteria.
Climate change could prolong toxic algal outbreaks by 2040 or sooner
Using cutting-edge technologies to model future ocean and weather patterns, Stephanie Moore, Ph.D., with NOAA’s West Coast Center for Oceans and Human Health and her partners at the University of Washington, are predicting longer seasons of harmful algal bloom outbreaks in Washington State’s Puget Sound.
The team looked at blooms of Alexandrium catenella, more commonly known as “red tide,” which produces saxitoxin, a poison that can accumulate in shellfish. If consumed by humans, it can cause gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms including vomiting and muscle paralysis or even death in extreme cases.
Longer harmful algal bloom seasons could translate to more days the shellfish fishery is closed, threatening the vitality of the $108 million shellfish industry in Washington state.
“Changes in the harmful algal bloom season appear to be imminent and we expect a significant increase in Puget Sound and similar at-risk environments within 30 years, possibly by the next decade,” said Moore. “Our projections indicate that by the end of the 21st century, blooms may begin up to two months earlier in the year and persist for one month later compared to the present-day time period of July to October.”
Natural climate variability also plays a role in the length of the bloom season from one year to the next. Thus, in any single year, the change in bloom season could be more or less severe than implied by the long-term warming trend from climate change.
Moore and the research team indicate that the extended lead time offered by these projections will allow managers to put mitigation measures in place and sharpen their targets for monitoring to more quickly and effectively open and close shellfish beds instead of issuing a blanket closure for a larger swath of coast or be caught off guard by an unexpected bloom. The same model can be applied to other coastal areas around the world increasingly affected by harmful algal blooms and improve protection of human health against toxic outbreaks.
More atmospheric dust from global desertification could lead to increases of harmful bacteria in oceans, seafood
Researchers at the University of Georgia, a NOAA Oceans and Human Health Initiative Consortium for Graduate Training site, looked at how global desertification — and the resulting increase in atmospheric dust based on some climate change scenarios — could fuel the presence of harmful bacteria in the ocean and seafood.
Desert dust deposition from the atmosphere is considered one of the main contributors of iron in the ocean, has increased over the last 30 years and is expected to rise based on precipitation trends in western Africa. Iron is limited in ocean environments and is essential to most forms of life. In a study conducted in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey, Erin Lipp, Ph.D. and graduate student Jason Westrich demonstrated that the sole addition of desert dust and its associated iron into seawater significantly stimulates growth and persistence of Vibrios, a group of ocean bacteria that occur worldwide and can cause gastroenteritis and infectious diseases in humans.
“Within 24 hours of mixing weathered desert dust from Morocco with seawater samples, we saw a 10-1000-fold growth in Vibrios, including one strain that could cause eye, ear, and open wound infections, and another strain that could cause cholera ,” said Lipp. “Our next round of experiments will examine the response of the strains associated with seafood-related infections.”
Since 1996 Vibrio cases have jumped 85 percent in the United States based on reports that primarily track seafood-illnesses. It is possible this additional input of iron, along with rising sea surface temperatures, will affect these bacterial populations and may help to explain both current and future increases in human illnesses from exposure to contaminated seafood and seawater.
Increased rainfall and dated sewers could affect water quality in Great Lakes
A changing climate with more rainstorms on the horizon could increase the risk of overflows of dated sewage systems, causing the release of disease-causing bacteria, viruses and protozoa into drinking water and onto beaches. In the past 10 years there have been more severe storms that trigger overflows. While there is some question whether this is due to natural variability or to climate change, these events provide another example as to how vulnerable urban areas are to climate.
Using fine-tuned climate models developed for Wisconsin, Sandra McLellan, Ph.D., at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee School of Freshwater Sciences, found spring rains are expected to increase in the next 50 years and areas with dated sewer systems are more likely to overflow because the ground is frozen and rainwater can’t be absorbed. As little as 1.7 inches of rain in 24 hours can cause an overflow in spring and the combination of increased temperatures — changing snowfall to rainfall and increased precipitation — can act synergistically to magnify the impact.
McLellan and colleagues showed that under worst case scenarios there could be an average 20 percent increase in volume of overflows, and they expect the overflows to last longer. In Milwaukee, infrastructure investments have reduced sewage overflows to an average of three times per year, but other cities around the Great Lakes still experience overflows up to 40 times per year.
“Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on urban infrastructure, and these investments need to be directed to problems that have the largest impact on our water quality,” said McLellan. “Our research can shed light on this dilemma for cities with aging sewer systems throughout the Great Lakes and even around the world.”
