[Senate Hearing 110-1153]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-1153
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND RESPONSES
IN ISLAND COMMUNITIES
=======================================================================
FIELD HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 19, 2008
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
75-205 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West TED STEVENS, Alaska, Vice Chairman
Virginia JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BARBARA BOXER, California GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BILL NELSON, Florida JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
Margaret L. Cummisky, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Lila Harper Helms, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and Policy Director
Christine D. Kurth, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel
Paul Nagle, Republican Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on March 19, 2008................................... 1
Statement of Senator Inouye...................................... 1
Witnesses
Kim, Karl, Ph.D., Professor and Chair, Department of Urban and
Regional Planning, University of Hawai`i at Manoa.............. 46
Prepared statement........................................... 49
Leong, Ph.D., Jo-Ann C., Director, Hawai`i Institute of Marine
Biology, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology,
University of Hawai`i at Manoa................................. 7
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Mackenzie, Ph.D., Fred T., Department of Oceanography, School of
Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawai'i
at Manoa....................................................... 18
Prepared statement........................................... 22
Rocheleau, Ph.D., Richard E., Director and Terry Surles,
Researcher, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, University of
Hawaii at Manoa................................................ 35
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Thomas, Bill, Director, Pacific Services Center, NOAA, U.S.
Department of Commerce......................................... 2
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Uehara, Dr. Goro, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human
Resources, University of Hawai`i at Manoa...................... 51
Prepared statement........................................... 53
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye
to:
Karl Kim, Ph.D............................................... 93
Jo-Ann C. Leong, Ph.D........................................ 71
Fred T. Mackenzie, Ph.D...................................... 71
Richard E. Rocheleau, Ph.D................................... 82
Bill Thomas.................................................. 87
Dr. Goro Uehara.............................................. 86
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND RESPONSES IN ISLAND COMMUNITIES
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Honolulu, HI.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room
325, Hawaii State Capitol Building, Honolulu, Hawaii, Hon.
Daniel K. Inouye, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
The Chairman. I'd like to thank all of you for joining us
today.
Over the past year, climate change has become a topic of
discussion, not only at the highest government levels, but
throughout the world, and it's become a political issue.
New important research and assessments continue to be
produced, which allow the public and policymakers to make more
informed decisions, and engage in more meaningful discussions.
Speaking of discussions, I believe one of the most
important ones was held last year at the United Nations Climate
Change Conference in Bali. I considered this important enough
to send some of my staff there.
This meeting, as you may be aware, established a road map
to develop a new approach that will serve as the logical
extension of the Kyoto Protocol.
Regardless of the causes of climate change, its effects are
felt by everyone. That fact is never more apparent than for
those who call this island community a home.
Islands have unique characteristics that make them
especially vulnerable to climate change and variability. While
our island state faces distinct challenges, it also has
significant opportunities when it comes to climate change,
because we're blessed with the full spectrum of renewable
sources of energy. We have multiple days of sunshine, we have a
healthy trade wind, most of the time, we have great, world-
class waves, and geothermal hot spots, so we can decrease our
dependence on fossil fuels.
Hawaii's consumers have suffered from some of the highest
fuel and utility costs in the Nation. In fact, a few days ago,
Maui hit the first $4 a gallon in the Nation. By producing our
electricity from renewable sources locally, we keep those
dollars in the state. This also means we can reduce our carbon
dioxide emissions.
Clearly we possess the natural resources to lead the
research, development and integration of clean, renewable
energy technologies, and become a model for the rest of the
Nation. We've already taken significant steps.
Locally, Honolulu is one of the more than 170 local
governments participating in the Cities for Climate Protection.
At the state level, Hawaii is one of only three states that
have passed laws establishing mandatory, economy-wide,
greenhouse gas emission limits, requiring the states or the
utilities to provide 20 percent of electricity production from
renewable sources by 2020.
In February, Hawaii partnered with DOE to produce 70
percent of the state's energy from renewable resources by 2030.
We're the only state to create this kind of partnership, so
we're ahead of the curve.
We're also addressing climate change issues beyond energy,
for example, Hawaii has taken steps to lead in planning and
adapting to the impacts of climate change and other natural
disasters through the newly authorized National Disaster
Preparedness Training Center, housed at the University of
Hawai`i.
So, I look forward to the testimony of the distinguished
witnesses we have assembled here, to hear more about our
involvement in understanding climate issues, and how we're
responding to the opportunities and challenges.
Our first witness is the Director of the Pacific Services
Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Mr.
Bill Thomas.
Mr. Thomas, welcome, sir.
STATEMENT OF BILL THOMAS, DIRECTOR, PACIFIC SERVICES CENTER,
NOAA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Mr. Thomas. Thank you, Senator. Good morning, Senator
Inouye, Members of the Committee. I'm Bill Thomas, Director of
NOAA's Pacific Services Center, and I'd like to extend my
sincerest mahalo for the opportunity to testify on the impacts
of climate change on the Hawaiian Pacific Islands, and those
efforts to assist the region in managing their resources in the
face of this challenge.
It's well-documented in scientific literature and
publicized in the media, that our changing climate will have
impacts on a global scale, and as you stated earlier, island
communities are particularly susceptible to climate change.
In 2007, a NOAA-sponsored Coastal Zone Visioning Session
held right here, in Hawaii, identified climate change as its
number one issue. In addition, at a recent meeting of all
island coastal managers, every jurisdiction set climate change
as their most important area of concern.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's recently
published Assessment Report, and other similar reports, have
identified small island communities as particularly vulnerable
to climate variability and change. The impacts highlighted in
these reports include the following: sea level rise is expected
to exacerbate coastal hazards, there's a projected reduction in
water resources in many small islands--the Pacific and the
Caribbean, alike--to the point where, by mid-century, resources
may be insufficient to meet demand during low rainfall periods.
Invasion of non-native species is expected to occur with rising
temperatures, and other existing human influences on fisheries
and marine ecosystems, such as over-fishing, habitat
destruction, pollution and excess nutrients will be
exacerbated.
But currently scientists and decisionmakers in the Pacific
are engaged in individual and collaborative efforts to
understand the nature of the climate change impacts described
in the IPCC's report, and explore our options for both
mitigation, and adaptation.
This shared effort involves NOAA, other Federal partners,
state agencies, university scientists, community leaders, and
non-governmental organizations. NOAA's Pacific Region is
engaged in a number of initiatives to help our island
communities both to collect atmospheric and oceanic data, and
plan for, mitigate against, and adapt to climate change.
I'll now highlight a few prominent efforts, I also have a
longer list in my written testimony.
Observations and data collection--NOAA is undertaking a
number of critical climate programs and activities, including
contributing to global and regional climate and ocean observing
systems, providing operational forecasts on climate
variability, and developing improved models that provide long-
term projections on climate change.
In fact, NOAA's Mauna Lau Observatory has been measuring
atmospheric gases for over 50 years, and the data has been
instrumental in forming the basis for the theory of global
atmospheric change.
On a regional scale, NOAA has developed the Pacific Climate
Information System, or PaCIS, an integrated organization that
brings together NOAA's regional assets, as well as those of its
partners, to provide a programmatic framework to integrate
ongoing and future climate observations, forecasting services
and climate projections, and outreach and communications that
will address the needs of American flag, and U.S.-affiliated
Pacific Islands.
PaCIS will also serve as the United States contribution to
the World Meteorological Organization's Regional Climate Centre
for Oceania.
Risk management decision-support tools--discussions with
Pacific disaster management agencies and coastal managers over
the past decade have highlighted concerns about sea level rise
and coastal inundation as one of the most significant climate-
related issues facing our coastal communities in the Pacific.
As a result, in 2003 NOAA formed the Pacific Risk
Management `Ohana, or PRMO, which is a network of partners and
stakeholders involved in the development and delivery of risk
management-related information, products and services in the
Pacific.
This multi-agency, multi-organizational, multi-national
group, brings together representatives from agencies,
institutions and organizations involved in Pacific risk
management-related projects and activities, with the overall
goal of enhancing communication, coordination, and
collaboration among the `ohana of partners and stakeholders
involved in this work.
As a result of this collaboration, several ideas that
emerged over the years have led to the development of decision-
support and community planning tools that aid managers and the
general public in better understanding risks, and in making the
best possible socio-economic decisions.
In conclusion, again, I'd like to thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. NOAA's Pacific Region
will continue to work with our island communities to develop
tools, products and services, to move toward realizing NOAA's
vision of an informed society that uses a comprehensive
understanding of the role of the oceans, coasts, and atmosphere
in the global ecosystem to make the best social and economic
decisions. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Thomas follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bill Thomas, Director, Pacific Services Center,
NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce
Introduction
Good morning, Senator Inouye and Members of the Committee. I am
Bill Thomas, Director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Pacific Services Center. I thank you for the
opportunity to testify on the impacts of climate change on Hawaii and
the Pacific Islands and NOAA's efforts to assist the region in managing
their resources in the face of this challenge.
Over the last 50 years, researchers at NOAA's Mauna Loa Observatory
(MLO) in Hawai'i have been measuring the increasing concentrations of
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere.
This long-term carbon dioxide record has been instrumental in forming
the basis for the theory of global atmospheric change as well as acting
as a catalyst for international policies. It is now well-documented in
scientific literature and publicized in the media that our changing
climate will have impacts on a global scale. Today, we must now begin
to understand and address the impacts of climate change in highly
vulnerable locations.
Island communities, such as Hawai'i and other Pacific Islands, are
particularly susceptible to climate change impacts. This was apparent
to participants at a coastal zone visioning session held in Hawai'i in
2007, organized by NOAA and sponsored by its Pacific Region, where
climate change was identified as the number one issue. In addition, at
a recent meeting of island coastal managers, every jurisdiction cited
climate change as their most important area of concern.
Changing Climate and its Impacts on Pacific Islands
The recently published Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR4) has updated the
projections of changing climate conditions (i.e., temperature,
rainfall, sea level, and extreme events) and the consequences for
Pacific Islands and other small island states. IPCC-AR4 confirms the
vulnerabilities identified in the 2001 Pacific Islands regional
assessment and provides insights into then less widely understood
climate-related challenges such as ocean acidification.
The IPCC-AR4 and similar climate assessment reports identify small
island communities like those in the Pacific as particularly vulnerable
to climate variability and change. There are similar threads regarding
small island impacts that run through such reports including:
Deterioration of coastal conditions is expected to affect
local resources and reduce their value as tourist destinations
(e.g., the combined effect of increased ocean temperatures and
ocean acidification on coral reef resources).
Sea level rise is expected to exacerbate coastal hazards
such as inundation, storm surge and erosion as well as
reduction of freshwater availability due to saltwater
intrusion, especially in low-lying islands.
Climate change is projected to reduce water resources in
many small islands (Pacific and Caribbean) to the point where,
by mid-century, resources may be insufficient to meet demand
during low rainfall periods.
Invasion of non-native species is expected to occur with
rising temperatures.
Climate change will exacerbate other existing human
influences on fisheries and marine ecosystems such as over-
fishing, habitat destruction, pollution, and excess nutrients.
NOAA in the Pacific Islands: Developing Capacity to Deal with Climate
Change
NOAA's Pacific Region is a hallmark of an integrated approach to
problem-solving.
The Pacific Risk Management `Ohana (PRiMO)
The Pacific Risk Management `Ohana (PRiMO) is a network of partners
and stakeholders involved in the development and delivery of risk
management-related information, products, and services in the Pacific
and is led by the NOAA Pacific Services Center. Established in 2003,
this multi-agency, multi-organizational, multi-national group brings
together representatives from agencies, institutions, and organizations
involved in Pacific risk management-related projects and activities
with the overall goal of enhancing communication, coordination, and
collaboration among the `ohana of partners and stakeholders involved in
this work. As a result of this collaboration, several ideas that
emerged over the years have led to the development of decision-support
and community planning tools that aid a cross section from managers to
the general public in better understanding risks and in making the best
possible socio-economic decisions. Examples of these collaborations
include:
Decision Support Tools
Hazard Assessment Tools (HATs) have been developed in
partnership with NOAA's Pacific Region, local governments in
American Samoa, Guam, and Hawai'i (County of Kaua'i). These
tools use Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps to
integrate hazard risk information, such as sea level rise
projections, along with local information on infrastructure,
natural resources, and administrative boundaries to improve
both short and long term decisionmaking.
The Hazard Education and Awareness Tool (HEAT) is a template
which allows any organization the ability to create a simple
website which provides public access to local hazard maps for
their community. Additional information on appropriate response
and preparedness actions are also included.
Nonpoint Source Pollution and Erosion Comparison Tool (N-
SPECT) is a decision support tool which allows coastal managers
to compare potential water quality impacts of land cover change
that may occur from changes in climate.
Data
The Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) is a nationally
standardized database of land cover and land change
information, developed using remotely sensed imagery, for the
coastal regions of the U.S. C-CAP products inventory coastal
intertidal areas, wetlands, and adjacent uplands with the goal
of monitoring these habitats by updating the land cover maps
every 5 years. Its primary objective is to improve scientific
understanding of the linkages between coastal wetland habitats,
adjacent uplands, and living marine resources. Land cover data
from C-CAP has been developed for Hawai'i from satellite images
acquired in both 2000 and 2005. High resolution elevation data
for Hawai'i was collected in 2005 using Interferometric
Synthetic Aperture Radar (IFSAR). This elevation data provides
resource managers with the highest resolution elevation data
currently available for Hawai'i. This data is invaluable for
determining potential impacts of changes in climate, such as
sea level rise, in areas where higher resolution data may not
be available.
Community Planning Tools
The Coastal Community Resilience (CCR) Guide presents a
framework for assessing resilience of communities to coastal
hazards. The work was the result of a partnership funded
through the Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning System Program and is
being piloted for application in Hawai'i. The framework,
developed in concert with over 140 international partners,
encourages integration of coastal resource management,
community development, and disaster management for enhancing
resilience to hazards, including those that may occur as a
result of climate change.
The Pacific Enso Application Center (PEAC)
Pacific Island communities continually deal with dramatic seasonal
and year-to-year changes in rainfall, temperature, water levels and
tropical cyclone patterns associated with the El Nino-Southern
Oscillation (ENSO) cycle in the Pacific. This dynamic system involving
the Pacific Ocean and the atmosphere above it can bring droughts,
floods, landslides, and changes in exposure to tropical storms.
Fourteen years ago, NOAA joined forces with the University of Hawai'i,
the University of Guam, and the Pacific Basin Development Council to
begin a small research pilot project designed to develop, deliver, and
use forecasts of El Nino-based changes in temperature, rainfall, and
storms to support decisionmaking in the American Flag and U.S.-
Affiliated Pacific Islands. That pilot project--the Pacific ENSO
Applications Center (PEAC)--continues its work today as part of the
operational National Weather Service programs in the Pacific. The PEAC
experience has demonstrated the practical value of climate information
for water resource management, disaster management, coastal resource
planning, agriculture, and public health.
