Could Offshore Oil Fund Beach Projects?

According to the N&O, Walter Jones would like to use proceeds from offshore drilling to fund beach renourishment and dredging projects. Since federal funds for these types of projects have dwindled over the years, I bet that is appealing for some communities such as Nags Head.

Can these projects bring enough revenue to coastal communities such that the benefits outweigh the potential environmental costs?

According to the Florida Chapter of the Sierra Club:

If that should happen, we should know that:

• Offshore drilling activities lead to the destruction of coastal wetlands. In Louisiana, where oil and gas development has been conducted for 50 years, close to 62 square miles of wetlands are lost each year.
• The pollution from offshore rigs causes a wide range of health and reproductive problems for fish and other marine life.
• Oil and gas operations dump more than 1 billion pounds of mercury-contaminated drilling fluids into the Gulf each year. Mercury levels in the sand around some Gulf rigs are three times higher than levels found at EPA Superfund sites where fishing is prohibited. Mercury levels in marine creatures living around these rigs are at least 25 times higher than in fish found elsewhere in the Gulf. Why then is the oil industry promoting rigs as "fish-rich oasis in the vast desert of the Gulf"? Tests of 70 coastal residents who ate Gulf-caught fish at least once a week show mercury levels of 5-10 times the EPA’s safe level for mercury in the human body. Since Gulf-caught fish are shipped all over the country, this is a health hazard of national proportions.
• "Routine" offshore drilling operations dump thousands of pounds of drilling muds into the ocean that contain toxic heavy metals such as lead, chromium and mercury.
• A single production platform, which can drill 50-100 wells, discharges over 90,000 metric tons of drilling fluid and metal cuttings into the ocean.
• A single exploratory well dumps approximately 25,000 pounds of toxic metals into the ocean.
• A single offshore rig emits the same air pollution as 7,000 cars driving 50 miles per day.
• The continued use of fossil fuels poses a particular threat to the residents of Florida. Fossil fuels increase global warming which leads in turn to the melting of the polar icecaps. In Florida, this will result in serious sea-level rise, while the higher temperatures will lead to more tropical diseases and heat-related deaths.

Spill statistics can be found here. Below is a graph of spills in the Gulf, between 1996 and 2007, which were greater than 50 bbls. Notice the higher number of spills associated with significant hurricanes. In 2005, the year Katrina and Rita ravaged the Gulf, 49 spills, each greater than 50 bbl, contributed roughly 15154.3 bbl.




Is this a substantial amount of oil? Deroy Murdock,columnist with Scripps Howard News Service, says no in an op-ed piece in the Seattle Post Intelligencer:

Feinstein is correct. U.S. offshore oil drilling is not perfectly tidy. It's only 99.999 percent clean. Indeed, since 1980 -- as MMS figures indicate -- 101,997 barrels spilled from among the 11.855 billion barrels of American oil extracted offshore. This is a 0.001 percent pollution rate. While offshore drilling is not 100 percent spotless, this record should satisfy all but the terminally fastidious.

Ironically, in terms of oil contamination, Mother Nature is 95 times dirtier than Man. Some 620,500 barrels of oil ooze organically from North America's ocean floors each year. Compare this to the average 6,555 barrels that oil companies have spilled annually since 1998, according to MMS.

I look forward to reading more debate on this. I still hold the opinion that we, as a nation, need more a substantial energy policy. It seems to me that this should be a small part of this larger debate, not a central issues.

Fish Heart Hurricanes

From NOAA:

NOAA-supported scientists from the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium found the size of this year’s Gulf of Mexico dead zone to be 7,988 square miles, slightly smaller than the predicted record size of 8,800 square miles and similar to the area measured in 2007. Scientists think Hurricane Dolly’s wind and waves may have added oxygen to the zone to reduce its size.

Hurricane Bertha Revisited: Hurricanes and Ocean Temperature

From NASA:

Weakening Magnuson or Adding Flexibility?

It appears that different fishing interests are holding hands again. From the Cape May County Herald:

Members of the recreational, charter, and commercial fishing industries, representing over 100 fishing organizations, met with Members of Congress and congressional staff in support of bipartisan legislation which promotes healthy populations of fisheries and fishing communities.

H.R. 5425, the Flexibility in Rebuilding American Fishery Act of 2008, co-sponsored by Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Henry Brown (R-SC), Barney Frank (D-MA), and Walter Jones (R-NC) would provide a measure of flexibility into the management process without compromising conservation goals.

