Meeting Notes – Ocean Acidification Workshop
April 26, 2010, St. Petersburg, Florida
Introduction of USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center and importance of
the region to marine sciences – Jack Kindinger
Overview – Ned Daly
Goals:
1. Education about ocean acidification and potential impacts
2. Open discussion about OA, what they think and if they want to/can engage
3. Look at opportunities – how can we help? What do you need?
Dr. Lisa Robins, USGS – Overview on OA, and current status on estuaries
1) Overview
A) OA anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere enters the ocean
B) This has been established since the 1950s
C) At the same time, Ph has declined
D) Calcium carbonate concentrations have also decreased
E) Worse case scenario – see slide showing Ph prediction for 2100
F) Absorption of CO2 by the ocean has been rapid, but recovery will take thousands of
years
G) OA is…
i. pH declines due to the absorption of atmospheric Co2 into ocean
ii. Fewer carbonate ions are available
a. This decrease causes a decrease in mineral saturation – impacting
calcifying organisms (ie shellfish)
b. Aragonite saturation state
 Over time the saturation of aragonite saturation has declined,
beginning in the Antarctic
 In some areas, there is no data to model this change – the Gulf of
Mexico is one of these areas – meaning, we don’t know what’s going
to happen in these areas
2) Florida Impacts
A) There is very little data on FL
B) We have some data from the Fl straits
i. Downward trend of aragonite from 1996-2006 in the straits
ii. This is one of the few data sets available for the area
iii. If the trend continues saturation will reach what is “marginal” for reefs
C) USGS is trying to fill in the data gaps
i. Monitoring CO2 fluxes on FL shelf
a. Documenting seasonal variability
b. Working with NOAA to get offshore data, to get a whole picture of the
Gulf
c. Aragonite winter saturations are quite low, higher in the summer – this
sets the baseline, provides basis for comparison
d. FL waters have a great deal of flux, this will impact the models
ii. Regional Estuary study USGS & FL dept of Ag
a. Used water quality data from shellfish harvest sites over 20-30 years, all in
estuaries
b. 70,000+ records
c. Compared average of the early 1980s to average of the early 2000s
d. 7 of 10 sites showed a significant pH change
e. 9 of 10 sites showed increase in salinity
f. 9 of 10 sites showed increase in average temperature
iii. OA is one part of the picture of what will impact fisheries – sea level rise,
and temp changes are also important factors
iv. Lab studies on organisms reaction to pH changes are at the beginning
v. Film clip: NSF Olympia oysters in CA bay “The world was our oyster”
Dr. Kimberly Yates, USGS – Impacts on coral and reef ecosystems
1) Coral reefs 101 – how will OA impact corals?
A) Reefs from over 1000s of years – making this key 3D structure
B) The vertical growth of corals helps them keep pace with sea level rise
C) There are different methods for estimating coral growth rates
2) Coral use carbonate to create their shells, when CO2 is introduced the reaction becomes
reversible, allowing for dissolution
A) Corals have biological process to regulate this process (to some degree)
B) Other reef organisms also calcify, such as algae
C) Despite differences in calcification processes, communities will calcify roughly at the
same rates
D) OA  loss in reef structure due to decrease in calcification rates and dissolution
3) Can reefs grow enough to keep up with sea level rise?
4) Our work has focused on if they are keeping up
A) Conduct experiments in FL, USVI, PR & HI to determine calcification rates
B) Data shows that ‘net’ calcification occurs during the day and dissolution at night
C) Significant sediment dissolution are already high, some reefs are already showing
erosion (ie net dissolution)
D) Dissolution threshold: what is the CO2/carbonate ion concentration when we get
net dissolution?
E) There is variation of dissolution threshold based on a number of factors – see slide
F) Based on dissolution threshold studies and predictions on argonite saturation –
dissolution will begin 2050-2065 – tipping point
G) The number of reefs “keeping up” with dissolution, based on reef accumulation, is
declining, 37% are keeping up now, while 16% are projected to be in 2050
5) OA winners
A) Temperate echinoderms – increased calcification, at the expense of tissue loss
B) Use slide for other examples
6) On fish?
A) Very limited data
B) Bivalves are like the hardest hit
Dr. Dennis Heinemann – potential ocean acidifcation impacts on fisheries
1) Very little work is being done on the impacts of ocean acidifcation on fish
2) Ocean acidification is a straight forward chemical reaction – doesn’t have the debate like
climate change
3) Most of the current data is on shellfish
4) Physiological effects – all lead to possibility of lower survival rates
A) Calcification
B) Respiration
C) Reproduction – decreased fertilization rates in invertebrates
D) Metabolism – reduced growth rates, due to environmental stress
E) Behavior Changes
F) Other impacts – We’re just beginning to understand the possible consequences
5) See PowerPoint slide showing a summary of current studies
6) Some species may experience some benefit from ocean acidification, however, other
biological processes for the same species may be hurt by ocean acidification
A) More CO2 can allow photosynthesizes to grow more
B) Maybe some crustaceans
C) But we don’t really know what will happen…
7) Pteropods
A) Corals and pteropods appear to the most vulnerable
B) Pteropods are small swimming snails, abundant in cold waters
C) Important food source, at the base of the food chain
8) OA combined with other factors, could mean the loss of coral reefs
A) Acidification might doom reefs before warming
9) Significant economic impacts on fisheries – see graphic in PowerPoint presentation
10) Adaptation?