The Pacific Climate Information System (PaCIS)
The experience gained from PEAC has helped inform the emergence of
a comprehensive Pacific Climate Information System (PaCIS). As an
integrated organization that brings together NOAA's regional assets as
well as those of its partners, PaCIS provides, on a regional scale, a
programmatic framework to integrate ongoing and future climate
observations, operational forecasting services, and climate
projections, research, assessment, data management, communication,
outreach and education that will address the needs of American Flag and
U.S.-Affiliated Pacific Islands. Within this structure, PaCIS will also
serve as a United States' contribution to the World Meteorological
Organization's Regional Climate Centre for Oceania and represents the
first integrated, regional climate service in the context of emerging
planning for a National Climate Service.
Scientists and decision-makers in Pacific Island communities are
now engaged in individual and collaborative efforts to understand the
nature of the climate change impacts described in IPCC-AR4 and explore
our options for both mitigation and adaptation. This shared effort
involves NOAA, other Federal programs, state agencies, university
scientists, community leaders and nongovernmental organizations.
Together they are bringing their unique insights and capabilities to
bear on a number of critical climate programs and activities including:
contributions to global and regional climate and ocean observing
systems; operational forecasts of seasonal-to-interannual climate
variability; development and analysis of improved models that provide
long-term projections of climate change; multi-disciplinary assessments
of climate vulnerability, climate data stewardship, the development of
new products and services to support adaptation and mitigation in the
Pacific, and education and outreach programs to increase the climate
(and environmental literacy) of Pacific Island communities,
governments, and businesses. One of the newest activities involves a
summary of the most recently published work on climate change and
vulnerability in key sectors such as agriculture, water resources, and
coastal infrastructure in the context of a Pacific regional
contribution to a new Unified Synthesis Report of the U.S. Climate
Change Science Program. This work is being supported and led by NOAA
through its Integrated Data and Environmental Applications (NOAA IDEA)
Center in Honolulu. While led by the NOAA IDEA Center, the full range
of regional assets of NOAA in the Pacific are being brought to bear on
this critical issue.
Future planning for a number of climate programs in the Pacific
will be organized in the context of PaCIS including building upon the
PEAC, the Pacific Islands Regional Integrated Science and Assessment
(Pacific RISA) program and other related climate activities in the
region. In addition to meeting the specific needs of U.S. affiliated
jurisdictions in the Pacific, PaCIS will also provide a venue in which
to discuss the role of U.S. contributions to other climate-related
activities in the Pacific including, for example, observing system
programs in the region, such as the Pacific Islands Global Climate
Observing System (PI-GCOS) and the Pacific Islands Global Ocean
Observing System (PI-GOOS), as part of an integrated climate
information system.
In order to further define the roles and capabilities of PaCIS, a
steering committee has been selected incorporating PEAC, the Pacific
RISA, PI-GCOS, U.S. National Weather Service Operations Service and
Climate Services Division, and their partners, as well as experts and
users of climate science and applications in the region. The PaCIS
Steering Committee, made up of representatives of institutions and
programs working in the fields of climate observations, science,
assessment, and services in the Pacific, as well as selected
individuals with expertise in similar regional climate science and
service programs in other regions, will provide a forum for sharing
knowledge and experience and guide the development and implementation
of this integrated, regional climate information program.
The Pacific Region Integrated Coastal Climatology Program (PRICIP)
Discussions with Pacific disaster management agencies and coastal
managers over the past decade have highlighted concerns about sea level
rise and coastal inundation as one of the most significant climate-
related issues facing coastal communities in the Pacific. In light of
this need, NOAA, through its IDEA Center with support from the Pacific
Services Center and working with colleagues throughout NOAA, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Geological Survey and university
scientists in Hawaii, Guam, Alaska, and Oregon, initiated the Pacific
Region Integrated Coastal Climatology Program (PRICIP). PRICIP
recognizes that coastal storms and the strong winds, heavy rains, and
high seas that accompany them pose a threat to the lives and
livelihoods of the people of the Pacific. To reduce their
vulnerability, decision-makers in Pacific Island governments,
communities, and businesses need timely access to accurate information
that affords them an opportunity to plan and respond accordingly. The
PRICIP project is helping to improve our understanding of patterns and
trends of storm frequency and intensity within the Pacific Region and
develop a suite of integrated information products that can be used by
emergency managers, mitigation planners, government agencies, and
decision-makers in key sectors including water and natural resource
management, agriculture, fisheries, transportation, communications,
recreation, and tourism.
As part of the initial build-out, a PRICIP web portal is serving a
set of historical storm ``event anatomies.'' These event anatomies
include a summary of sector-specific socio-economic impacts associated
with a particular extreme event as well as its historical context
climatologically. The intent is to convey the impacts associated with
extreme events and the causes of them in a way that enables users to
easily understand them. The event anatomies are also intended to
familiarize users with in situ and remotely-sensed products typically
employed to track and forecast weather and climate.
Hawaiian Archipelagic Marine Ecosystem Research (HAMER)
The Hawaiian Archipelagic Marine Ecosystem Research Plan (HAMER) is
a collaborative planning process to develop sustainable conservation
and management throughout Hawai'i's marine ecosystem through improved
understanding of the unique physical and biological attributes of the
Hawaiian archipelagic marine ecosystem, their interconnected dynamics,
and their interactions with human beings. By using Hawai'i as a large-
scale archipelagic laboratory for the investigation of biophysical
processes, comparing the protected Northwestern Hawaiian Islands to the
heavily used Main Hawaiian Islands and integrating socioeconomic
information, Hawai'i and comparable marine ecosystems worldwide should
realize improvements in resource management and community response to
changes in climate.
While this project is in its formative stages, the information
generated by this projected 10-year multi-agency, collaborative program
will:
Fill critical and important research gaps in the underlying
science of marine ecosystem dynamics.
Complement national, international, and state ecosystem
research initiatives.
Improve understanding of the behavior of humans in a marine
ecosystem approach to conservation and management.
Formulate predictive theory of ecosystem dynamics relative
to physical and biological variables, and
Generate useful information for conservation managers.
Conclusion
NOAA's Pacific Region is engaged in a number of ways to help the
Pacific Islands plan for, mitigate against, and adapt to climate
change. This is not an exhaustive list. I have highlighted efforts that
are most prominent at this time. The development of NOAA's products and
services as they relate to climate change is as dynamic as the issue
itself.
NOAA's Pacific Region will continue to work with our island
communities to develop tools, products, and services to move toward
realizing NOAA's vision of, ``An informed society that uses a
comprehensive understanding of the role of the oceans, coasts and
atmosphere in the global ecosystem to make the best social and economic
decisions.''
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
The Chairman. I thank you very much, Mr. Thomas.
Next witness is the Director of the Hawai`i Institute of
Marine Biology, Dr. Jo-Ann Leong.
Dr. Leong?
STATEMENT OF JO-ANN C. LEONG, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, HAWAI`I
INSTITUTE OF MARINE BIOLOGY, SCHOOL OF OCEAN AND EARTH SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI`I AT MANOA
Dr. Leong. Thank you.
Good morning, Senator, and Members of the Committee. Thank
you for the opportunity to speak before you on the impacts of
climate change on Hawaii's species at the level of coral
resilience and resistance to invasive species.
Again, my name is Jo-Ann Leong, and I serve as Director of
the Hawai`i Institute of Marine Biology and I represent a group
of scientists whose major research effort includes a study of
coral reef ecosystems.
We also provide research for the new Papahanaumokuakea
Marine National Monument through an MOA with the Pacific Island
Regional Sanctuary Office.
One of the fundamental questions being addressed by HIMB
researchers for the Monument is, what factors are important in
coral reef resilience? In particular, we are examining the role
of biological connectivity in reef restoration, and the role of
genetic and species diversity in the ability of reefs to bounce
back after a disturbance.
In today's testimony I would like to focus on the following
points: One, thermal stress and bleaching, coral disease and
ocean acidification are real threats to the coral reef
ecosystem in Hawaii, and particularly, in the Northwestern
Hawaiian Islands.
Two, genetic analysis, coupled with spatial and physical
measurements are needed to tell us about the role of genetic
diversity and coral resistance to temperature stress.
Three, biological connectivity studies indicate that we
need to manage coral reefs as individual units, and not as a
single chain of islands and atolls. Our studies show that these
islands and atolls may not be biologically connected, and
therefore capable of replenishing each other, should one member
of the chain experience a stress event. And I'll get back to
that.
Now, recommendations for controlling the spread of invasive
species have been developed for the Northwestern Hawaiian
Islands, and I've provided copies for the Committee, in the
back. And genetic technologies are useful in identifying the
origin of invasive species to truly find out whether they're
really invasive, or that the ecosystem has changed, and an
epedemic has now begun to take over.
Ocean acidification will affect the crustose coralline
algae, as well as the stony corals, and that may have an even
more dramatic effect on the future of coral reefs.
Now, I offer these points in the context of what Hawaii can
offer to this study. We have a Hawaiian archipelago, the
largest living coral reef ecosystem in the United States. It
stretches over a distance of 1,500-plus miles, with 132 islands
and atolls, reefs, shallow banks, shoals and sea mounts. This
lovely set of islands, from Kure Atoll in the Northwest, to the
Big Island of Oahu in the Southeast, offers natural gradients
in island evolution, and now, temperature regimes; and a
gradient of anthropogenic stressors with dense human
populations in the South, to the relatively pristine
environment in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. This makes
Hawaii a natural laboratory to study the effects of climate
change on global coral reefs, and in that process, develop
recommendations to protect those reefs. It really is our
responsibility, sir.
I have provided written testimony that far exceeds the
amount of time I have before you today, so let me point out
five findings that have bearing on our discussion.
The role of species diversity at both the organismal and
genetic level in reef resilience has not been determined.
We assume from other ecological studies that redundancy in
an ecosystem function offered by high species diversity will
also work in a coral reef ecosystem. So, that if one goes out,
you will have another to take its place. We are just beginning
to conduct those studies, here in Hawaii. Scientists have
finally put temperature monitors across a reef--so we've wired
a reef--and sampled every coral in that reef, so that we know
what the genotype of that coral is.
So, what we found is that in a reef there are hot spots,
and there are cool spots. So, the patchiness of a bleaching may
be due to those physical change dynamics.
The genotype and the symbiont in those corals are just
being determined now, and I hope to be able to give you an
update and a briefing in another 6 to 9 months.
The incidents of coral disease appears to be increasing in
Hawaii. At least 17 coral diseases have been described.
Experience with bleached corals in other parts of the world
indicates that we will see more disease among our corals,
because we've already had three episodes of bleaching in
Hawaii.
The immunologic agents for these diseases have not been
determined. Hawaii, and the Pacific Region, needs a safe
facility for conducting studies that might identify these
agents, and provide some methods for treating disease. We can
not work on that--and we will not work on that--unless those
safe facilities are available.
Invasive species come in many forms, that's point number
three, and it is the small ones that usually escape our eye.
This is the case for micro-algal symbiont for corals. I have
highlighted a study in my written testimony from Ruth Gates and
Michael State at HIMB. They have identified a genotype of
zooxanthellae which is the micro-algae in the coral, it's a
symbiont and it belongs to what we call clade A. And clade A is
a genotype you normally don't find in the Pacific. It is found
in a jellyfish called cassiopeia, which is a foreign
introduction into Hawaii, from the Caribbean.
And what we found is that, we found this clade A in corals
in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands at French Frigate Shoals.
And there was a high correlation with this Clade A in these
corals, and disease susceptibility. So, we have to be careful
at that level, about the introduction of invasive species.
Now, please note that we have provided the Committee with
20 copies of a plan for monitoring invasive species, and I've
also provided these little booklets, or little cards, which
contain coral diseases for the rest of the Committee. And
they're provided from the Department of Aquatic Resources.
You need to tell me if I'm going over time.
Biological connectivity is one of the key factors that are
used in the designs of marine protected areas. We work in the
largest marine protected area in the United States, and we
don't know whether this MPA can provide the protection to
preserve these marine resources.
Rod Toonen and Brian Bowen have been tracking the movement
of the larvae of fish and invertebrates to ask when--are any of
these atolls and islands can serve to replenish a neighboring
island or system. We have found the answers to that question
differs greatly among species, and that no one species can
represent any other species in that taxa.
So, I was going to refer you to my written testimony, which
is showing on Figure 2. And in this it shows you blocks--yellow
blocks--in the archipelago. And those yellow blocks identify
barriers to gene flow exchange between one system and another
system. That tells you that you have to be very careful in
developing management of any ecosystem, because there might not
be enough gene flow to replenish a system from another system
that is protected in that area. And you need to know that
information.
OK, ocean acidification will affect Hawaii, on its northern
end first. Some of the key studies on the effect of pH on
calcification rates was done in Hawaii. One of the most
interesting findings that has just emerged, is that ocean
acidification will affect the crustose coralline algae. The
coral reef glue that holds reef together, and provides the cues
for the settlement of coral larvae on the reef.
This is a critical finding, and we need to identify the
effects of slight changes in pH on other marine calcifiers.
To end this testimony, I ask the Committee to carefully
consider the recommendations on page 16 [of this transcript],
for critical research needs. I made a plea for the need for
facilities to conduct studies on coral disease with native and
non-regional corals of the Coral Conservation Program workshop
last year.
We also need, in the Pacific Region, sites where research
will be able to conduct experiments on coral reef misocosms
that can be replicated under controlled, measurable conditions.
This is not available to anyone, anywhere.
And, thank you again for this opportunity, Senator Inouye,
and Members of the Committee, and I'm willing to take
questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Leong follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jo-Ann C. Leong, Ph.D., Director, Hawai`i
Institute of Marine Biology, School of Ocean and Earth Science and
Technology, University of Hawai`i at Manoa
Introduction
Good morning Senator Inouye and members of the Committee. Thank you
for the opportunity to speak before you on the impacts of climate
change on Hawai'i's myriad ocean species at the level of coral reef
resilience and resistance to invasive species. My name is Jo-Ann Leong
and I serve as Director of the Hawai'i Institute of Marine Biology. I
represent a group of scientists whose major research effort includes
the study of coral reef ecosystems and the biological connectivity
between the islands and atolls of the Hawaiian Archipelago. We have a
memorandum of agreement with the NOAA Pacific Regional Sanctuary office
to provide research for the new Papahanaumokuakea Marine National
Monument.
Current models for sea surface temperature (SST) and seawater
CO2 saturation in the coming decades suggest that the
Hawaiian Archipelago will experience rises in sea levels, increased
episodes of coral bleaching, and decreased aragonite saturation in its
ocean waters (Guinotte, Buddemeier, Kleypas 2003; IPCC, 2007 working
group I report; E. Shea, Preparing for a Changing Climate, 2001).