At present, the law requires a total rebuilding of the stock of certain “overfished” species within 10 years, often requiring drastic reductions in fishing quotas and in some cases a complete or effective shut-down of the fishery.

Here is a summary of the bill from the Congressional Research Service:

Flexibility in Rebuilding American Fisheries Act of 2008 - Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to require fishery management plans, amendments, or regulations for overfished fisheries to specify a time period for ending overfishing and rebuilding the fishery that is as short as practicable (currently, as short as possible). Modifies the exceptions to the requirement that such period not exceed ten years.

Requires consideration, in evaluating progress to end overfishing and rebuild overfished stocks, of factors other than commercial and recreational fishing.

Requires, when the Secretary of Commerce extends the period under specified provisions, that the maximum rebuilding time not exceed the sum of the initial ten-year period, the expected time to rebuild the stock absent any fishing mortality and under prevailing environmental conditions, and the mean generation time of the stock.

St Pete Beach to Renourish

Yesterday, I wrote a post* discussing the fate of T-Groins in St Pete Beach. The St Pete Beach City Commission has decided to remove the T-Groins and go ahead with a beach renourishment project.

The commission decided to go forward with a beach renourishment project in 2009 and recover the T-groins.

In 2010, they'll hire an engineer to look at alternative plans for the area, such as a possible artificial reef.

Council members will then begin implementing those changes by 2012.

* I originally stated that this decision was being made by the county commissioners. This was incorrect. The decision was made by the St Pete Beach City Commission.

Find More, Use Less

From Morning Edition:

The Senate brings up another bill aimed at lowering gas prices Tuesday, as Republicans tout a new slogan: "Find more. Use less." It's a paradox because finding more oil drives the price down, which encourages consumption. And despite talk of conservation, election-year efforts by Congress to lower gas prices may actually diminish incentives to lower oil consumption.

Is this really a paradox? It would be a paradox if we had enough oil to cause a substantial shift in supply, thus driving down prices. It is my understanding that the US does not have enough oil to substantially impact prices. I still think that all this talk of additional drilling is a diversion from developing a comprehensive energy policy, but calling it a paradox is a bit of a stretch.

Another stretch?

GA Senator Johnny Isakson: "The Congress of the United States is sitting on a ham sandwich, starving to death."

That is a pretty small ham sandwich and it needs some mustard!

Hardening St Pete Beach

Between Upham Beach to the St. Pete Beach, coastal managers have been trying to address beach erosion using temporary T-Groins. Now City Commissioners of St Pete Beach are debating whether to replace existing sandbags with a more permanent structure (i.e. rocks). From baynews9.com:

The tubes are temporary to test out the size and T-shape. If approved by city commissioners, the county wants to replace the bags with rocks.

Pinellas County Coastal Coordinator Nicole Elko said during the two-year study 50 percent of the sand has eroded, without the tubes it would have been 80 percent.

The current project cost $1.5 million and is funded by the county and state.

Elko said the tubes would save millions of dollars down the road. It costs $6 million to pump in more sand and restore the beach. The bags cut that in half at $3 million.

Below is a jpeg I made using Google Earth showing these T-Groins.



Notice the convex shape of the beach around the groins. You can also see a jetty to the left of the first T-Groin. All these structures impact longshore transport of sand.

Picture Time! Marine Invasive Species

Here is a map of marine invasive species from UNEP:


It looks like there are some serious pathways through the Mediterranean.

US Nautical Charts for Google Earth

Navimatics has developed a kml overlay for Google Earth so you can now view nautical charts all over US coastal waters. This just makes it that much harder to leave your computer at home!

Here is a shot of Ocracoke Island using the overlay. Last year I had the pleasure of sailing out to Ocracoke for Labor day. We didn't have much wind, but we did have plenty of beer.


HT: Free Geography Tools

Offshore Wind Potential

Here is an image of Offshore Wind Potential from NASA's Earth Observatory:




It looks like there is significant seasonal variability. It will be interesting to see how many of these projects get started. As I have posted in the past, these projects may not be viable in some locations due to high start-up costs. These costs have not stopped all projects however. Delaware will have the first offshore project in the US. In addition to Delaware, it appears that numerous other states are pursuing offshore wind (examples:GA and MA).

Note: Here is an excellent site from Oregon State depicting wind potential. By clicking on the map you can view different regions by month.