“Understanding climate change on a local level and what it means to county beach managers or water quality safety officers has been a struggle,” said Juli Trtanj, director of NOAA’s Oceans and Human Health Initiative and co-author of the interagency report A Human Health Perspective on Climate Change. “These new studies and models enable managers to better cope and prepare for real and anticipated changes in their cities, and keep their citizens, seafood and economy safe.”
On the Web:
Image Gallery: http://oceansandhumanhealth.noaa.gov/multimedia/ohh-climate.html
NOAA’s Oceans and Human Health Initiative: http://oceansandhumanhealth.noaa.gov
Georgia Oceans and Human Health Initiative at the University of Georgia: http://www.georgiaoceansandhealth.org
University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee School of Freshwater Sciences: http://www4.uwm.edu/freshwater
I got to models and knew from there that this was CRAP!! MODELS=GIGO!!!!!!!!!
pat says:
February 19, 2011 at 9:10 pm
My local High School did a similar experiment about 6 years ago. E. Coli. Postulated identically. They found out that 15 feet from shore out of a discharge of heavily contaminated water….yes, 15′, the bacteria had dispersed to an insignificant extent was being heartily EATEN by salt water forms that relished the taste. The local Board of Health was so impressed that they actually replicated the study, confirmed it, and told every one they were relieved.
============================================================
Hi Pat !!!!
Interesting observation.
Some of our best surfing breaks at Gunnamatta, on the Mornington Peninsula are located near an outfall discharging sewage treated to secondary standard. Moderately contaminated you might say.
Since the outfall started operating in 1975 the incidence of ear ,nose and throat infections, not to mention gastric problems has gone from zero to commonplace.
E coli cannot tolerate salt water but, given the fact we surf no closer than 1000 meters from the outfall, leads me to believe your 15 feet is bullshit.
I’m getting pretty exasperated by all these computer models which seem to be taking the place of experimental science.
What did scientists do before computing power increased to such an extent that this type of gratuitous data processing was possible? In the early decades of computing, because computer time was a scarce resource and processing time was comparatively slow. A lot of thought was needed to firstly define a problem correctly and then determine the objectives. Similarly, a lot of thought was needed to code the analysis efficiently (using machine and assembler code because of the ability to optimise this far better than any compiled code) and then it had to be entered onto punched cards or punched paper tape, before submitting to the computing department to be scheduled and run. When I was at university in the early 60s, I recall that programs which needed serious computing power had to be sent to one of the only three (if I recall correctly) Atlas computer labs in the UK.
Some time later your results would appear and if there were errors in the program you would have to repeat the process until some sensible output was received.
The key point is that because of the timescales involved, scientists had time to think properly about all aspects of the process, and had the incentive to do so because of the potential delays to their projects if they got intermediate steps wrong.
Jump forward to today’s almost unlimited computing power, where even desk top computers can perform massive iterative processes within realistic timescales and you have the means to test even the most stupid proposition. You can continuously change parameters until you get closer to the answer you want. Having got the answer you wanted you can then go back to the parameters that you changed and work out some sort of theory that allows you to justify those changes.
This calls for far less blue sky thinking where you would come up with a theory and then devise an experiment to test it. Now you come up with an answer and then devise a theory to fit it, aggressively challenge doubters to prove you wrong and do all you can to undermine the credentials of those challenging you.
If you think I’m being cynical, ask yourselves about the motives of the scientists involved and their acolytes, who have persuaded themselves that they are the saviours of mankind.
Geoff Sherrington says:
February 19, 2011 at 9:24 pm
‘Fess up. Are you going to reduce you[r] eating of seafood because of this report?
============================================================
Hi Geoff !!!
Er………….No.
But its more to do with the fact that oyster and mussel beds for example, are monitored, and any contaminated product does not reach the market.
This has the dual benefit of preventing you from dropping your guts all over the lounge room floor, and saves the supplier the trauma of being sued by people just like you.
Happy shucking !!!
These “experts” apparently have no other interests in life other than doom and
gloom, and making everyones life a bloody misery on a daily basis at our own expense.
Enough I say!
So if you add weathered Moroccan dust (which is known to contain a lot of iron) to seawater containing Vibrio bacteria (which need iron to thrive), the bacteria multiply rapidly. That’s a surprise – the authors should submit a paper to a mainstream journal immediately. I’d be happy to peer-review it. This is definitely one piece of quality research which should be protected from the GOP axe.