Higher sea surface temperatures produced severe bleaching events in the
main Hawaiian Islands in 1996 and in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands
(NWHI) in 2002 and 2004. Climate experts are virtually certain that
more episodes of coral bleaching are in store for Hawai'i. Moreover, by
2049, ocean acidification is expected to have a marked effect in the
waters surrounding Kure and Midway Atolls. These climate changes will
have an impact on the marine resources of the Hawaiian Archipelago.
One of the fundamental questions being addressed by the research at
HIMB is what factors are important in coral reef resilience. In
particular, we are examining the role of biological connectivity in
reef restoration and the role of genetic and species diversity in the
ability of reefs to bounce back after a disturbance. In today's
testimony, I would like to focus the following points:
1. Thermal stress and bleaching, coral disease, and ocean
acidification are real threats to the coral reef ecosystem in
Hawai'i and particularly in the NWHI.
2. Genetic analysis coupled with spatial and physical
measurements are needed to tell us about the role of genetic
diversity in coral resistance to temperature stress.
3. Biological connectivity studies indicate that we need to
manage coral reefs as individual units and not as a single
chain of islands and atolls. Our studies show that these
islands and atolls are not biologically connected and therefore
capable of replenishing each other should one member of the
chain experience a stress event.
4. Recommendations for controlling the spread of invasive
species have been developed for the NWHI and genetic
technologies are useful in identifying the origin of invasive
species.
5. Ocean acidification will affect the crustose coralline algae
as well as the stony corals and that may have an even more
dramatic effect on the future of coral reefs.
Coral Bleaching Events in Hawai'i
Although coral bleaching due to high temperature was first
described in Hawai'i by Jokiel and Coles (1974) off Kahe Point (O'ahu)
electric generating station, the isolated subtropical location of
Hawai'i was thought to be sufficient to protect its corals from the
bleaching outbreaks that have ravaged coral communities elsewhere.
However, in the late summer of 1996, the first large-scale bleaching
event in the main Hawaiian Islands occurred (Jokiel & Brown, 2004) and
another major bleaching event occurred in the Northwestern Hawaiian
Islands (NWHI) in the Summer of 2002 (Brainard, 2002; Aeby et al.,
2003). In September 2004, a third Hawaiian coral bleaching event
occurred at the three northern atolls (Pearl and Hermes, Midway, Kure)
(Kenyon & Brainard, 2005). Clearly, Hawai'i is not immune to large
scale coral bleaching events.
Mean summer monthly temperatures in Hawaiian waters are
approximately 27 1 +C. A 30-day exposure to temperatures
of only 29-30 +C will cause extensive bleaching in Hawaiian corals
(Jokiel & Coles, 1990). Combined with high irradiance (clear days) and
low winds, water temperatures can be 1-2 +C higher in certain coastal
regions. The ``degree heating weeks'' (DHW) (1 week of SSTs greater
than the maximum in the monthly climatology) over a rolling 12 week
period now serves as an indicator of the likelihood of bleaching.
Whether the single factor of temperature increase is sufficient to
predict coral bleaching is unclear since hind sight analysis of SST
data note the absence of bleaching reports in Hawai'i when SST data
indicated that there should have been bleaching in 1968 and 1974.
Nevertheless, DHW is used by NOAA's Coral Reef Watch program because it
gives a first alert to investigators and the public of possible coral
bleaching events.
Hawai'i's coral reefs did recover from the bleaching. During the
1996 episode on O'ahu, the corals were closely monitored for recovery
in Kane'ohe Bay. A month after the height of the bleaching episode, the
slightly bleached corals regained pigmentation, and 2 months later, the
completely bleached corals had recovered. Overall coral mortality
during the event was less than 2 percent. The rate of recovery was
related to bleaching sensitivity, i.e., the first corals to bleach were
the last to recover. Most of the bleached corals at Kure, Midway and
Pearl and Hermes involved in the September 2002 event also recovered by
December 2002 except for the Montipora capitata. Estimates of 30
percent of the montiporids did not recover from this bleaching event in
the back reef sections of Midway, Pearl and Hermes Atolls (Kenyon and
Brainard, 2006).
A comparison of the sensitivity of different corals to bleaching is
shown in Table 1. In general, the montiporid and pocilloporid corals
were sensitive to thermal stress and the poritid corals were more
resistant. But even these more sensitive corals have resistant members
in a bleaching event and scientists are beginning to focus on these
coral ``survivors'' for answers to the question of whether coral reefs
will survive to 2100. The first question asked by Steve Karl, a
researcher at HIMB, was whether the temperature gradients across a reef
were uniform. Thus, if corals responded to thermal stress by bleaching,
then perhaps those corals that did not bleach were those corals that
inhabited cool spots on the reef. A careful study with miniature
temperature monitors placed at 4 M intervals throughout a reef has
shown that there are hot spots and cool spots within a reef and this
may account for the patchiness of coral bleaching. In addition, Steve
and his group have mapped every single coral in the reef and the
genotype for each coral is being determined. The question being
addressed is whether the corals are genetically distinct (produced by
sexual reproduction) or clonally derived (produced by breakage and
regrowth from a parent colony). This research may provide some answers
regarding the role of genotype in thermal resistance. Steve's study is
being carried out at Kane'ohe Bay, French Frigate Shoals, and Pearl &
Hermes Atoll. In addition to the genotype analysis, Steve is working
with HIMB researcher Ruth Gates to determine if there are differences
in the zooxanthellae symbiont type in the resistant and sensitive
corals. Symbiont type has been identified as a key factor in resistance
to thermal stress in corals (Baker, 2004; Little, van Oppen, & Willis,
2004; Berkelmans and van Oppen, 2006; Middlebrook, Hoegh-Guldberg, and
Leggat, 2008)).
Table 1. Relative Resistance of Corals to Bleaching in Hawai'i
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane'ohe Bay 1996 NWHI 2002, 2004
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highly Resistance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Porites evermanni Porites compressa
Cyphastrea ocellina Porites lobata
Fungia scutaria Montipora flabellata
Porites brighami
Moderate Resistance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Porites compressa Porites evermanni (Maro,
Laysan, Lisianski)
Porites lobata
Montipora patula Montipora patula (Maro,
Laysan, Lisianski)
Montipora capitata
Low resistance (most sensitive to
bleaching)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montipora turgescens
Montipora flabellata Montipora patula
Pocillopora meandrina Montipora capitata
Pocillopora damicornis Pocillopora damicornis
Montipora dilitata. Pocillopora ligulata
Pocillopora meandrina
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compiled from Jokiel & Brown, 2004; Aeby, Kenyon, Maragos, and Potts,
2003; Kenyon and Brainard, 2006.
Coral Disease in Hawai'i
Coral diseases have emerged as a serious threat to coral reefs
worldwide and Hawai'i has its own set of coral diseases. There are at
least 17 described coral diseases in Hawai'i (Work & Rameyer 2001; Work
et al., 2002; Aeby, 2006; Friedlander et al., 2005). In general, coral
disease is found to be widespread on reefs but occurs at a low
prevalence. However, disease outbreaks with more serious effects are
starting to occur in Hawai'i. The white syndrome resulting from tissue
necrosis and loss in Acropora cytherea has appeared at French Frigate
shoals, a pristine area presumably free from anthropogenic stressors.
In Kane'ohe Bay on O'ahu, Montipora capitata are showing progressive
signs of tissue loss (Figure 1F). The etiology (cause) of these
diseases has not been determined because no facility for the safe
conduct on this research is available in the Pacific. Nevertheless, we
must continue to monitor these outbreaks. Experiences with bleached
corals in other parts of the world indicate that bleached corals are
more susceptible to disease (Bally and Garrabou, 2007). If this is
true, Hawai'i should expect more disease outbreaks.
Figure 1. Some coral disease found in Hawai'i. A. Porites
trematodiases. B. Acropora white syndrome. C. Porites growth anomalies.
D. Pocillopora white band disease. E. Acropora growth anomalies. F.
Montipora white syndrome. H. Montipora multi-focal tissue loss
syndrome. I. Montipora dark band. J. Dark spot disease caused by
endolithic hypermycosis.
Genetics, Diversity, and Coral Reef Resilience
Resilience of ecosystems was originally defined by C.S. Holling in
1973 as the ability of systems to absorb, resist or recover from
disturbances or to adapt to change while continuing to maintain
essential functions and processes. For coral reefs, resilience is the
term used to describe the ability of coral reefs to bounce back or
recover after experiencing a stressful event such as bleaching.
Resistance, in turn, refers to the ability of coral communities to
remain relatively unchanged in the face of a major disturbance.
Ensuring reef resilience is an important aim for all present and
future marine protected areas in Hawai'i. The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
has done an admirable job in developing a model of reef resilience. The
four principles of reef resilience that TNC have identified are:
1. Provide adequate replicates of habitat types to decrease the
risk of catastrophic events, such as bleaching, from destroying
the entire ecosystem.
2. Identify as high priority conservation targets those areas
vital for the survival and sustainability of the coral reef
ecosystem, i.e., nursery habitats, regions of high diversity.
3. Ensure connectivity among reefs to ensure replenishment of
coral communities and fish stocks to enhance recovery in case
of a catastrophic event.
4. Reducing threats to the environment by effective management.
In the HIMB-Monument research partnership, we are examining the
issue of biological connectivity among the reefs and atolls in the
Northwestern Hawaiian Islands and its possible connectivity to the Main
Hawaiian Islands. The work of HIMB researchers Rob Toonen and Brian
Bowen and their colleagues shows that the answer to this question
differs greatly among species, and that single studies of individual
species tell us little about how to manage any other population (Bird
et al., 2007). Although these are preliminary results, the extensive
survey currently underway suggests that many of the fishes are well-
connected throughout the archipelago. In contrast, the corals and other
invertebrates that form the reefs are far more isolated, and must
therefore be managed carefully on a local scale to persist. Despite the
differences among species, however, some striking patterns of isolation
emerge; there are consistent breaks in exchange of individuals across
many species that divide regions of the Hawaiian Archipelago (Figure
2). Notably, there is a consistent break between populations found at
the Big Island, Kauai, and between the Main and NWHI, with the
predominant direction of exchange being to the northwest rather than to
the southeast. Additionally, even for fishes--which show the highest
degree of connectivity in our studies--the rate of exchange is too low
to subsidize fisheries stocks in the Main Hawaiian Islands, suggesting
that regional or community-based management will be the most effective
route for the future (Bird et al., 2007).
Figure 2. Shared genetic breaks among diverse species (including
Spinner dolphins, sharks, opihi, tube snails, lobsters, and sea
cucumbers) across the Hawaiian Archipelago. Although patterns of
population structure differ by species in each case, the four regions
highlighted in this figure appear to limit exchange across a broad
range of marine taxa.
A major contributor to reef resilience is species diversity at both
the organismal level and the genetic level. Although we have a listing
of the species found in the Hawaiian Archipelago to date, the actual
species diversity in the NWHI is largely unknown. A recent Census of
Marine Life Cruise to French Frigate Shoals uncovered 30-50
invertebrate species new to science, 58 new ascidian records, 33 new
records of decapod crustaceans, and 27 new opistobranch mollusks of
record (R. Brainard, personal communication). It is clear that we don't
know the extent of species diversity in the NWHI and it is critical
that we find out if we are to understand how that ecosystem functions
and what levels of redundancy in function are available (McClanahan,
Polumin, and Done, 2002). HIMB scientists are beginning to examine the
genetic diversity of different coral species in Hawai'i.
Symbiont diversity, we are learning, is a vital factor in the
resistance of corals to bleaching. The symbiotic dinoflagellate genus
Symbiodinium is genetically diverse containing eight divergent lineages
(clades A-H). Corals predominantly associate with clade C Symbiodinium,
although clades A, B, D, F, and G are also found to a lesser extent in
corals. There is ample evidence that some type of symbiont
``shuffling'' occurs during the process of acclimatization of corals to
higher thermal stress (Berkelmans and van Oppen, 2006; Middlebrook,
Hoegh-Guldberg, and Leggat, 2008). In fact, there is growing evidence
that corals with clade D symbionts are more resistant to thermal stress
than the same species with clade C symbionts, the more common coral
symbiont clade in the Pacific region. HIMB researchers Ruth Gates and
Michael Stat found Symbiodinium clade A1, a rare symbiont type, and
clade C associated with the Acropora cytherea corals at French Frigate
Shoals. The A symbiont type is rare, and genetic evidence suggests that
this clade was introduced with Cassiopea (Stat & Gates, 2007).
Moreover, the presence of clade A was highly associated with disease.
None of the diseased corals had clade C as the dominant symbiont (Stat
& Gates, preliminary communication).
Invasive Species
Living in KAne'ohe Bay, we are confronted daily by the invasive
algae that impact our coral reefs. Our associates, Cindy Hunter, Celia
Smith, the Division of Aquatic Resources, and The Nature Conservancy
are part of an organized effort to keep the algae from taking over our
reefs. As part of our efforts to prevent this from ever happening in
the NWHI, we have developed a set of recommendations to restrict the
transport of non-indigenous species to the NWHI. They include hull
inspections for vessels planning to enter the NWHI and requiring
treatment of ballast water. Copies of the document are provided for the
members of the Committee: S. Godwin, K. S. Rodgers, and P. L. Jokiel
(2006) Reducing Potential Impact of Invasive Marine Species in the
Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National Monument.
The power of the genetic tools we use to detect invasive species
can also be used to uncover the origins of invasive species and I
provide this example for our discussion. When the snowflake coral,
Carijoa riseii, was first observed growing at high densities on the
black coral beds in Hawai'i, it was labeled as a foreign invasive from
the Caribbean. It was thought to have been brought in by ships coming
to Hawai'i from the continental United States. Genetic evidence no
longer supports this finding (Concepcion et al., in review). Rather,
the ``Hawaiian snowflake coral'' was closer genetically to the
snowflake corals identified throughout the Pacific Islands, and that
there are multiple species of Hawaiian snowflake coral (Concepcion et
al., 2007). It is clear that this is not a Caribbean introduction and
the data cannot rule out a natural colonization of Hawai'i by the
snowflake coral. If that is the case, then the ecology of the black
coral ecosystem has been altered to allow the snowflake coral to
overgrow these precious coral beds.
Fig. 3. Distribution of genotypes of Carijoa riseii. Each colored
circle is characteristic for a specific genotype of Carijoa. Note that
Hawai'i does not share any genetic types with the Caribbean.
Ocean Acidification
Several models for changes in aragonite saturation at today's
CO2 concentration (375-380 ppm) to the projected saturation
state for years 2040-2049 (465 ppm) indicate that Kure Atoll and Midway
Island will be affected by rates of aragonite saturation that are
marginal for coral growth (Guinotte, Buddemeier, & Kleypas, 2003;
Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Experiments in mesocosms containing
corals exposed to lower pH suggest that coral calcification rates will
slow (Ries, Stanley, & Hardie, 2006; Marubini & Atkinson, 1999), and,
in some cases, the corals will actually decalcify to form sea anemone-
like soft bodied polyps (Fine and Tchernov, 2007). Ilsa Kuffner and her
colleagues at HIMB have shown that crustose coralline algae are
dramatically affected by acidified ocean water (Figure 4). This is an
important finding because members of this group of calcifying algae act
as framework organisms, cementing carbonate fragments into massive reef
structures, providing chemical settlement cues for reef-building coral
larvae, and is a major producer of carbonate sediments (Kuffner et al.,
2008).