2007 Recreational Catch Data

From NOAA

Marine recreational anglers caught more than 468 million fish in 2007, down slightly from last year’s historic high of 475 million fish, but still the second highest recreational catch total in the last ten years.

The overall number of fish caught and kept also declined slightly, from 214 million to196 million fish, according to NOAA’s Fisheries Service.

The 2007 data demonstrates a widespread turn toward “catch and release” among recreational anglers. While anglers are catching about 27 percent more fish than a decade ago, they are also releasing more fish than they keep. Of the 468 million fish caught by anglers in 2007, 272 million or 58 percent were released alive. The percentage of fish released into the environment has increased steadily from about 51 percent in 1993.

Spotted seatrout was the most popular catch among marine recreational anglers. The species is caught in the Gulf of Mexico and the south Atlantic regions, which have the highest combined concentration of saltwater anglers in the nation. The top catches in other regions were lane snapper (Caribbean), striped bass (North Atlantic), Atlantic croaker (Mid-Atlantic), chub mackerel (Pacific), black rockfish (Pacific Northwest), and bigeye scad (Western Pacific).

Surfs Up

From The Sidney Morning Herald:

AN ILLEGAL fishing ship whose captain is rumoured to have been murdered has thrown plans for the World Surfing Championship in Bali into chaos by running aground on the island's best surf break.

This story has mini-series written all over it. It has includes murder, illegal fishing, Greenpeace, and a surfing competition. It appears that the boat, the Ho Tsai Fa, struck a reef off illegally fishing off Bali. From reading the article, I had a hard time determining the exact timeline, but it appears that the the boat's Indonesian crew had thrown the captain overboard some time during the fishing expedition. The crew then tried to return home fleeing the boat after it wrecked into the reef. Unfortunately, this section of reef has some of the best surf, thus threatening the World Surfing Championship.

According to a separate story in the Sidney Morning Herald,

The Taipei Times has reported that it was caught with 60,000 kilograms of shark fins in Costa Rica in 2003.

The previous article also mentions that Greenpeace had intercepted the boat in May, illegally fishing in the Pacific. On a positive note, at least for the locals, local residents helped themselves to the illegally caught fish.

The crew fled and, SurfingMagazine.com reported, local residents boarded the ship and helped themselves to about 500 illegally caught fish on board, including huge tuna, barracuda and shark.

This is a great picture:




HT: GCaptain

2008 May Be a Record Year for the Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone

NOAA and LSU scientists are reporting that this may be a record year for the Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone.

The researchers are predicting the area could measure a record 8,800 square miles, or roughly the size of New Jersey. In 2007, the dead zone was 7,903 square miles. The largest dead zone on record was in 2002, when it measured 8,481 square miles.

Flooding on the Mississippi River is leading to significant increases in nitrogen within the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers.

The dead zone is an area in the Gulf of Mexico where seasonal oxygen levels drop too low to support most life in bottom and near-bottom waters. This low oxygen, or hypoxic, area is primarily caused by high nutrient levels, which stimulates an overgrowth of algae that sinks and decomposes. The decomposition process in turn depletes dissolved oxygen in the water. The dead zone is of particular concern because it threatens valuable commercial and recreational Gulf fisheries.

Below are graphics from USGS. USGS also has data depicting monthly nutrient and streamflow delivery to the gulf (Previous years).




USGS also has a study investigating Phosphorus and Nitrogen delivery into the Gulf.

Do we really want to buy out US Sugar?

According to the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) the U.S. Sugar buyout may be a waste of public funds. PEER cites a 10 year old Army Corps of Engineer report which claims a "flow away" from Lake Okeechobee, the plan Governor Crist hopes to use to restore the Everglades, as infeasible. Limitations of the plan, as cited in the PEER news release:

• Land Subsidence. By some estimates, intensive agriculture has reduced the elevation of the current land twenty feet below where it was before human intervention. As a result, any released water would pool rather than flow. In the words of the Corps: “Soil subsidence in the EAA has substantially reduced the hydraulic head that would drive the southward flow of water; hence, velocities and flow rates would be greatly reduced”;
• Water Loss. The flow way would lose a tremendous amount of water to both seepage and evaporation: “By spreading the water over shallower areas (as opposed to reservoirs) and because a marsh habitat would have to be kept hydrated, the evapotranspiration loss could easily be doubled”; and
• No Steady Supply. “Perhaps the most crucial element, water flowing from the lake to the WCAs [Water Conservation Areas] is not present in dry or even normal years!...The only years where water could flow for long duration are wet periods…[and in] those years, the stages in the WCAs are already too high and additional flow from flowways would be damaging, not beneficial.”