Gotta rush – I’m going down to my local shop to get a few things. I’ll be going through the local park, which is already showing signs of desertification – the grass is short and there are no leaves on the trees.
Did anyone actually pay for this study ??
Even my 3 year old daughter knows not to swim in, or drink from polluted water. After all that’s all the study is talking about, and yes, we must be mindful of the pollutants that we do tip into ALL our waterways. Surely these ‘Experts’ could turn their hand to coming up with better ways to the disposing of human pollutants rather than give us this stupid study.
SJB says increduously up above, “How can we have GLOBAL DESERTIFICATION with INCREASED RAINFALL?”
Logically. That increased rainfall has to come from somewhere; and where it comes from gets desertified. (sarc off)
I noted the same contradiction. It’s like the gradations from global warming to climate change to sever climate disruption. My bet is that the next prediction will be that “In between reportable climate events, we predict long periods in which nothing of real interest happens anywhere.” By including this prediction, all possibilities are covered and all forecasts will be correct – in hindsight.
*puts head in hands*
No! No! No! Not more computer models, not more ‘coulds’, ‘maybes’ and ‘mights’.
Please someone make it stop.
This “new evidence” will be used by someone I argue with in the next couple of weeks to “prove” to me that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is “real”. This has been a recurring pattern for sometime now – I point out the dearth of evidence, even cases of falsification and failures of such models to even hindcast, then someone makes a new model and tells me it is “evidence”.
NOAA AGW department from NOAA is in desperate need of an overhaul.
Just a few other publications like this and nobody will take them serious anymore.
I’m sure the King of Morocco will take the NOAA report very seriously since a healthy climate is an absolute priority in a country where open tuberculoses still is a major health risk.
http://www.scidev.net/en/news/open-source-tb-megaproject-yields-first-fruits.html
That sounds like an idea. Could the House of Representatives vote to cut off money for this like they did for the climate ‘initiatives’ at NASA?
Dr Lubchenko must be poorly informed or has a short memory,
During 2010, I watched Univ-Bremen’s M.V. Polarstern on AMSR-E sea ice maps, do many circles in a small area of the Southern Atlantic, over a few days, a bit higher in latitude than the Falkland Islands. It was presumed to be a test run of iron sulfate (?) to generate an increase in algae and absorb CO2, to feed the plankton that would die and carry the carbon to the ocean floor. It was reported that the experiment failed, as the nice juicy plankton were consumed by fish further up the food chain.
Maybe this wind blown iron bearing desert sand could increase fish stock and decrease CO2 (whatever that is – LOL )
These guys and the public should be constantly reminded of the litany of failed predictions that they have come up with. With such a track record, how could any sane person take them seriously?
“Using cutting-edge technologies to model future ocean and weather patterns….”
Yet more wrong computer models. No need to read any further. But I did anyhow…sadly I was right…I should have stopped at that sentence.
As an experimental scientist, why do I continue to torture myself with this bogus “research” of computer models?
I give Lipp and Westrich credit, though, for actually doing an experiment! More AGW “scientists” should consider such a fantastic feat for themselves.
Someone should tap into the bottomless pit of AGW funding and conduct a study to determine which is more accurate: Tarot cards or AGW computer models. The null hypothesis is neither is more accurate. The alternate hypothesis is that Tarot cards are more accurate.
Could also expand the study to Ouija boards, tea leaves, etc.
Put down that model, place your hands on your head and walk away from it.
THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING! PUT DOWN THAT MODEL…
The weak shall inherit climate science.
Meanwhile when the going gets tough, the tough get going in Bangladesh. Low lying swamp lands in Bangladesh inundated by sea water in last years cyclone has created an opportunity for farmers fattening crabs that can grow as heavy as 4kg and fetch up to $5 each.
Off course this regular flooding occurence over the centuries of salt water flooding these lowlands leads the BBC to call the area “polluted” but thats another story all together.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12046805
All the do gooder bs’ers in the West and all the money poured into NGO’s did nothing, it’s the farmers themselves that came up with a solution. Climate scientists need to stop using Bangladesh as their personal toy for their propaganda machine and let the people get on with their lives.
The problem is in disentangling what is our fault in climate change from is what not our fault; a task impossible of satisfactory solution for reasons related to the Uncertainty Principle. But since it’s getting colder we can safely assume that we aren’t contributing much to warming the globe with CO2 and get on with solving problems rather than assigning blame. We’re up to here in alligators and they don’t know nuthin’ about first causes.