Figure 4. Encrusting algal communities on experimental cylinders.
Control cylinder on the left was exposed to normal seawater at pH 8.17
and shows the pink crustose coralline algae colonies. On the right,
this cylinder exposed to seawater at pH 7.91 shows growth of on non-
calcifying algae.
Recommendations:
Management strategies will need to focus on increasing coral reef
resilience, usually by managing other stressors on reefs, i.e.,
nutrient overload, sediments, human induced disturbances, resource
extraction. Management will also require:
1. An accurate survey of the biodiversity of the coral reef
ecosystems in Hawai'i.
2. A study of ecosystem function in these reefs to identify
keystone species and redundancy in the system.
3. Management must be based on an accurate assessment of the
biological connectivity between the different reefs and atolls.
Temporal and spatial contributions to replenishment from
healthy reefs must be determined.
4. Coral reef ecosystem management and fisheries management
must work together to provide sustainable harvest while
preserving habitat and ecosystem functions.
5. Research needs include:
a. Identification of the etiologic agents of coral
disease within an appropriate containment facility.
b. Understanding the epizootiology of coral diseases
(transmission, rate of spread, virulence, etc.).
c. Measurement of the impacts of reduced calcification
on a wide range of marine organisms including
pteropods, coccolithophores, foraminifera . . .
d. Determine the calcification mechanisms across many
different calcifying taxa.
e. Large mesocosms equipped with seawater that can be
regulated for temperature, flow rate, wave action, pH
and CO2, and light are needed to conduct
replicate studies on the effects of these thermal
stress and/or lowered pH on coral reefs.
6. We support the recommendations of the report: Impacts of
Ocean Acidifcation on Coral Reefs and Other Marine Calcifiers:
A guide for future research. Authors: J. A. Kleypas, R. A.
Feely, V. J. Fabry, C. Langdon, C. L. Sabine, and L.L. Robbins.
References
Aeby, G. S., J. C. Kenyon, J. E. Maragos, and D. Potts. (2003)
First record of mass coral bleaching in the Northwestern Hawaiian
Islands. Coral Reefs 22:256.
Aeby, G. S. (2006). Baseline levels of coral disease in the
Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Atoll Research Bulletin 543:471-488.
Baker, A. C., C. J. Starger, T. R. McClanahan, & P. W. Glynn.
(2004). Corals' adaptive response to climate change. Nature 430:741.
Baker, A. C. (2001). Reef corals bleach to survive change. Nature
411:765-766.
Bally, M. and J. Garrabou. (2007). Thermodependent bacterial
pathogens and mass mortalities in temperate benthic communities: a new
case of emerging disease linked to climate change. Global Change
Biology 13:2079-2088.
Berkelmans, R. and M. J. H. van Oppen (2006) The role of
zooxanthellae in the thermal tolerance of corals: a ``nugget of hope''
for coral reefs in an era of climate change. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London, Series B., Biological Sciences, doi: 10,1098/
rspb.2006.3567
Bindoff, N. L., J. Willebrand, V. Artale, A. Cazenave, J. M.
Gregory, S. Gulev, K. Hanawa, C. Le Quere, S. Levitus, Y. Nojiri, G. C.
Shum, L. D. Talley, and A. Unnikrishnan. (2007). Observations: Oceanic
Climate Change and Sea Leve. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of the working Group I to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
(Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Avery, M.
Tignor, and H. L. Miller [eds]). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Bird, C. E., B. S. Holland, B. W. Bowen, and R. J. Toonen. 2007.
Contrasting population structure in three endemic Hawaiian limpets
(Cellana spp.) with similar life histories. Molecular Ecology 16
(15):3173-3187.
Brainard, R. (2002) Bleaching in NW Hawaiian Isalnds. Bleaching
Report, National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information
Service. ORA/ORSPD Coral Reef Team, Coral Reef Bleaching Hotspots.
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/als_bleaching
.10.16.2002.
Brown, B. E., R. Dunne, M. S. Goodson, and A. E. Douglas. (2000)
Bleaching patterns in reef corals. Nature 404:142-143.
Concepcion, G., M. Crepeau, D. Wagner, S. E. Kahng, & R. J. Toonen.
2008. An alternative to ITS--a hypervariable, single-copy nuclear
intron in corals, and its use in detecting cryptic species within the
octocoral genus Carijoa. Coral Reefs. Online first, DOI: 10.1007/
s00338-007-0323-X.
Concepcion, G., S. E. Kahng, M. Crepeau, E. C. Franklin, S. Coles,
& R. J. Toonen. In Review. Molecular data refute a Caribbean
introduction and suggest multiple origins for the invasive snowflake
coral in Hawai'i. Molecular Ecology.
Cooper, T. F., G. De'ath, K. E. Fabricius, and J. M. Lough. (2008)
Declining coral calcification in massive porites in two nearshore
regions of the northern Great Barrier Reef. Global Change Biology 14:
529-538.
Friedlander, A., G. Aeby, E. Brown, A. Clark, S. L. Coles, S.
Dollar, C. Hunter, P. L. Jokiel, J. Smith, B. Walsh, and Wiltse, W.
(2005) The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the Main Hawaiian Islands,
pp. 222-269. In: J. Waddell (ed.), The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems
of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2005. NOAA
Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 11. NO AA/NCCOS Center for Coastal
Monitoring and Assessment's Biogeography Team. Silver Sping, MD. 522
pp.
Guinotte, J. M., R. B. Buddemeier, and J. A. Kleypas. (2003).
Future coral reef habitat marginality: temporal and spatial effects of
climate change in the Pacific basin. Coral Reefs 22: 551-558.
Holling, C. S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological
systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4:1-23.
Jokiel, P. L., and S. L. Coles. (1974). Effects of heated effluent
on hermatypic corals at Kahe Point, O'ahu. Pacific Sciences 28(1):1-16.
Jokiel, P. L., and E. R. Brown. (2004) Global warming, regional
trends and inshore environmental conditions influence coral bleaching
in Hawai'i. Global Change Biology 10:1627-41.
Jokiel, P. L., and S. L. Coles. (1990) Response of Hawaiian and
other Indo-Pacific reef corals to elevated temperatures associated with
global warming. Coral Reefs 8:155-162.
Kenyon, J. C. and R. E. Brainard. (2006) Second Recorded Episode of
Mass Coral Bleaching in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Atoll Res.
Bull. 543:505-523.
Kuffner, I. B., A. J. Andersson, P. L. Jokiel, K. S. Rodgers, and
F. T. MacKenzie. (2008) Decreased abundance of crustose coralline algae
due to ocean acidification. Nature Geosciences 11:114-117.
Little, A. F., M. J. H. van Oppen, and B. L. Willis. (20040.
Flexibility to algal endosymbioses shapes growth in reef corals.
Science 304:1492-1494.
Marubini, F., and J. J. Atkinson. (1999). Effects of lowered pH and
elevated nitrate on coral calcification. Marine Ecology progress Series
188:117-121.
McClanahan, T., N. Polumin, and T. Done. (2002). Ecological States
and the resilience of coral reefs. Conservation Ecology 6(2):18.
Middlebrook, R., O. Hoegh-Guldberg, and W. Leggat. (2008). The
effect of thermal history on the susceptibility of reef-building corals
to thermal stress. Journal of Experimental Biology 211:1050-1056.
Ries, J. B., S. Stanley, and L. A. Hardie. (2006). Scleractinian
corals produce calcite, and grow more slowly, in artifical Cretaceous
seawater. Geology 34:525-528.
Shea, E. L., G. Dolcemascolo, C. L. Anderson, A. Barnston, C. P.
Guard, M. P. Hamnett, S. T. Kubota, N. Lewis, J. Loschnigg, and G.
Meehl. (2001). Preparing for a Changing Climate: The Potential
Consequences of Climate Variability and Change, Pacific Islands. Pub.
East-West Center, Honolulu, HI. ISBN: 0-86638-197-X.
Stat, M., and R. D. Gates (2008). Vectored introductions of marine
endosymbiotic dinoflagellates into Hawai'i. Biological Invasions
10(4):579-583.
Van Oppen, M. J. H., and R. D Gates. (2006) Conservation genetics
and the resilience of reef-building corals. Molecular Ecology.
Work, T. M., and R. A. Rameyer. (2001). Evaluating Coral Health in
Hawai'i. U.S. Geological Survey, National Wildlife Health Center,
Hawai'i Field Station, 42 pp.
Work , T. M., S. L. Coles, and R. A. Rameyer. (2002) French
Frigates Shoals Reef Health Survey. U. S. Geological Survey, National
Wildlife Health Center, Hawai'i field Station, 25 pp.
The Chairman. I wish to assure all witnesses that your
prepared statements will all be made part of the record, and
other exhibits that you may have. We will study them when we
get back.
Our next witness is the Professor Emeritus, Department of
Oceanography, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology
at the University of Hawai`i, Dr. Fred T. Mackenzie.
Dr. Mackenzie?
STATEMENT OF FRED T. MACKENZIE, Ph.D., DEPARTMENT OF
OCEANOGRAPHY, SCHOOL OF OCEAN AND EARTH SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI`I AT MANOA
Dr. Mackenzie. Thank you, Senator Inouye.
Senator Inouye, ladies and gentlemen, I want to thank you
very much, a mahalo, for giving me the opportunity to address
the Subcommittee.
As you all know, just very recently the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change came out with their 2007 report on the
physical science of climate change, but also with two volumes
on adaptation and mitigation. All volumes were about the same
size, 800 pages each.
What I would like to do today is to show you some recent
findings relevant to global warming and the Pacific Region, in
terms of climate impacts that were not in the recent IPCC
science report, and have come forward within the last couple of
years.
So the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change produced
their last climate change science report in 2007. However,
research was excluded from the 2007 document if it were
controversial, not fully quantified, or not yet incorporated
into models. Papers published after 2005 could not be used.
Now, this is very important, the importance is shown below.
Of importance to any discussion of Pacific Region climate
impacts are the post-2005 observations. Land and ocean surface
temperatures have risen relatively rapidly, just in this
century. Global climate models had assumed that ice sheets
would melt slowly in response to increased warmth. What really
happens is that ice sheets fracture as they melt, and they
allow water to penetrate rapidly toward the bottom of the
sheet, with the result that the ice sheet surges and breaks up.
The rate of ice loss in Greenland has more than tripled,
just in this century, and there has been rapid loss of sea ice
around Antarctica, and mass loss of ice in West Antarctica.
A few other post-2005 observations are that: (1) global sea
is rising about 50 percent faster in the early 21st century
than in the recent past decades. This may be a sign of
accelerated sea level rise.
Based on recent predictions, sea level rise in 2100 is
probably going to be about 1 meter under a business-as-usual
emissions scenario. (2) Interestingly enough, it appears that
the Gulf Stream has slowed about 30 percent between 1997 and
2004. This Stream transports heat to high latitudes in the
North Atlantic, and its slowing would have major climatic
implications.
(3) Arctic sea ice has decreased 15 percent just in this
half-decade. In 2007, there was a record decrease in the area
of sea ice, and the Northwest Passage was open for the first
time in centuries.
(4) The North Pacific Region around Hawaii, of relatively
low productivity and nutrient-deficient surface waters, has
expanded to the East as the surface water, ocean water has
warmed, with poorly known consequences for pelagic fishes, like
our tuna fisheries.
(5) In certain regions of the ocean, the strength of the
oceanic sink of anthropogenic carbon dioxide is weakening, as
the partial pressure difference of carbon dioxide between the
atmosphere and the ocean decreases. The oceans are the major
reservoir besides terrestrial plants on land for uptake of
anthropogenic carbon dioxide, and that reservoir, that sink, is
weakening, in terms of taking up the carbon dioxide.
Now, I would like to turn to regional projections of
climate change variables on into this century. They're based
mainly on climate models, and although these models are much
improved, they are still not as robust as the global
projections.
Large deviations among models make regional estimates
across the Pacific Region uncertain. However, the following
diagrams that I'll show you for precipitation--temperature,
precipitation, and sea level projections for this Century, for
the Pacific Region, are based on the U.K.'s Hadley Centre for
Climate Prediction and Research Model, HADCM2 General
Circulation Model. After this, I will make a brief comment on
storminess, and along with Dr. Leong, I will have something to
say about ocean acidification.
First, temperature--the 2007 global mean annual carbon
dioxide concentration of 380 parts per million globally, and at
Mauna Lau at present, 385 parts per million, is higher today
than it has been in the past more than 600,000 years. And this
is due to fossil fuel burning and land use changes.
The global mean surface temperature has risen nearly 1
degree centigrade since the 18th century. The global mean
temperature anomaly between just the 5 years of 2000 and 2005,
was about a half a degree centigrade. And that anomaly in the
high latitudes of the Northern hemisphere was a whopping 2
degrees centigrade. You wonder why Greenland is melting! You
wonder why the permafrost is melting! This is the reason, it's
getting warm in the high latitude of the North Atlantic.
The 2007 IPCC science report concluded that the probability
that the warming is caused by natural climatic processes alone
is less than 5 percent. Most of the observed increase in global
average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely
due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas
concentrations.
I apologize to you, these maps do not show up as good as
they do on the PC, but this one shows regional surface
temperature changes between the end of the 20th century, and
the end of the 21st century for the Pacific Region. Hawaii will
be two to three, and probably 3 degrees centigrade warmer at
the end of this century in a business-as-usual scenario of
fossil fuel emissions. Note, importantly, the seasonal and
geographical variability in the temperature changes. The real
red harsh colors mean, are hotter, the yellows are not as hot.
This shows the projections for Pacific rRgion changes in
precipitation between the end of the 20th Century and the end
of the 21st. Hawaii may be wetter, Hawaii may be drier--this
will all depend on how the elevation of the trade wind
inversion above Hawaii changes.
If the inversion decreases in elevation, Hawaii will become
drier, and that's the anticipation. If it increases in
elevation, Hawaii will become wetter. Once more, I want you to
note, the big variability seasonally, and geographically, in
precipitation. The blues, very wet, the reddish color in here
and here, dry.
This slide shows the Pacific Region projections of sea
level rise for two scenarios--late 20th to mid-21st century,
late 20th to the end of this century. And you can see, from
just this frame, that Hawaii under a business-as-usual, fossil
fuel-emissions scenario, it's project to have at least 40
centimetered high sea level in the latter part of this century.