The news release also cites buildups of nutrients as a concern. High levels of nutrients may cause less desirable plant species to dominate the system.

HT:RFF Library Blog

NC Senators Chime In

It appears that North Carolina senators Elizabeth Dole and Richard Burr both support offshore drilling. In fact, they are co-sponsors on a bill to lift the congressional ban. Yesterday the president lifted the executive order restricting offshore drilling and opening up drilling along the US coast now awaits congressional approval. Here are statements from Senators Dole and Burr in the N&O

Dole:

The solution to our energy crisis is finding more and using less. Families struggling with record high gas prices can’t afford for Congress to keep energy exploration options off the table.

Burr:

I'm pleased that the President has lifted the executive order banning deep-sea exploration for energy resources. Four dollar a gallon gasoline has affected every family in North Carolina, and it is time for the Democrat Leadership in Congress to stop blocking action and pass long-term energy legislation like The Gas Price Reduction Act, which I have cosponsored. This legislation would lift the Congressional moratorium on Outer Continental Shelf exploration by giving states the ability to opt in on energy exploration off their coasts. We need a comprehensive approach to this energy crisis that allows us to find more and use less.

First, I do think it is very humorous that the name of the legislation is "The Gas Price Reduction Act." It has been pretty well documented that there is insufficient oil to substantially impact oil or gas prices. That being said, I do agree with both senators that we need a comprehensive energy strategy. My biggest problem with this is that any additional offshore drilling will likely take 10 years to come to fruition and it will have little impact on the larger market. Conservation will have a much larger impact than drilling. I would like to see some Republican led plans that put more emphasis on conservation and the development of alternative energy sources. At this point I haven't seen a comprehensive approach. There is a lot of talk for a small return.

That said, the Democrats hardly deserve a free pass. If we are currently at or near peak oil, will we really be able to avoid eventually drilling in these areas as oil becomes more scarce? What are the real risks to drilling? Personally, I think that there are more effective measures available than opening up drilling 10 years down the road, but opening up the Strategic Petrolium Reserve, as requested by Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer, seems like the different side of the same coin, i.e. more political posturing. Will this subject really dominate our energy dialog as we approach November? I hope not, this entire topic should be a small talking point in a larger discussion.

Sayonara to the Ban!

Bush lifts the ban on offshore drilling. Of course Congress still would need to alter existing legislation for drilling to begin in restricted areas. This should make for good election year politics. I hope this discussion will involve a comprehensive energy plan and not just the usual partisan rhetoric.

Yellowfin Absence in SC?

Recreational anglers couldn't get a whiff of yellowfin tuna off SC this year. I am curious what catches are like in other states. From Myrtle Beach Online:

Jenkins provided the number of yellowfin tuna landed or released in Governor's Cup tournaments over the last 10 years and the data reveals a disturbing downward trend in recent years.

In 2003, 251 yellowfin tuna were either landed or released in the five Governor's Cup events. Since, the numbers have dropped to 52 in 2004, 22 in 2005, 52 in 2006 and 12 in 2007 before this year's total absence of fish through three tournaments.

It appears that recreational anglers in NC are also seeing a decline.

The trend also has been noticed in North Carolina. In the 50th annual Big Rock Blue Marlin Tournament on June 7-14 out of Morehead City, N.C. - during what is traditionally prime yellowfin tuna fishing time - 176 boats competed for five days and a lone yellowfin was brought to the dock.

"We've had slim years but we've never had none [caught] before, at least not in recent history," said Crystal Watters, tournament director of The Big Rock Blue Marlin Tournament.

Interesting Figures: Offshore Drilling

From the Union Tribune:


I would like to comment on a couple interesting points in this article.

“The debate will be dominated by . . . the 'drill at any cost' crowd and the 'don't drill at any cost' crowd, and their ideological priors and political power will pre-empt any good policy discussion,” said Thomas Firey, who monitors energy issues for the Cato Institute, a libertarian research group in Washington, D.C.

That sounds about right. I am generally skeptical that opening up more drilling will be beneficial, but it still deserves a reasonable debate.

The impassioned debate masks a little-known reality: About two-thirds of the recoverable oil reserves on the Outer Continental Shelf in the lower 48 states already are accessible for development.

I did not realize this.