=========
The word model / models is used 5 times above. Too much for me.
Below are 2 studies regarding snow in the Great Lakes:
Less snow in Great Lakes
More snow in Great Lakes
Too much speculation for my liking.
Sounds like a good way to increase ocean productivity – Vibrios and other bacteria (and algae) are simply at the bottom of the food chain. We’ve always had dust storms and I’m sure they’ll wax and wane just like other climatic events, including rainfall and even desertification.
On one hand we’ve had the human population increased for many, many decades, and increasingly pumping poorly treated sewage into rivers and oceans – never mind the storm/sewer overflow events when there is high rainfall, on the other hand we’ve improved our sewage treatment in the last few decades and are continuing to do so. It is necessary to make the point though that sewage treatment tends to focus on the organic loading and ‘oxygen demand’ of the sewage. We have only recently started to focus on reducing the nutrients (N and P) in the discharges. The nutrients around our coasts have the potential to increase algal blooms, and evidence suggest this has increased in recent decades. Increased water temperatures may be a factor, although part of it may simply be our increased ability to detect blooms and toxins.
I used to enjoy collecting/cooking mussels from the shore and was always careful to avoid taking them from “polluted areas”, however, having done extensive consultancy work for a shellfish company about 10 years ago I realised the error of my ways. The toxins from algae that you really need to worry about at that time could only be tested for reliably by a mouse bioassay which took up to 72 hours. Commercially this means the batch of harvested shellfish has to be processed while the test on that batch is underway – a huge waste if the batch then has to be condemned. More rapid testing is now available :
however it still takes time to send to a lab; an ‘instant’ bioassay is under commercialisation: http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Food-Safety/New-technology-promises-to-revolutionise-shellfish-safety-regime
As for Vibrio, there is an excellent description of the ecology here (it is most associated with estuaries): http://www.medicalecology.org/water/cholera/cholera.htm It should also be noted:
1. Not all strains of Vibrio cholerae are pathogenic – there are genetic elements carried on plasmids (non-genomic DNA) that are passed from cell to cell.
2. Cholera (development of the illness) requires ingestion of a certain ‘bacterial load’ as explained in the link above, and the ecto-symbiont nature of Vibrios facilitates this. Just having unspecified strains detected in the water column will not necessarily increase risk.
I so dislike this fearmongering.
There is a very interesting paragraph in the link above related to Cholera:
Sound familiar?
Has Al set up a “Dust Credit” exchange yet?
Desert dust deposition from the atmosphere is considered one of the main contributors of iron in the ocean
=========================================
and also Iron for all the land plants and rain forests……….
what dimwits
“…longer seasons of harmful algal bloom outbreaks in Washington State’s Puget Sound.”
I’m not sure if any of the investigators here are ecologists, but it doesn’t seem likely. Dinoflagellate blooms are dependent on a whole bunch of stuff, one of which is the temperature of the water.
These guys go into a “suspended animation” phase in the winter when the water is too cold, but also do so in the summer. The summer suspended animation phase is poorly understood, to say the least, and may be due to nutrient availability or predation. Thus the blooms may commence earlier and go on later but the gap in the middle might get larger, for no net change.
I can’t find any data for Alexandrium catenella, but for Alexandrium tamarense, which is better studied, there is a spike in abundance in spring, a disappearance in summer and a lesser spike in abundance in autumn.
Phytoplankton are not on their own in a bucket: they experience competition from other phytoplankton (other dinoflagellates and diatoms, etc) as well as predation from copepods and others. There is a succession through the year where different species are dominant. In UK waters (and elsewhere) this is related to the development of a discontinuity layer (due to storminess, warmth) and subsequent depletion of surface nutrients.
Therefore to say the least predicting changes in the abundance of any one organism is fraught with difficulties, implying as it does that only one factor is limiting their abundance at present (climate) and assuming that climate change is certain to improve the conditions for the species in question.
@Verity
Is it possible for mortals to post images too?
[Reply: Mortals may post images. But unfortunately, not on WUWT. However, you may post image links.☺ ~dbs, mod.]
I think one of the problems with these increasing numbers of groups of people who are so over- the-top with their ridiculous climate modelling is to get their name on the paper as Authors or Co. Authors, and in this case Graduate Students. That way it will improve their CVand receive better recognition from the gullible, and those believing in the cult, which will most certainly lead to more funding, leading to more ridiculous climate modelling than this utter rubbish.