But, because of our recent knowledge on the rate of ocean
thermal expansion, the rate of the melting of mountain and
valley glaciers, and--and most importantly--the rate that the
Greenland Ice Sheet is melting, we are now predicting a 1 meter
rise in sea level by the year 2100.
And just within the week, the National Research Council's
Transportation Board has released a report demonstrating how
vulnerable our transportation system will be to that 1 meter
rise, including Hawaii.
I live in Hawaii Kai--I drive Kalanianaole Highway. With a
1 meter rise in sea level, and any kind of small storm surge,
that highway will be under water, considerably, with a 1 meter
rise in sea level.
This slide shows what Waikiki and environs would look like
with a 1 meter rise in sea level.
My own personal feeling is that we in the state need to
prepare for the possibility of a 1 meter rise in sea level. We
will have to prepare by adaptation, since Hawaii does not emit
much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, mitigation is not
going to play a big role.
Storminess--this has been a big problem, it's still a
problem today. There's still considerable uncertainty
concerning how storm and hurricane frequency and intensity will
change for the Pacific Region in a warmer world. Multi-model
ensembles do not give a clear picture of how storms in the
Pacific Region will be affected by temperature change, and
water--hydrological--change.
The Hadley Model projects increased storminess for the
Hawaiian Islands, as well as the Federated States of
Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.
Storminess is projected to decrease for the region around Fiji,
and the French Polynesian Islands.
However, and very importantly, to date there is no rigorous
observational proof that there is a trend in the intensity or
frequency of hurricanes in the Atlantic or Pacific. Inter-
annual, El Nino/La Nina, and inter-decadal Pacific and Atlantic
natural climate phenomena, I think, are masking whatever
influence global climate change is having on storms, at the
moment.
Ocean acidification--and Dr. Leong went through this in
quite detail, but I think it's worth emphasizing, because this
is a very serious issue for us. Ocean acidification is simply
due to emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, because
of fossil fuel combustion, and land use changes. And their
partial absorption in surface waters--this is a major
environmental problem today. The observational record of
surface ocean pH, measure of acidity, and model calculations--
those done on my own laboratory--show that since the 18th
Century, the oceans have become more acidic.
Accompanying the increase in acidity, is a decline in the
carbonate saturation state of the world's surface oceans, with
respect to all carbonate minerals. And thus, this makes it much
more difficult for organisms to calcify.
Under a business-as-usual emissions scenario, in the year
2100, surface water pH could decrease to 7.85--its pristine,
pre-industrial level was 8.1, 8.2. This will be accompanied by
a 30 percent decrease in carbonate saturation state. Obviously,
these decreases would very likely affect the calcification
rates of both benthic coral and algae corals, pelagic flora,
calcifying organisms--and be accompanied, and this is important
by major changes in marine ecosystem communities, their
structure, and ability to recruit.
Coastal ocean acidification will be especially detrimental
to the coral reefs of Hawaii, and the rest of the Pacific
Region. Only 50 years from now, much of the surface water that
bathes Pacific reefs will be more warm, and more acidic, and
hence marginal for vigorous reef growth.
Unfortunately, the only way to resolve this problem is by
the reduction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions to the
atmosphere. I cannot emphasize that more--no matter what the
climate does in the future, as long as we put carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere, the oceans will continue to acidify.
Finally, I have a list of key concerns and needs for Hawaii
and Pacific Island communities, I'm not going to go through
these in detail, they're written out in both of the handouts we
have. I would, however, like to end by looking at these two
down here with diamond symbols on the slide.
I feel now there is a need for a new Pacific Region
assessment of climate variability and change, in light of
improved models, and these improvements are going on every
year--and particularly the observations of the last 10 years,
which are not documented well in the 2007 report of the IPCC. I
would like to see regional-based climate information services
established in the Pacific Region, and to some extent this is
going on, but not to the extent that I perceive. It could be
handled by UH, it could be handled by NOAA, to provide climate
services that bridge the gap between local weather, and global
climate information for island communities, for the people.
These services should include community educational resources,
such as the one that I have given out here, and is available
for all of you--on climate change, its variability, and the
anticipated impacts and vulnerability and adaptation to climate
change and rising sea level for the Pacific Region.
I'd like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to
address the Committee, I know I ran a little over time, my
apologies. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Mackenzie follows:]
Prepared Statement of Fred T. Mackenzie, Ph.D., Department of
Oceanography, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology,
University of Hawai'i at Manoa
Introduction
Good morning, Senator Inouye, Members of the Committee, ladies and
gentlemen. Thank you for giving me the opportunity this morning to
speak to you on global climate issues and how they might impact island
communities. My name is Fred Mackenzie and I am an Emeritus Professor
in the Department of Oceanography at the University of Hawai'i. My
research is quite broad in scope but focuses on the behavior of the
Earth's surface system of oceans, atmosphere, land, and sediments
through geologic time and its future under the influence of humans,
including the problems associated with greenhouse gas emissions to the
atmosphere, global warming, and ocean acidification. I have been an
academician for more than 45 years and published more than 250
scholarly publications, including six books and nine edited volumes in
ocean, Earth and environmental science. Today you have asked me to
comment on how climate change might affect island communities and on
our recent work developing climate and sustainability case studies for
Pacific island resources that can be used to educate and inform the
community, including local decisionmakers.
Many of my comments are derived from the report of the Pacific
Islands Regional Assessment Group, for which I served as a member,
entitled Preparing for a Changing Climate. The Potential Consequences
of Climate Variability and Change (Shea et al., 2001), and the case
study Climate Change, Water Resources, and Sustainability in the
Pacific Basin: Emphasis on O'ahu, Hawai'i and Majuro Atoll, Republic of
the Marshall Islands (Guidry and Mackenzie, 2006). I and my colleagues
have used these materials and my books Our Changing Planet: An
Introduction to Earth System Science and Global Environmental Change
(Mackenzie, 2003) and Carbon in the Geobiosphere--Earth's Outer Shell
(Mackenzie and Lerman, 2006) to educate the public and students at all
levels in Hawai'i and elsewhere about climate change and its impacts.
We also have run an immersion course for native Hawaiian students and a
course for the Myron B. Thompson Charter School in Hawai'i employing
these texts and an interactive website as resource materials.
General Comments on Climate Change
The science of climate change has been assessed in a series of four
reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a body
of 2500 scientists that, as you are aware, shared the 2007 Nobel Peace
Prize for their work on distilling the scientific community's research
on the physical and biogeochemical basis for climate change into
authoritative reports. Similar sized volumes on mitigation and impacts,
adaptation and vulnerability have accompanied the more recent science
volumes. The panel's latest 2007 physical science report Climate Change
2007: The Physical Science Basis (IPCC, 2007) includes a full chapter
on regional climate projections that for temperature, precipitation,
and extreme weather projections are very similar to the Third
Assessment Report (TAR) of the IPCC in 2001, as are the global climate
assessments and projections. The major difference between the TAR and
the 2007 report is that generally the projections have a higher level
of confidence due to a larger number of simulations, improved models, a
better understanding of model deficiencies, and improved detailed
analyses of the results. It should be kept in mind that the
distillation of the science of climate change by the IPCC in their 2007
report only dealt with findings up until the year 2005. More recent
findings from 2005-2007 studies are included in this testimony. Also it
is still very difficult to take the information from the IPCC physical
science report and use it to predict the future of regional and short-
lived annual events, like day-long high sea levels and floods, or even
inter-annual (El Nino/La Nina) or decadal (North Atlantic and Pacific
Decadal Oscillations) climate changes and their effects on
precipitation, sea level, and hurricane frequency or intensity.
At its most basic level, the balance between incoming solar
radiation and outgoing infrared heat radiation determines Earth's
climate. The absorption of the outgoing Earth radiation by atmospheric
greenhouse gases of methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), and especially carbon dioxide (CO2) and
the consequent heating of the lower atmosphere are what constitute the
well-recognized ``greenhouse effect''. It should be kept in mind that
water vapor (H2O) is the most potent greenhouse gas. The
greenhouse gases have for most of planetary history resided in our
atmosphere and by trapping outgoing Earth radiation have maintained the
Earth at a temperature amenable to life. Thus, there has always been a
greenhouse effect, but humans by adding greenhouse gases to the
atmosphere are increasing the strength of the greenhouse effect. The
Earth without greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would be -18 +C, 33 +C
colder than the late pre-industrial global mean temperature of 15 +C.
We have had an ``enhanced greenhouse effect'' operating since at least
the beginning of the industrial era.
It is well known and documented that the greenhouse gases of carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) have increased
markedly in the atmosphere due to human activities. The global increase
of atmospheric carbon dioxide from 1750 to 2007 has been about 36
percent, from 280 ppm (parts per million) to 382 ppm globally and 385
ppm at the Mauna Loa Observatory on the Big Island of Hawai'i.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are higher today than they have been
in more than 600,000 years. The global increases in carbon dioxide
concentration are mainly due to fossil fuel use and land use changes.
The increases of methane from 715 to 1774 ppb (parts per billion) and
nitrous oxide from 270 to 320 ppb are primarily due to agriculture. The
concentrations of the potent synthetic halogenated greenhouse gases,
like CFC-12, have risen from zero to hundreds of ppt (parts per
trillion) concentrations. For example, CFC-12 has risen from zero to
538 ppt. This rise is due to industrial activities and use of the
compound as a coolant in refrigeration and air conditioning units.
Another greenhouse gas, tropospheric ozone (O3) (not to be
confused with stratospheric ozone), is formed from reaction of
anthropogenic sources of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds
in the atmosphere derived from the burning of fossil fuels and biomass.
The 1987 Montreal Protocol and its amendments have had a significant
effect on slowing the rise of the chlorofluorocarbons in the
atmosphere, but other halogenated compounds that have replaced the
chlorofluorocarbons are rising in concentration in the atmosphere. With
the well-documented rise in the concentrations of the greenhouse gases
in the atmosphere, one would anticipate an increase in global
temperatures. In addition, the anthropogenic greenhouse gases persist
in the atmosphere for years to decades to centuries implying impacts on
the climate far into the future.
Natural and anthropogenic micrometer-sized aerosol particles in the
atmosphere also affect climate directly or indirectly. In general, the
aerosols in the lower atmosphere are removed on time scales of days to
weeks and their climatic impacts are mainly that of cooling,
particularly on a regional scale. The most notable of the aerosol
compounds is that of sulfate (SO4) aerosol which may affect
climate directly by reflecting sunlight back toward space or indirectly
by acting as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and leading to cloud
formation, the type and distribution of which affect climate. For
example, the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991 that
spewed sulfur compounds high into the upper atmosphere led to a cooling
of the planet on a time scale of several years of about 0.5 +C. The
burning of fossil fuels, particularly coal, generates sulfur gases that
in the atmosphere are converted to sulfate aerosols and the cooling and
cloud formation effects of these particles are considered in present
climate models.
Global dimming is the gradual reduction in the amount of direct
solar irradiance at the Earth's surface that has been observed for
several decades after the start of systematic measurements in the
1950s. It appears to be caused by air pollution and the increase in
particulates such as sulfur aerosols in the atmosphere due to human
activities. The effect varies geographically. Worldwide it has been
estimated to have resulted in a 4 percent reduction in irradiance
between 1960 and 1990. The trend appears to have been reversed during
the past decade, as the lower atmosphere has become less polluted in
some regions. The dimming has affected the water cycle by reducing
evaporation and likely was the cause of droughts in some areas. Dimming
also creates a cooling effect that may have partially masked the
enhanced greenhouse effect.
The sun's output of solar energy also affects climate. In actual
fact, during the past four billion years, the sun's luminosity has
increased about 30 percent. More germane to the present global warming
issue is that during periods of high sunspot activity, the Earth
receives slightly more solar radiation at the top of Earth's
atmosphere; the converse is true at times of low sunspot activity. The
cool period of the Little Ice Age of 1350-1850 was probably due in part
to a decrease in the amount of solar radiation received from the sun at
the top of the Earth's atmosphere However, for the period 1750 to 2005,
it appears that the sun's forcing on climate has only been about + 0.12
(0.06-0.30) W m-2 out of the total net anthropogenic forcing
of +1.6 (0.6-2.4) W m-2. The global average radiative
forcings on climate of the various major factors involved in climate
change from 1750-2005 are shown in
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Global average radiative forcing estimates (RF) and
ranges in 2005 since 1750 for greenhouse gases and other agents and
mechanisms (IPCC, 2007).
The first report of the IPCC in 1990 suggested that the warming of
0.3 +C to 0.6 +C during the twentieth century was reasonably consistent
with projections from the climate models in operation at the time but
also within the ballpark of natural climate variability. The
attribution of the warming to human or natural causes was not
definitive at that time. By 2007, the IPCC stated that there is a very
high confidence that ``the global average net effect of human
activities from 1750 to 2005 has been one of warming, with a radiative
forcing of +1.6 (0.6-2.4) W m-2 ''. This climatic forcing
has led to a nearly 1 +C rise in temperature since 1750. This
temperature change is remarkably close to that predicted for a climate
system that has a climate sensitivity response to increasing greenhouse
gas concentrations of 2-3 +C (best climate sensitivity estimate is 2.8
+C) for a doubling of effective atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentration over its 1850s concentration of 280 ppm. In addition, the
IPCC concluded that the probability that the warming is caused by
natural climatic processes alone is less than 5 percent. Most (>50
percent) of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures
since the mid-twentieth century is very likely (confidence level >90
percent) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse
concentrations (IPCC, 2007).
Recent Findings Relevant to Global Warming
We should bear in mind in the material discussed in later sections
that the IPCC has a very rigorous review process. However, research was
excluded from the 2007 document if it were controversial, not fully
quantified, or not yet incorporated into models. Furthermore, no papers
published after 2005 could be discussed in the report.
Positive feedbacks to the rate of atmospheric greenhouse gas
accumulations and climate and ``tipping points'' (a point at which the
climate system and biogeochemistry suddenly switch from one mode to
another) were not always included in the IPCC 2007 chapter discussions.
Of importance are the post-2005 observations that:
1. Land and ocean surface temperatures have risen relatively
rapidly in the early twenty-first century (Figure 2). Ocean
temperatures down to 3000 meters are also on the rise.
2. Current climate models assume that ice sheets will melt
slowly in response to increased warmth. Recent work shows that
ice sheets fracture as they melt, allowing water to penetrate
rapidly toward the bottom of the sheet with the result that the
ice sheet surges and breaks up. The rate of ice loss in
Greenland has more than tripled in this century (Velicogna and
Wahr, 2006) and there has been rapid loss of sea ice around
Antarctica and mass loss of ice in West Antarctica. If the
Greenland ice sheet melted completely, this would lead to a 6-7
meter rise in sea level. The Larsen B ice shelf collapsed in
2005. The melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet would add 5-6
meters of sea level rise.