Agency director Randall Luthi figures the reserves are much greater because most of the research was conducted before 1981 using less-sophisticated equipment.

It makes sense to update offshore oil estimates and gauge what it would take to tap reserves, said Firey of the Cato Institute.

I don't disagree that it makes sense to understand what resources are available so you can make informed decisions. What types of trade-offs are we really making? This same logic enters into my argument that we need more funding for coastal and ocean research (both natural and social).

The shifting sentiment has fueled campaigns, including one by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a Republican who heads the political advocacy group American Solutions for Winning the Future.

“Drill here. Drill now. Pay less,” is one of the group's slogans.

“The pro-drilling forces are clearly winning the sound-bite war because the concept sounds good,” said Warner Chabot, a vice president at the Ocean Conservancy in San Francisco. “Unfortunately, it doesn't work and it's not true.”

The Drill now, Pay less argument is just false. It is well documented that this will not lead to lower prices. This type of political rhetoric, much like the gas tax holiday, sounds good, but is just nonsense. Why do we let politicians get away with this? A more realistic argument would be drill now, increase government revenues, create jobs. Those benefits might not outweigh other costs, but it is a more honest argument. Last,

“If we fight like hell to keep oil off our coast, what happens in Africa or South America when the same companies develop oil in those places?” asked Michael McGinnis, acting director of the Ocean and Coastal Policy Center at the University of California Santa Barbara.

“We must not just think about the production of oil off our coast, but our consumption of oil,” he said. “One thing I haven't seen in the political debates is coming to grasp with real tough, tragic choices that we need to make.”

This is a good point. We need to begin to shift our thinking so that we conserve our resources more effectively.

Get Out Those Bulldozers and Dig those Canals!

The LA Times has an article discussing an agricultural/biofuel venture which utilizes the plant salicornia.

The crop is salicornia. It is nourished by seawater flowing from a man-made canal. And if you believe the American who is farming it, this incongruous swath of green has the potential to feed the world, fuel our vehicles and slow global warming.

Feed the world, fuel vehicles, and slow global warming? Is that all? This is actually a pretty interesting article because the venture doesn't need freshwater and can be located on coastal desert areas.

He wants to channel the ocean into man-made "rivers" to nourish commercial aquaculture operations, mangrove forests and crops that produce food and fuel. This greening of desert coastlines, he said, could add millions of acres of productive farmland and sequester vast quantities of carbon dioxide, the primary culprit in global warming. Hodges contends that it could also neutralize sea-level rise, in part by using exhausted freshwater aquifers as gigantic natural storage tanks for ocean water.

Analyzing recent projections of ice melt occurring in the Antarctic and Greenland, Hodges calculates that diverting the equivalent of three Mississippi Rivers inland would do the trick. He figures that would require 50 good-sized seawater farms that could be built within a decade if the world gets cracking.

I am always skeptical of large scale engineering projects meant to address large scale environmental problems. That does not mean there haven't been tremendous successes in the past, but there are lots of examples of engineering projects that resulted in unfortunate unintended consequences. One prime example has been the engineering of the Mississippi River. For a great book on the subject, check out RISING TIDE: THE GREAT MISSISSIPPI FLOOD OF 1927 AND HOW IT CHANGED AMERICA.

This may very be a pipe dream, but I do love reading about new innovative energy and agricultural products. It will be interesting to see if this is economically feasible.

HT: Environmental Capital

More Photos from the Olympic Sailing Obstacle Course

There has been some serious scooping going on as China get ready for Olympic Sailing competitions. From the Guardian:

Wang said authorities had already scooped up 300,000 tonnes from local waters and would spare no expense to ensure the sailing competition went ahead smoothly.
"We have very strong support from the government and will achieve this goal at any cost," Wang said.

You have to admit, the Chinese are very serious about these Olympics. It is kind of ironic that all these negative externalities exist as a byproduct of the rapid expansion of their economy but now they will spare no expense to make sure the environmental conditions for the Olympics are satisfactory.


From the New York Times:



From NASA's EO Newsroom:

Tough Time to Be a Coral

This week released a publication titled "The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2008". This report describes nearly half of these coral ecosystems to be in poor or fair condition. Those ecosystems adjacent to more populated areas appear to be under the greatest pressure. Threats from humans include water pollution, over-fishing, marine debris, and sedimentation. These corals are also at risk from climate-related impacts such as ocean acidification. I have briefly discussed ocean acidification in a previous post.