A) Organisms will adapt, but it will be a tough selection process
B) Healthy ecosystems are more resilient to ocean acidification, if we can reduce other
stresses it would aide in adaptation
C) The aquaculture industry has more potential for adaptation because it has more
control, and can use closed containment systems, or relocate to areas where
conditions are better
D) Industry has pushed for research and monitoring
E) The only real solution is to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere but will still take time to
reverse the damage
11) Mitigation – the only real solution
A) Breaking down CO2 sources helps to make the problem more manageable (see
PowerPoint presentation graphic)
B) 2 options for mitigation by fisheries
i. Increase uptake – restore mangroves and salt marshes
ii. Reduce production of CO2 – seafood industry not a large contributor but
needs to contribute to the solution (fishing operations, processing,
transportation, distribution)
Questions/Discussion
1) When would the oceans rebound? A minimum of 500 years, if we change things
now. CO2 is a global effect that you can’t reduce locally, but you can stop
overfishing and pollution – that can increase the resilience of the local ecosystems.
We look for immediate effects, is a cultural change to get people to change their
viewpoint and look long-term.
2) There is difficulty trying to determine which stressor is causing the impact, especially
in the coastal US where there are multiple impacts (temperature, pollution, ocean
acidification)
3) Would seagrass planting be helpful? A local way to improve estuarine habitats and
mitigate? I don’t think it can hurt, and there would be other benefits – habitat
restoration, for example. Mangroves and sea grass are large sequestration forces and
it would improve the ecosystem health and coastal protection as well. Its well worth
exploring but very little of it is being done globally.
4) What are the “wish list” areas of research for OA? The top two areas are 1) figuring
out the chemistry – seasonal variation, depth variation. There has been work done
on this, but there is no standard. To understand the impacts, we need to understand
the chemistry, and to do that we need comparable standards 2) The comparison of
coastal vs. open ocean. Microcosm studies that will help us understand OA in the
real world, not just the lab but offshore and near shore studies.
5) When you deal with the public, what do you recommend as solutions, given the long
time frame to seeing results? There is debate among the conservation/science
community about “how bad do we scare people?” when talking about what we think
the future will look like. We don’t really know what the future will look like so we
have to focus on what we do know – controlling CO2 will slow climate change and
ocean acidification, making the future less bad, so if we can do that, we should. From
a political view, you need to give people something positive but that gives them false
hope. Additionally, if you don’t make it sound bad enough, they won’t act or if it’s
too bad they won’t do anything, thinking it’s hopeless. It’s the wedges approach (see
PowerPoint slide – Dennis Heinneman, showing how much CO2 is produced by
different activites), everyone has to figure out where they can contribute a reduction
in CO2 emissions and if we can fund the research, maybe a big solution will come.
6) The industry doesn’t always realize the voice they have, asking for funding and
research. Engaging themselves in the issues is key and when they have a better
understanding, we can move forward.
7) There is the research side, but also the fisheries side. Have you noticed any impacts?
Not specifically, we have seasonality and variation but I can’t point to anything
specific. Fisheries people don’t feel like they are part of the research process, making
it hard for them to buy into what scientists are saying. Industry is afraid to be put out
of work also. We could do a better job at fisheries management, but when they’re
talking about shutting down a fishery, there won’t be a lot of support. The
industry/recreational fishing hasn’t seen returns from past management decisions,
they see it as being political.
8) We’re learning that making a it local issue, is helpful to allowing people to relate.
9) Different stakeholders see the timeframe differently because of their perspectives.
Fishermen are concentrating on surviving the next few seasons but fisheries
managers are trying to rebuild over 10-20 years. If you’re out of business in 2 years,
being better off in 20 years doesn’t help. This perception of time is also the issue
with climate change, you need to act on something now that will be happening
decades in the future and those actions will cause you pain now. Until we can
reconcile the long-term and short-term view, we won’t get people to act. Policymakers are also looking short-term because they aren’t in office very long, it might
be helpful to bundle it with something that is happening right now, i.e. sea level rise
linked to storm surge.
10) In regard to local actions, we’d like to engage local people to help monitor and
gather data. In the future, there might be some intervention strategies to control and
mitigate in certain areas.
11) Ocean acidification for scientists is a hard sell because you can’t see it – there are no
pictures of shrinking sea ice, it’s not warm and fuzzy. But there are corollaries;
people in the northeast can connect because of the experience with acid rain in that
region.
12) Things like ocean acidification help make a good case for building ‘precaution’ in
the system, especially for people that are cautious of precaution. A comparison of
how a resilient ecosystem copes vs a stressed system.
13) Just like no one knows where the ecological tipping point is, we don’t know where
the societal tipping point is. Part of the reason you push everyone toward something
is to try and find the tipping point – a solution that will make a big difference. While
the ecological tipping point is working against us, the societal one could help, if we
move toward it.
14) What can we put out there as something for stakeholders to do?
What can Seafood Choices and the broader NGO community do to facilitate?
1) We don’t know much about the water body variations (ie open mouth, estuaries,
Open Ocean with regard to various pH levels). The coastal ocean is the “gap” in the
data.
2) What type of monitoring would you need in Tampa bay to look at this issue? They
aren’t currently monitoring all the things we need. There is lots of historical data that
is somewhat meaningful but it’s not robust enough to be really meaningful.
3) Monitoring
4) Educational tools
5) Research
6) Regional strategies
7) What actions people can take? – Seafood Choices should list opportunities when we
send out materials.
8) Would love to see incentives from SeaGrant or wherever for fishermen to get
involved. This is their business, not having fish in 50 years is not enough; they need
real incentives. There needs to be a win-win option.
9) Florida is a good place to get programs started; we have strong associations and
environmental groups. Make the science clear and they will be receptive.
10) Would holding something similar to the workshop specifically for your fishing
groups? Something with no “ask.” Hmmm…maybe. We’d like to help, speaking at a
meeting or helping with a newsletter insert.