Figure 2. Global land-ocean anomaly for 1880 to 2005 and the 2001-
2005 mean surface temperature anomaly. In just the latter period of
time, the anomaly was 0.54 +C and of more importance is the fact that
the anomaly over the high latitude of the Northern Hemisphere was up to
2.1 +C. It is this abnormal heating that is the cause of the warming at
high latitudes of surface seawater and the melting of the Greenland ice
sheet and the permafrost.
3. Global sea level is rising about 50 percent faster in the
early twenty-first century than predicted by the IPCC in their
2001 report, perhaps the first sign of accelerated sea level
rise. Average rates of sea level rise during the last several
decades were about 1.80.5 mm/yr, with a larger rate
of increase during the most recent decade of 3.10.7
mm/yr. However, the IPCC 2007 report in their worse case
scenario for global sea level rise reduced their sea level rise
estimates from 88 to 59 centimeters for the period 2000 to
2100, but the new observational findings of this century were
not incorporated in the models used in the IPCC 2007 report.
4. It appears that the Gulf Stream has slowed about 30 percent
during the period 1957-2004. This is a crucial current in terms
of transporting heat to high latitudes in the North Atlantic
and its slowing would have major climatic implications and is a
key aspect of models of past climatic change and tipping
points.
5. The positive feedback of the effect of rising temperatures
on the release of carbon dioxide and methane from soils,
permafrost, and the seabed were not considered in detail in the
2007 IPCC report. The permafrost is melting rapidly in western
Canada and Siberia. Indeed, standing bodies of water are
forming in the Siberian permafrost with high methane
concentrations.
6. Arctic sea ice area has decreased about 15 percent since
October 2005 (Nghiem et al., 2006) and in 2007 there was a
record decrease in the area of sea ice and the Northwest
Passage was opened for the first time in centuries.
7. Higher rates of precipitation are now observed at mid to
high latitudes and lower rates in the tropics and subtropics,
with corresponding changes in surface seawater salinities.
8. The North Pacific region of relatively low productivity and
nutrient deficient surface waters has expanded to the east as
the surface ocean has warmed with poorly known consequences for
pelagic fishes, like tuna.
9. Ocean surface water pH has fallen 0.1 pH unit (``ocean
acidification'') (Orr et al., 2005; Andersson et al., 2005)
(the pH scale is logarithmic so this represents a significant
increase in hydrogen ion concentration) since 1700, and the
projected rate of change in ocean surface water pH will
increase on into this century and beyond unless anthropogenic
emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere are curtailed.
Invasion of carbon dioxide into the deeper ocean has resulted
in the shoaling of the depth at which the calcareous skeletons
of sinking pelagic organisms can be dissolved (Feely et al.,
2004).
10. In certain regions of the oceans, the strength of the
oceanic sink of anthropogenic carbon dioxide is weakening as
the partial pressure difference of carbon dioxide between the
atmosphere and the ocean decreases.
The Pacific Region Temperature, Precipitation, Sea Level and Storm
Projections
Regional projections of climate change variables on into this
century, based mainly on climate models, although much improved, are
still not as robust as global projections. Large deviations among
models make regional estimates across the Pacific region uncertain.
However, the following diagrams show the temperature, precipitation,
and sea level projections for this century for the Pacific region based
on the United Kingdom's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and
Research HADCM2 General Circulation Model (GCM). Notice that Australia
and the Pacific tropics and subtropics are very likely to warm the
most, with temperatures in Hawai'i in the late twenty-first century
being 2-3 +C higher than at the beginning of this century. There are
likely to be strong seasonal and geographical changes in temperature
for the Pacific region induced by global warming.
Annual rainfall is likely to increase in the equatorial belt of the
Pacific on into this century and likely to decrease over southwestern
Pacific islands, with Hawai'i perhaps being wetter or drier. The latter
is more likely. Whether Hawai'i is wetter or drier in a globally warmer
word is mainly a function of the behavior of the trade wind inversion
above which rainfall decreases sharply.
Sea level using the HADCM2 GCM is projected around Hawai'i to be
about 40 centimeters higher in the late twenty-first century than at
the beginning of this century. However, the HADCM2 model projections do
not include the melting of the ice sheets, and it is likely because of
ice sheet melting, warming of surface waters, and acceleration of the
melting of valley and mountain glaciers that global mean sea level
could reach a level one meter higher than in the year 2000 by the end
of the twenty-first century. As with precipitation, the rise in sea
level is not likely to be uniform throughout the Pacific region but
geographically variable making regional estimates uncertain. Notice,
however, that with a one-meter rise in sea level, areas like Waikiki in
O'ahu, Hawai'i (a high Pacific island) will be drowned. New marshes
would be formed and salt water during storms with inordinate daily high
sea levels would be prevalent in sewer drains and an important
component of the flooding. Beach erosion would intensify and the
distribution of beach sand about the Hawaiian Islands would change.
Homes close to the present shoreline would be more susceptible to
flooding, erosion and damage. For low-lying Pacific islands like Majuro
in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, a one-meter rise in sea level
would have devastating consequences. For example, for the Laura atoll
region of the Marshall Islands, the shoreline would retreat by about
150 meters on each coast, which would result in a loss of more than 25
percent of the atoll's surface area. In addition, approximately 50
percent of the volume of Laura's freshwater lens would be salted out
and unusable as a fresh water resource (Miller and Mackenzie, 1988;
Holthus et al., 1992). The damage due to storms and resulting surges
would be amplified considerably by the rise in sea level.
There is still considerable uncertainty concerning how storm and
hurricane frequency and intensity will change for the Pacific region in
a warmer world. Multi-model ensembles do not give a clear picture of
how storminess in the Pacific region will be affected by temperature
and hydrologic changes. It is likely with global warming that the warm
water (Pacific warm water pool) and intense atmospheric convection that
are normally confined to the western equatorial Pacific will move
eastward into regions that presently only experience warm waters during
El Nino events. In part as a result of this, the HADCM2 model projects
increased storminess in the Hawaiian Islands as well the Federated
States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.
Storminess is projected to decrease for the Pacific region that
includes Fiji and the French Polynesian Islands. It should be kept in
mind that these findings are not as robust as we would like, but we do
know that the patterns of storms will change in the Pacific region due
to global warming.
Ocean Acidification
The modern environmental problem of ocean acidification due to
emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere because of fossil fuel
combustion and land-use changes and their partial absorption in surface
ocean waters has been discussed in the literature since at least the
early 1970s (Broecker et al., 1972). More recently the observational
record of surface ocean water pH and model calculations show that
surface water pH has declined about 0.1 pH unit since the 18th century
(Caldeira, et al., 2005; Orr et al., 2005; Andersson, et al., 2005).
Accompanying this decline in pH is a decline in the carbonate
saturation state of the world's surface ocean waters with respect to
all carbonate minerals. Model calculations show that under a Business
as Usual emissions scenario (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IS92a), surface water pH could reach 7.85 by the year 2100 accompanied
by a 30 percent decrease in carbonate saturation state (Figure 3). Such
a decrease would very likely affect the calcification rates of both
benthic calcifying organisms, like corals and coralline algae, and
pelagic calcifiers, such as foraminifera, pteropods, and
Coccolithophoridae, accompanied by other major changes in marine
ecosystem communities, structure and recruitment. Coastal ocean
acidification will be especially detrimental to the coral reefs of
Hawaii and the rest of the Pacific region. The only way this problem
can be alleviated is by reduction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide
emissions to the atmosphere.
Figure 3. pH and carbonate ion concentrations, a measure of
carbonate saturation state, as predicted under various greenhouse gas
emissions scenarios. Only radical innovation measures will prevent the
oceans from becoming more acidic.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Future global climate change and the resultant impacts to water
resources are very serious problems for Pacific island communities. For
small low-lying island communities like Majuro and large volcanic
islands like the southern Hawaiian Islands, water is a most precious
natural resource. Majuro and Hawai'i represent the end points for two
different types of Pacific island communities. Majuro in the Republic
of the Marshall Islands is a small low-lying atoll two to three meters
above sea level. The impact of projected sea level rise on Majuro's
water resources is potentially severe. The low-lying atoll lacks
groundwater resources for its freshwater needs and relies primarily on
rainwater catchment systems for freshwater supply. The groundwater
reservoir does provide a freshwater source for times when rainfall is
low and thus rainfall catchment is reduced. Rising sea level,
exacerbated by storm activities, all due to climate change, will reduce
Majuro's volume of fresh groundwater and that of other low-lying
Pacific islands. In addition to climate change, rising population will
place additional pressures on the groundwater resource. To undertake
shoreline protection measures for low-lying Pacific islands is costly
but will be necessary to protect its groundwater and land area
resources from rising sea level and storm events. Desalinization is
another measure that could be implemented to support, at least in part,
present and future freshwater needs of both high- and low-lying Pacific
islands, albeit at considerable cost.
Compared to the low-lying atolls and island communities like
Majuro, the island of O'ahu is a relatively large volcanic island with
a peak elevation of over 1200 meters (3,936 feet) and a much larger
groundwater resource. This groundwater resource already supplies O'ahu
with 92 percent of freshwater use. The development and use of the
groundwater system have reached the point where the sustainability of
current and future water usage rates is in doubt. Even if future
climate change were to lead to increased precipitation for O'ahu, the
elevated temperature, via its influence on evaporation rate, could
result in a reduction in groundwater recharge rates and thus a decrease
in the groundwater reservoir size. Add to this the increased
groundwater usage due to population growth and also the background of
future sea level rise and O'ahu's groundwater resource could be
significantly taxed. The future rise in sea level could also threaten
the economy of Hawai'i by negatively impacting vital areas (e.g.,
airport runway and Waikiki) in close proximity to shorelines. The rise
in sea level could also result in the flow of salt water from the ocean
to land via the storm drainage system that during storm events can
result in flood damage to areas such as the Mapunapuna industrial
district.
A summary of the some key concerns and needs for Hawai'i and
Pacific island communities follows:
The adaptive capability of the human systems is generally
low for small islands and their vulnerability is high; small
island communities are likely to be among those regions most
seriously impacted by climate change.
The projected global sea level rise and its geographical
variability in this century will cause enhanced coastal
erosion, loss of land and property, dislocation of people,
increase risk from storm surges, reduced resilience of coastal
ecosystems, saltwater intrusion into freshwater resources, and
high resource costs to respond to and adapt to these changes.
Islands with very limited water supplies are highly
vulnerable to the impacts of climate change on their water
balance.
Coral reefs are likely to be negatively affected by
bleaching due to increasing temperature and by reduced
calcification rates due to higher carbon dioxide levels and
consequent ocean acidification; mangroves, sea grass beds, and
other coastal ecosystems and their associated biodiversity are
likely to be adversely affected by rising temperatures,
accelerated sea level rise, and increasing acidity of seawater.
Declines in the water quality and pH and increasing
temperatures of coastal ecosystems could negatively impact reef
fish and threaten reef fisheries, those who earn their
livelihoods from reef fisheries, and those who rely on the
fisheries as a significant food source.
Limited arable land and soil salinization make agricultural
practices for small islands, both for domestic food production
and cash crop exports, highly vulnerable to climate change.
Tourism, an important source of income and foreign exchange
for many islands, likely would face severe disruption from
climate change and sea level rise.
Island communities will mainly have to adapt to climate
change and its impacts. Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions
is important from a strategic and sustainability viewpoint but
will have little effect on rising atmospheric greenhouse gas
concentrations.
There is a need for a new Pacific regional assessment of
climate variability and change in light of improved models and
observations made since the last assessment of 2001.
Regional-based climate information services should be
established for the Pacific region, perhaps by the University
of Hawai'i or by NOAA, to provide climate services that bridge
the gap between local weather and global climate change
information for island communities. These services should
include community educational resources on climate change and
variability and on the anticipated impacts and vulnerability
and adaptation to climate change and rising sea level.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the Committee. I
look forward to answering your questions.
Selected References
Andersson, A. J., Mackenzie, F. T. and Lerman, A., 2005, Coastal
ocean and carbonate systems in the high CO2 world of the
Anthropocene. American Journal of Science, v. 305, p. 875-918.
Broecker, W. S., Y.-H. Li and T. H. Peng., 1972, Carbon dioxide--
man's unseen artifact. In: D. W. Hood (ed.), Impingement of Man on the
Oceans, Wiley Interscience, New York, p. 387-324.
Caldeira, K. and M. E. Wickett, 2005, Ocean model predictions of
chemistry change from carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere and
oceans. Journal of Geophysical Research (Oceans), v. 110, C09SO4, doi:
10.1029/2004JC002671.
Feely et al., 2004, Impact of anthropogenic CO2 on the
CaCO3 system in the oceans. Science, v. 305, No.
5862, p. 362-366.
Grossman, W., F. T. Mackenzie and A. J. Andersson, 2007, in
preparation.
Guidry, M. W. and F. T. Mackenzie, 2006, Climate Change, Water
Resources, and Sustainability in the Pacific Basin: Emphasis on O'ahu,
Hawai'i and Majuro Atoll, Republic of the Marshall Islands, University
of Hawai'i NOAA Hawai'i Sea Grant Publication, Honolulu, Hawai'i, 100
pp.
Hansen et al., 2006, Global temperature change. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, v. 103, No. 38, p. 14288-14293.
Holthus P., M. Crawford, C. Makroro and S. Sullivan, 1992,
Vulnerability Assessment for Accelerated Sea Level Rise. Case Study:
Majuro Atoll, Republic of the Marshall Islands. SPREP Reports and
Studies Series No, 60, 107 pp.
IPCC, 2001, Climate Change 2001. The Physical Science Basis.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 881 pp.
IPCC, 2007, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 996 pp.
Mackenzie, F. T., 2003, Our Changing Planet--An Introduction to
Earth System Science and Global Environmental Change. Prentice Hall,
Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 580 pp.
Mackenzie, F. T. and A. Lerman, 2006, Carbon in the Geobiosphere--
Earth's Outer Shell. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 402 pp.
Miller, D. L. R. and F. T. Mackenzie, 1988, Implications of climate
change and associated sea level rise for atolls. Proceedings of the 6th
International Coral Reef Symposium, Australia, v. 3, p. 519-522.
Nghiem, et al., 2006, Depletion of perennial sea ice in the East
Arctic Ocean. Geophysical Research Letters, 10.1029/2006GL027198.
Orr, J. C. et al., 2005, Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the
twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organisms. Nature, v.
437, p. 681-686.
Shea et al., 2001, Preparing for a Changing Climate. The Potential
Consequences of Climate Variability and Change. Report of the Pacific
Islands Regional Assessment Group, East-West Center, Honolulu, Hawai'i,
102 pp.
Velicogna, I. and J. Wahr, 2006, Acceleration of Greenland ice mass
loss in spring 2004. Nature, v. 443, p. 329-331.
Visbeck, M., 2008, From climate assessment to climate services.
Nature Geoscience, v. 1, No. 1, p. 2-3.