Today, the New York Times has a story discussing another threat to corals, farmed algae.

Corals are being covered and smothered to death by a bushy seaweed that is so tough even algae-grazing fish avoid it. It settles in the reef’s crevices that fish once called home, driving them away.

It appears that numerous countries have tried to farm two types of algae.

Kappaphycus alvarezii is most desirable because of its high carrageenan content; Eucheuma denticulatum is less valuable but easier to cultivate.

Carrageenan is used as a food binder and fat substitute. According to the article, carrageenan is found in products such as some types of ice cream (fat free?).

In this example, the farming venture has been a failure which then leads to degradation of the local corals. The article attributes this failure to numerous issues including the cultural characteristics of the people. The biggest problem is that this farming venture is a state run business.

This state-owned company was formed in 1991 to restart failed efforts by the fisheries ministry, advised by foreign consultants, to introduce seaweed farming in the 1980s. Today, after the algae were introduced to 10 islands in Kiribati, only one, Fanning in the Line Islands, is producing anything. So the government is giving up on the other nine and moving the seaweed company to Christmas Island, which is near Fanning Island and more than 2,000 miles from Tarawa.

“The government raised the price we pay to farmers to 60 cents a kilo so we lose 27 cents a kilo by the time we’ve shipped it to the processing plant,” which is 3,000 miles away in the Philippines, Mr. Rouatu said. “The government didn’t give us the difference last year, so we were only able to buy 100 tons, and the farmers are now stuck with 250 tons.”

Ah, another failed development project. There are many examples of this all over the developing world. Apparent Story: Beneficent Western Government or NGO decides small impoverished country could produce a certain product to improve economic conditions. Said government/organization does not do enough research into the characteristics of the people of impoverished country. Western government/organization helps local government develop business, but the local government does a poor job running it (surprise!) and the local people are not particularly well suited for running this type of business/farming. Local government tries to increase participation by setting minimum wages for farmers and as a result, there is local production, but costs of production are greater than market prices. Business venture deemed a failure and now byproduct of this venture is degrading the local environment.

Doesn't this seem like the storyline?

NOAA + USGS = NOGAA?

The latest Science Magazine, a group of former USGS and NOAA senior employees recommend the development of an earth systems science agency.

We propose that an Earth Systems Science Agency (ESSA) be formed by combining NOAA and USGS and by building a strong policy, administrative, and collaborative research bridge to NASA's Earth sciences program. The agency should focus on research, monitoring, communication, and the advancement of applications, particularly decision support systems that inform policy-making and guide implementation.

This discussion piece makes some very good points. As it stands, many of these scientific responsibilities are spread out among numerous different agencies. As a result, some scientific efforts seem to be duplicated while others are neglected. As it stands, these agencies are also in direct competition for resources. A single agency would have the potential to be much more efficient.

The core mission of ESSA should be to conduct and sponsor research, development, monitoring, educational, and communications activities in Earth systems science. Its portfolio should include ocean, atmospheric, terrestrial, cryosphere, freshwater, and ecological processes and the interactions among them. It should develop and communicate comprehensive information on Earth processes, including natural disasters and extreme weather events. It should generate information critical to the sustainable use of water, mineral, biomass, wind, and other resources. Also, it should provide information on the state and quality of freshwater, estuarine, and marine biological resources and nonrenewable materials resources to guide commercial and conservation activities.

This discussion piece does not touch upon the political hurdles associated with developing a single agency. That is surprising, considering the authors background. There would have to be significant political will to pull this off. Does Congress really have this type of will? I am skeptical that this could really be pulled off. NOAA is in the Department of Commerce and USGS is in the Department of the Interior. There would be a pretty substantial battle for resources.

It took September 11th to generate the momentum necessary to develop the Department of Homeland Security. While climate change is much larger in scale, it is more of a chronic problem rather than a discrete event. In my humble opinion, it is much harder to generate political momentum for these types of issues. There are probably very strong budgetary arguments for this type of move (returns to scale?), but is that enough? Is there a powerful politician out there that would champion this type of cause or is this just another pipe dream?

Hurricane Bertha

Hurricane Bertha is the first hurricane of the 2008 Atlantic Hurricane season. At this point it looks like it has a path well off the Atlantic coast, which is good news for the Southeast. However, there are numerous areas that could use some rain. Maybe an ideal situation would include this storm dropping in intensity and then dropping a little precipitation...

GE Image of Tropical Storm Bertha

Google Earth Blog posted a link to a kml file for Google Earth which allows users to track storms and view projected storm paths. Here is a picture of Tropical Storm Bertha.

Tropical Storm Bertha in Atlantic

From the National Hurricane Center

A Buffet/Berkshire Bailout with Bonds? I feel a bit like Dr Seuss!

It appears that Berkshire Hathaway has guaranteed to buy $4 billion in bonds from Florida in the event of a large scale event (> $25 billion). For this service, the state of Florida has agreed to pay Berkshire $224 million up front. From the News Journal Online:

The deal would partly shore up the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund, a state program that sells low-cost reinsurance to property-insurance companies. Reinsurance is a type of coverage that insurers buy to help pay claims after hurricanes.

With the nation's financial markets in disarray, state officials have grown increasingly concerned the catastrophe fund would not be able to borrow enough money to meet its obligations after a Hurricane Andrew-type storm.

The Herald Tribune describes the situation well:

In order to attract insurers, the state-run Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund was formed after 1992's Hurricane Andrew to reimburse insurers for major claims paid to residents.

The so-called Cat Fund has $8 billion in reserves collected from assessments on insurance policies in the state. But after Crist led the charge last year to deepen the state's risk in order to lower insurance premiums, the fund is on the hook for up to $29 billion in reimbursements to insurers this year in case of catastrophic storm damage.

This move may have been necessary due to current conditions, but there needs to be a better long term policy to address this type of risk. In a previous post, I discussed private insurer's attempt to provide flood insurance (here). This would likely give more homeowners access to flood insurance.

Howard Kunreuther of the Risk Management and Decision Processes Center at the Wharton School argues for a system with risk based premiums where policies are long term contracts tied to the property itself rather than individuals. In this proposed system premiums would be tied to mitigation measures, thus creating an incentives for these types of measures. As it stands now, people tend to under invest in these measures. He states

By mitigating existing and new homes with structural measures (e.g., better
designed roofs) one could reduce future disaster losses significantly. If all residential
homes in Florida were fully mitigated, the damage from a 100‐year hurricane would
be reduced from $84 billion to $33 billion, a decrease of 61 percent.

Get that local shrimp while you can

From the N&O:

The soaring prices are crimping North Carolina's $82 million commercial fishing industry. Unlike recreational fishing captains, who can pass on a fuel surcharge to clients, many commercial fishermen are being squeezed by low dockside prices for catches and mounting fuel bills.

As I discussed earlier, recreational fishing licenses are down and charter boats have experienced a decrease in business. In this article, we see that many commercial fishermen have reacted to rising costs by choosing not to fish. It appears that prices of shrimp and other fish have not increased enough to account for these rising operating costs.

McKeon estimated fuel costs have increased commercial fishermen's costs by 10 percent. Trucking costs for getting the catch to market also have soared, raising seafood prices in restaurants and retail fish markets. Retail prices likely will go higher, but nobody knows when the increases will make it worth leaving the dock.

It seems to be a tough time to be a commercial fisherman. On a separate note, if commercial and recreational fishing is down, I am curious how this will impact overfished stocks. Can rising gas prices have any noticeable effect on any of these species?

The Pollution Olympics?

There have been numerous stories discussing China's pollution problems and the Olympics. Many discuss Olympic athlete's worries about air pollution (for example here). Beijing has reacted by taking at least 300000cars off the road.

China's growth has obviously impacted other aspects of environmental quality besides air quality. It appears that high levels of polluted discharges and runoff has threatened Olympic sailing competition. From The International Herald Tribune:

With less than six weeks before it plays host to the Olympic sailing regatta, the city of Qingdao has mobilized thousands of people and an armada of small boats to clean up an algae bloom that is choking large stretches of the coastline and threatening to impede the Olympic competition.

You have to hand it to the Chinese, they really solve problems the old fashioned way - they order lots of people to address the problem!

Media reports estimate that as many as 20,000 people have either volunteered or been ordered to participate in the operation, while 1,000 boats are scooping algae out of the Yellow Sea.

This algae bloom covers more than 5,000 square miles of the Yellow Sea. It appears that, in addition to scooping the algae out, the Chinese will also attempt to wall off the algae. Walls and algae? Sounds like sailing competition will have an added level of difficulty! Now they just need some pirates!

Pictures below are also from The International Herald Tribune. I really like the last picture. Are those wind surfers in the background?