The Chairman. On behalf of the Committee, I thank all of
you for your testimony. It's a bit frightening. However, I
should tell you that in the past several weeks, articles
prepared supposedly by scientists with various degrees have
been circulated and distributed among Members of Congress, and
these articles suggest that we are giving too much credit to
the greenhouse gases for what is happening. They're suggesting
that what is happening is a natural phenomenon. They point to
the Ice Age, and the fact that the oceans have been there for 4
billion years.
Yesterday on my way into Hawaii, flying, there was a
documentary on the screen, I believe it was prepared by a
British company, that showed the drying out of the
Mediterranean caused by the two continents coming together. It
showed this warm belt that goes underneath, by Alaska, and
that's been affected.
It suggested the importance of one-cell plankton which, if
reduced, would affect all living organisms in the ocean.
What are your thoughts on these articles? Because although
they are not taking hold in the Congress, it does provide
certain people with arguments to slow it down. And all of you
have been suggesting that now is not the time to slow down.
Do you have any thoughts about this? Yes, sir?
Dr. Mackenzie. I have considerable thoughts on them. As you
well know, there's a move out there amongst certain scientists,
working for certain organizations, to come up with information
to try to falsify the hypothesis of global warming, and that's
the way science works--we try to destroy the hypothesis, we try
to tear it apart. That's the way that scientific method works.
And so, some of them are doing it, I think, fairly, they're
doing it, but others, I do think have certain political or
other motivations.
Having said that, let me backtrack in geologic time, and
come forward to today, because I think it will answer your
question about what we've seen in the past--and the past has
been great, why is the future so frightening, maybe? Through
the last 600 million years of Earth's history, we have had
changing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. Indeed, 400
million years ago, carbon dioxide concentrations in our
atmosphere were 18 times the present pre-industrial level of
280 parts per million.
Coming closer to today, during the Cretaceous, at 100
million years ago, those concentrations were 8 to 10 times
higher. During both of those periods, the Earth was warmer.
Now, between those periods, we had carbon dioxide
concentrations that looked much like those of the pre-
industrial age--concentrations much like what we had before we
came into this human anthropogenic scene. And at that time, one
was the so-called Permian Triassic, we had big glaciers. Now we
have big glaciers. So, we are in a relatively cold period of
Earth's history.
During that whole time, as atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentrations were changing, oxygen concentrations were
changing, and sea water chemistry was changing dramatically.
But, these were very slow changes--they weren't changes that
occurred on a scale of tens of years to hundreds of years.
These were changes on a scale of 5 million, to 10 to 100
million years.
Coming close to the present, during this last great Ice
Age, the Pleistocene glaciation developed 1.8 million years
ago. Since then, we have seen a series of warm and cold stages.
The last glacial maximum ended 18,000 years ago, and we are
currently in an inter-glacial, a warming phase of those great
inter-glacial warm/cold cycles, each lasting about 100 million
years.
Those cycles had nothing to do with the anthropogenic
CO2. Those cycles were driven mainly by what is
known as the Milankovitch Hypothesis, which is a hypothesis
which shows how much more or less radiation the Earth receives
as it moves about its sun, and its orbit about the sun changes
with time. Even then, when the Milankovitch 4 scene changed,
the carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide levels in the
atmosphere also changed. So that, during the ice ages, carbon
dioxide was very low--on 180 parts per million by volume,
18,000 years ago. Methane was low, nitrous oxide was low. Going
back to the last, but ultimate, inter-glaciation, the converse
was true--carbon dioxide was about 280 parts per million by
volume, almost like late pre-industrial age time, methane was
high, and nitrous oxide was high.
But during this whole--the record now, the ice core record,
which is the observational data for what I've just said--goes
back more than 600,000 years. And at no time during that period
of time, did we have atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations
above 280 parts per million. That only started when humans
began to influence the system in the 18th century.
And so, the rise in CO2 from the late 19th
century, on up until today, is totally due to fossil fuel
burning, and land use activity. And anyone that denies that is
sadly mistaken.
The same is true for all of the other anthropogenic gases.
They have risen far above their pristine levels in the
atmosphere.
The Chairman. Do most of the scientists involved in these
studies agree that the sea level in the next 50 years will rise
about a meter?
Dr. Mackenzie. I think up until the recent news that we
received, most people would have believed the IPCC, which in
their 2001 report under a business-as-usual scenario, the
largest rise they anticipated at that time was on the order of
88 centimeters--almost a meter. They have reduced that in their
2007 report to 58 centimeters.
However, that report does not take in the recent evidence
of melting of our ice sheets--not just Greenland, but West
Antarctica, too. And they're melting at increasing rates, the
ocean is warming quickly, and part of the rise in sea level is
due to the warming of the ocean and its volume increase,
because of isothermal expansion.
I'm a mountaineer by avocation, I've climbed all over the
world, and I can tell you that most of the valley and mountain
glaciers are melting very rapidly. And so, all of that water is
going into the ocean. So now the presumptive idea is that we
are probably--let me, let me phrase in the way the IPCC 2007
phrases it, it is very likely we will see a 1 meter rise in sea
level by the year 2100.
The Chairman. Dr. Leong, Mr. Thomas, do you agree or
disagree?
Dr. Leong. This is not in my field, so I can't speak as
expert, as Dr. Mackenzie does. But I do agree that we have to
plan for that, that this might happen. And we have to plan for
thermal warming, because our coral reefs will have, within the
next 10 years, many episodes of coral bleaching.
Mr. Thomas. Perhaps I can put this more on a policy level,
in how we integrate our science with policymaking.
As you know, NOAA is a science agency, and we have a very
public purposes. And we take our sense of mission very
seriously. And as part of science, we have to ensure that what
we do is justifiable, is defensible, is scientifically
significant, and more importantly, it's socio-economically
significant.
So, I'd like to follow up on Dr. Mackenzie's comments by
not only reiterating what he said, but also in addition to the
historical data--this is something that is really on a global
scale. And research takes a long time--to really determine what
is scientifically significant.
We have 50 years, and counting, worth of data that backs up
everything that Dr. Mackenzie has said. And, you know, to the
point where NOAA--and, you know, Federal agencies are
reluctant, at times, to say things very unequivocally, but NOAA
has come out very publicly, and said unequivocally that warming
of the climate system is unequivocal, and most of the observed
increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th
century is very likely due to the observed increase in
greenhouse gases caused by humans. I mean, that is a very clear
statement we have from NOAA based on its research.
But there are uncertainties, I mean, with that statement,
there's still a lot of things that we don't know. And, you
know, things like the rate of warming, including the abrupt and
extreme changes, I think, which is what some of the scientists
that you've heard are referring to, as well as regional climate
variations and change.
But with that, also, goes the fact that we have to create
policies that require some mitigation and adaptation, but we
don't really know what the effect of those strategies will be.
Those things are still uncertain. But, I think from our
standpoint, based on our understanding of our own data, as well
as the data of many other scientists, that we state
unequivocally that global warming is here.
The Chairman. As you may have concluded, most Members of
Congress, on a bipartisan basis, are becoming a bit more
concerned, and a little fearful of what may happen to us. We
have passed laws that will set certain standards and levels.
However, a recent report suggests that the two major
culprits of greenhouse gas emissions are China and the United
States. Scientists suggest that even if the U.S. and the rest
of the world should decide to do something about it, but if one
major country the size of China continues business-as-usual, it
would be an effort that might not pay a dividends.
Do you agree?
Dr. Mackenzie. If I understand the question correctly,
you're implying that perhaps the United States may take action
but China would just continue on, and what that--just our
taking action--have impact, if China did not. Is that,
generally, the--?
The Chairman. Well, Congress is now considering laws that
may be considered unfriendly, such as if products being shipped
into the United States have been produced without consideration
of carbon dioxide emissions, they will not be permitted to be
sold in the U.S. And hopefully, by doing that, influence
producers of products. But we have no idea whether they will
work or not.
Dr. Mackenzie. This worries me, and it worries me mostly
from the standpoint that global warming is not a regional
issue, it's not a national, single nation issue, it's a global
issue.
China is not the only country that's moving forward
quickly, and unfortunately in their case, using mainly their
coal resource to burn, but they are also, now, importing oil.
And I believe either this year or--well, probably this year, if
they haven't already, because the statistics are hard to get--
China has passed the United States in total emissions of
CO2 to the atmosphere.
But China's not the only one. India is growing very
rapidly, all of Southeast Asia. So, if I were, myself, were
doing anything, I would rather see global action on the
problem, global agreement on how we deal with all of this,
rather than individual nations being punitive, or taking
actions simply on their own for whatever reason.
You know, there's a lot of talk about mitigation here, in
Hawaii, but you know, mitigation is not going to do this
problem, global warming, one bit, in terms of Hawaiian
mitigation. I think it's great from a sustainability
standpoint.
The Chairman. That's why we're hoping that the Kyoto
Protocol would be a good first step, but the U.S. has not
adopted it, completely, you know.
Dr. Mackenzie. I think the other issue there is we've got
to reign in the deforestation, because that's 20 percent of the
carbon dioxide emissions. So, while we're looking at the fossil
fuel issue, and how we're going to deal with that globally, we
also have to be looking at the deforestation issue, which is
mainly in the developing world, and how we're going to deal
with that in an equitable way.
The Chairman. We're aware of that, and we are concerned.
I'd like to thank all of you for your participation here, and
we will be submitting, if we may, questions that we hope you
can respond to.
Dr. Leong. Thank you.
Dr. Mackenzie. Well, thank you for the invitation.
The Chairman. We could have had an informal gathering and
just have discussions, but because of the severity of the
problem, we decided to at least give it an official mantle and
so that it would be on the record.
And we do intend to do the right thing, but as you may be
aware, there isn't a single scientist in the Congress of the
United States. We have no idea what's happening, but we have to
take your word, so your answers to our questions will be very
important.
Thank you very much.
Dr. Mackenzie. Thank you.
Mr. Thomas. Thank you.
The Chairman. Our next panel consists of the Director of
the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, School of Ocean and Earth
Science and Technology, University of Hawai`i, Manoa; Dr.
Richard E. Rocheleau, Dr. Karl Kim, Professor and Chair,
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Hawaii
at Manoa; and Dr. Goro Uehara, Professor, Department of
Tropical Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Hawai`i at
Manoa.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD E. ROCHELEAU, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, HAWAII
NATURAL ENERGY INSTITUTE, SCHOOL OF OCEAN AND EARTH SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI`I AT MANOA
Dr. Rocheleau. I am the Director of the Hawaii Natural
Energy Institute at the School of Ocean and Earth Science and
Technology at the University of Hawai`i.
And I just wanted to take one moment to acknowledge my co-
author on this testimony, Dr. Terry Surles, who prior to
joining the HNEI faculty was the Associate Lab Director in
charge of Energy at the Livermore National Laboratory, and has
served on the National Academies of Science Committee examining
federally funded energy research programs.
Our faculty at HNEI conducts research on many technologies
in the areas of renewable energy and ocean resources, including
hydrogen fuel cells, conversion of biomass to fuels, and high-
value products, seabed methane hydrates, photovoltaics, battery
technology and microbial systems. We are also leading the UH
effort to establish an ocean energy center in Hawaii.
Support for this work comes from a variety of government
and private sources, and HNEI operates a number of laboratories
to conduct this work. And I just wanted to say, information on
these specific projects is available on our website, but that
wasn't the focus of my talk today.
While I was asked to discuss our work related to clean
energy technologies, I want to make a few comments about the
relation between global climate change and energy. These
largely derive from the IPCC report that many people have
referred to. And then to give a few concrete examples of the
magnitude of this issue, in regards to managing CO2
by transforming our energy infrastructure, and finally, talk
about HNEI's efforts to develop partnerships to accelerate the
development and deployment of renewable energy technologies.
We've heard this before, but at the most basic level, the
balance between incoming solar radiation and outgoing infrared
radiation determines the Earth's climate. And greenhouse gases,
including CO2, do affect this balance whether
naturally occurring or from man.
The most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
is unequivocal in its conclusion that the Earth is warming, and
attributes this to greenhouse gas concentrations in the
atmosphere. And the most often-cited evidence is the increase
in the CO2 concentration from the pre-Industrial
Revolution level of 280 parts per million to today's level of
380.
The concerns about global climate change, global warming
and CO2 emissions has been much more publicly
visible and of interest since the Kyoto meeting in 1997. In
spite of this increased awareness, the rate at which carbon
dioxide is being released into the atmosphere continues to
increase, from around 6.4 billion tons per year in the 1990s to
over 7 billion tons per year in the 2000-2005 time frame.
In fact, a report that just came out today from U.S. DOE,
or at least a citation of a report, reported that power plant
carbon emissions in the U.S. went up 3 percent between 2006 and
2007. So, in spite of the awareness, not much is being done to
reverse the trend.
We just heard from a panel that talked about the
implications of this, and I'll simply state that the bottom
line is that the impact on island nations is likely to be
significant, and some island nations may simply cease to exist
if the sea level rises that are predicted do occur.
The magnitude of this problem is daunting. I noted just a
minute ago that we currently emit about, worldwide, about 7.2
billion tons of carbon per year. To put this in perspective, I
want to talk about the energy infrastructure changes that would
need to be made just to displace one of those 7 gigatons.
We would need to replace seven hundred 1,000-megawatt coal
plants that are currently in operation today with coal plants
that include carbon capture and geological storage. Neither of
those technologies are available today.
We will have to install 150 times the current world
capacity in wind turbines, or replace 2 billion 30 miles per
gallon efficiency cars with 60 miles per gallon. And that would
only make a 1 gigaton, or a 15 percent reduction in our annual
output.
So, the next question is, what would we need to do to make
a significant impact on global emissions? The IPCC targets
immediate action in an attempt to limit carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere to 550 ppm, twice the pre-industrial level, and more
than 50 percent of what we have today. To meet this goal--
basically to reduce--we will have to reduce our carbon
intensity, which is the carbon emissions per dollar of
productivity, to approximately 10 percent of what it is today--
it's a huge reduction.
To give you some idea of what this would require, we will
have to generate 75 percent of all our electricity from non-
fossil sources, we will have to increase energy end-use
efficiency by 1 percent per year, every year, and nearly double
the efficiency of our electricity generation, and also increase
average passenger car mileage up to 50 miles per gallon. Even
then, we will need additional technological breakthroughs to
get to the 10 percent carbon intensity level. So, the magnitude
of the problem is huge.
People talk about potential solutions, obvious ones are use
less energy--helpful, it won't do it all by itself. Carbon
sequestration--necessary, not yet available. And significant
increases in renewable and nonfossil-based energy. And the
numbers you just heard show how daunting that task is, but we
basically need to try to make progress in all areas.
So now I'm just going to discuss for a few minutes, 2
minutes or so, remaining, some of the HNEI efforts.
As we've already heard, Hawaii imports a majority of its
energy, about--over 90 percent. Well, it's characterized by an
unusually high dependence on oil for power generation. And this
reliance on fossil fuel is juxtaposed against an abundance of
renewable resources which could be used for energy. And so, our
position is, you know, with this--and other people in the
sdtate--with this array of renewable resources, and the
opportunity for high-productivity energy crops in Hawaii,
renewable electricity and bio-derived fuels offers great
promise for Hawaii to reduce its dependence on fossil fuel, and
for Hawaii to serve as a model to demonstrate the ability to do
this for the rest of the Nation.
As the Chair has already noted, this potential has
attracted the attention of the Department of Energy, which
recently signed an MOU with the state identifying 70 percent of
our energy from renewable resources by 2030, as a goal, and the
state has, itself, enacted renewable portfolio standards,
targeting 20 percent of our electricity by renewables by 2020.
Given today's energy system, and some of the difficulties,
even the more modest goal is going to be a challenge. HNEI is
committing its resources to developing partnerships which will
help provide analysis and tools to help identify paths
forward--ways to make the proper decisions to move forward, and
to identify critical projects that can demonstrate the ability
to integrate today's technologies into the grid. The ultimate
goal is to use Hawaii as a model for high-penetration renewable
energy generation. And I'm going to speak very briefly about
two projects that have been underway and are continuing today.
As documented in my written testimony where I summarize
some of the energy technologies, there are a number of
commercial and emerging technologies--wind, solar, ocean energy
systems--that do offer the potential for large-scale
penetration into our grid. However, these are inherently more
variable and less dispatchable than conventional energy.
The utilities, the operators, and planners will have to
change the way they do business. HNEI has partnered with the
local utility, with GE Global Research, with the state and with
the U.S. Department of Energy to identify solutions to this
problem. The thrust of this is to develop models and other
tools that can be used to direct future development of
renewable energy systems on the islands. This was initiated on
the Big Island, now includes Maui and this year is expected to
move to O'ahu and Kauai.
These tools are providing information on approaches for
placing more renewable energy into the mix, and it will help
identify enabling technology so the utility can do so.
The Department of Energy is interested in this because our
current stability/reliability issues on these islands will
eventually be faced on the mainland, as well.
In the biomass arena, we do do work on basic research, but
again, we are trying to develop partnerships to move our
technologies forward, using partly what is available today.
Researchers at HNEI and the College of Tropical Agriculture
are working collaboratively on new energy production systems.
This includes crop screening for high-productivity, high-
yielding crops and conversion technologies that can be
integrated for the maximum energy production potential. The
economic feasibility of the integrated bio-energy systems will
be used to select the appropriate technology to move forward.
We are also working with local and national industry to try
to demonstrate promising biofuels technologies in a small-
scale, tropical bio-refinery. This effort is in its infancy,
but the eventual goal will be a pre-commercial demonstration of
a tropical bio-refinery system, which could then be replicated
in many of the high-production, high-productivity tropical
regions around the world, to provide biofuels.
A quick note--one of the key tools to moving forward with
new energy technologies is policy, and HNEI is working closely
with the Department of Energy, the PUC, state energy office,
and the energy providers to provide unbiased information to
help develop appropriate policy to move the state forward.
Just kind of going back and repeating again--Hawaii
provides--and in closing--a very unique environment that will
allow quantitative evaluation of grid integration and
commercialization of renewable technologies, and it can be a
model for our state and our county. It's really unlikely that
the public or the private sectors alone will be able to solve
this--it's going to take an integrated, concerted effort.
Just as a note, the issue today was global warming, but the
issues associated with renewable energy also impact our energy
security both in the state and in the Nation, so these are
objectives we should try to meet regardless of your position on
global warming. And, as I said, this is going to require
concerted and collaborative effort among all of the partners,
and continuity of funding to move this forward in the national
interest, and thank you very much for this opportunity to
testify.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Rocheleau follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard E. Rocheleau, Ph.D., Director and Terry
Surles, Researcher, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, University of
Hawai`i at Manoa
Introduction
Good morning, Chairman Inouye and Members of the Committee. Thank
you for the opportunity to testify on this very important matter--
Climate Change Impacts and Responses in Island Communities. My name is
Richard Rocheleau. I am Director of the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute
(HNEI). The Institute is an organized research unit in the School of
Ocean and Earth Science and Technology at the University of Hawai`i at
Manoa. HNEI's faculty and staff conduct a range of research in the
areas of renewable energy and ocean resources and manage several larger
public-private partnerships to accelerate the acceptance and deployment
of renewable energy technologies into Hawaii's energy mix. Our primary
areas of emphasis includes development and deployment of hydrogen and
fuel cell technologies, conversion of biomass into fuels and other high
value products, advanced batteries and their applications,
photovoltaics, seabed methane hydrates, and analysis of integrated
energy systems to facilitate high penetration of intermittent renewable
energy technologies into electrical grid systems. As the renewable
technologies mature, the ability to deploy them in an economic and
environmentally sound manner without negatively impacting the
reliability of our energy systems becomes of paramount importance.
My own personal research has been in the areas of photovoltaics,
hydrogen technology and fuel cells. As Director, I have focused
considerable effort on development of public-private partnerships
directed toward the implementation and deployment of renewable energy
technologies into the islands' energy mix. My coauthor of this
testimony, Dr. Terry Surles, is a member of the HNEI faculty. Prior to
joining HNEI he was the Associate Lab Director at Livermore National
Laboratory for Energy, was General Manager of Environmental Programs at
Argonne National Laboratory, was the head of the Public Interest Energy
Research Program at the California Energy Commission, and served on a
National Academy of Sciences committee examining prospective benefits
of federally funded energy research. Dr. Surles' primary interests are
integrated energy systems as they relate to solutions for global
climate change and energy security issues.
I have been asked by this Committee to discuss our work related to
clean energy technologies. Hawaii is very concerned about global
climate change and energy security. It is unique among the 50 states in
its dependence on oil for the production of electricity--about 86
percent of Hawaii's electricity is produced from oil. The grid systems
are small by mainland utility standards and on the neighbor islands are
relatively sparse leading to high costs for transmission and
distribution. These factors, and Hawaii's abundant supply of renewable
energy resources, offer a unique opportunity for Hawaii to serve as a
``living laboratory'' to identify the achievable limits for the
deployment of renewable energy systems and to evaluate the impacts,
benefits, and issues associated with such deployment to ameliorate
global climate change and petroleum dependency.
The problems are not simple. Even renewable energy systems can have
a CO2 footprint--some such as ethanol from corn can be
almost as large as that from petroleum. Due to intermittency and
reliability, there are practical limits to the penetration of renewable
systems on the grid. Can these limits be pushed sufficiently far and
fast enough to have a significant impact on emissions and global
climate change? HNEI and its partners are attempting to address these
issues. In the last section of this testimony I do describe a few of
HNEI's activities in this area, ones which if successful will impact
not only the state but also the Nation. However, before describing what
HNEI's activities are, I would like to take a few minutes to address
global climate change and energy from the larger context. This
discussion comes largely from the recent reports of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and related publically
available studies.
Energy and Global Climate Change
At the most basic level, the balance between incoming solar
radiation and outgoing infrared radiation (as heat) determines Earth's
climate. Earth, it should be noted, is a greenhouse gas planet.
Greenhouse gases, which include water vapor, absorb this infrared
radiation, thus trapping heat near the earth's surface. Other gases,
such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, are also greenhouse
gases. While these occur naturally, anthropogenic emissions of these
gases, as well as man-made greenhouse gases (i.e.,
chlorofluorocarbons), have substantially increased the amount of these
heat trapping gases in the atmosphere.
Warming of the earth, according to the most recent
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007), is unequivocal,
as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air
and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising
global mean sea levels. The IPCC attributes this warming to the
increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. For
example, the concentration of carbon dioxide, arguably the most
important greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere has increased from about
280 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere prior to the Industrial
Revolution to over 380 ppm at present. The continuously recorded data
at the Mauna Loa Observatory demonstrate a seasonal, but monotonic,
increase from about 315 ppm in 1958 to today's levels.
There are arguments that these changes are part of the natural
climate cycles of the earth and not attributable to human factors.
However, paleo-climate information supports the interpretation that the
warmth of the last 50 years is unusual over at least the last 1,300
years. The last time the Polar Regions were this warm for an extended
period was about 125,000 years ago. Vostok (the Russian research
station in Antarctica) ice core data suggest that the earth may be as
warm as it has been in the past 400,000 years.
Recent data also support the fact that the past 10 years contain
many of the warmest years since weather data were being recorded. In
fact, despite the increasing concerns about climate change and global
warming, the rate at which carbon dioxide is being released into the
atmosphere continues to increase from 6.4 Gigatonnes carbon (GtC) per
year (6,400,000,000 tonnes C/yr) during the 1990s to about 7.2 GtC per
year between 2000 and 2005, an increase in the rate of emission release
of over 10 percent in 10 years.
The IPCC report provides projections for the future of earth's
climate which include significant continued increases in temperature.
For temperature change, the models are reasonably consistent in
predicting increased temperatures based on the amount of carbon dioxide
being emitted over this coming century. Since carbon dioxide will
remain in the atmosphere for a very long time, even an aggressive
response for reducing emissions is expected to result in an increase in
temperature. Thus, a best case estimate for a low emissions and related
temperature rise scenario will be between 1.1 +C to 2.9 +C (a global
temperature increase of about 3 +F) by 2100. Other scenarios predict
likely temperature increases in the range of 2.4 +C to 6.4 +C (a global
temperature increase of about 7 +F) by 2100.
The implications of this considerable increase in temperature have
been documented in numerous peer reviewed journal articles. Some of
these impacts would include changes in cropping patterns due to an
increase in drought and precipitation in agricultural areas. Other
impacts on our food supply can include the introduction of invasive
species, such as plant and animal pests as the climatic conditions may
change. Additional impacts may be related to human health as tropical
diseases become prevalent in formerly temperate climates.
The impacts of the changing climate are now beginning to manifest
themselves. Over the past decade, we have seen increased precipitation
in the mid-latitudes, further drying of lower latitudes (leading to
increased desertification), and more intense and longer droughts in the
tropics and sub-tropics. The lack of water will potentially impact
Pacific Island nations in the nearer-term. There is reasonable
expectation for these precipitation trends to continue.
In the longer term, some island nations may simply cease to exist
due to rising sea levels associated with melting land-based glaciers
and sea water expansion due to increased water temperature.
Conservative projections for sea level rise, even under the best of
circumstances, are for a rise of slightly over three feet over the
course of this century. For many low lying islands, this amount of sea
level rise would have a substantive impact. Sustained temperature
increases that are implied in the higher scenarios, described in the
preceding paragraph, could eventually--over the course of this
century--melt the Greenland ice sheet, causing a sea level rise on the
order of twenty feet.
A substantial amount of carbon dioxide emissions is due to our use
of energy. The onset of the Industrial Revolution is generally equated
with the start of large-scale burning of coal in England. The majority
of today's carbon dioxide emissions arise from the burning of fossil
fuel including coal, oil, and natural gas. In the mainland U.S., coal-
fired power plants, the worst emitters, account for slightly more than
50 percent of the electricity generation. In Hawaii, about 86 percent
of electricity is provided by oil-fired generation and 7.4 percent is
provided by coal-fired generation.
For transportation, the situation is similar and possibly even
worse. Almost all of our Nation's transportation fuel is derived from
petroleum. It should be noted that this dependence on petroleum is also
a key contributor to our Nation's energy security issues as well as the
foreign debt/balance of payments problems. Thus, there is clear reason
for linking security and climate change issues for our country's well-
being.
The magnitude of this problem is daunting. For example, we
discussed the fact that the world is currently emitting 7.2 gigatonnes
of carbon a year. To put this into perspective we offer some examples
of the changes to our energy infrastructure that would be required to
reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by one gigatonne per year (from R.
Socolow, Stanford Hydrogen Workshop, 2003). These include:
Install 700 1000 MW coal-fired power plants that include
carbon capture and geological storage (not even available yet);
Install two thousand times (2000) the world's
current supply of photovoltaics.
Install 150 times (150) the current worldwide
capacity of wind turbines;
Replace two billion 30 mpg efficiency cars with 60 mpg
efficiency cars.
The implication of climate change mitigation is that we must try to
stabilize the concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere to a
doubling of pre-industrial concentrations in order to not suffer
unknown, but potentially catastrophic effects. In other words, we need
to take immediate action to limit carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to a
concentration of 550 ppm. Since we are already seeing impacts at 380
ppm concentrations, even this may be too high. However, as discussed in
the preceding paragraph, the changes in our energy infrastructure
required to control carbon dioxide emissions are daunting. In order to
achieve and maintain a 550 ppm atmospheric concentration of carbon
dioxide by the end of the century, we will need to reduce our carbon
intensity to less than 10 percent of what it is today. (Carbon
intensity is the measure of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere
divided by the gross domestic product.)
Projected requirements to achieve this 10 percent goal include
accomplishing all of the following:
Generate 75 percent of all electricity from non-fossil
sources.
Increase end-use energy efficiency increases by 1 percent
per year every year.
Increase electricity generation efficiency to 67 percent
(currently about 35 percent) by 2050.
Increase passenger car mileage to average 50 mpg by 2050.
Even if all of these are achieved, we will need additional
technological breakthroughs to achieve a carbon intensity goal of less
than 10 percent of our current value and even that will only limit the
planet to a doubling of its atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations
from pre-industrial times.
For our country and for our state, we must pursue all technology
solutions. The most effective solution is to simply use less energy.
The highest priority for many state public utility commissions starts
with end-use energy efficiency. This needs to involve not only the
request to change lifestyles, but to develop and commercialize new end-
use technologies that are more energy efficient in meeting the demands
of the economy.
Another mechanism is to sequester (capture and store) carbon
dioxide from coal-fired power plants. This is currently a technology
under development that still faces a number of environmental,
engineering, and financial challenges before reaching any stage of
commercialization. Recent estimates report that CO2 capture
may require at least 25 percent of a pulverized coal-fired power
plant's total output (C&E News, March 3, 2008). Newer technologies,
such as oxy-combustor and integrated gasification/combined cycle
systems, may allow for the continued use of coal and the more cost-
effective capture and geological storage of carbon dioxide. This will
allow our country to continue to utilize indigenous national energy
resources.
Another approach--and one which will now be discussed at greater
length--is the increased utilization of renewable energy resources. The
greater use of these indigenous resources will allow us to reduce our
dependence on foreign energy resources, while at the same time reducing
carbon dioxide emissions for the amount of energy we consume. As noted
earlier, the carbon emissions for any renewable resource technology are
not zero. When one takes the technology's life cycle into
consideration, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are emitted
during the fabrication or operation of these technologies.
As indicated, if we are to make progress against increasing
CO2 emissions, the solutions will necessarily be
multifaceted. Renewables offer one potential solution for reduction of
fossil fuel usage in both the electricity and transportation sectors.
With its wealth of renewable resources, renewables can be a
particularly effective approach for the state of Hawaii. The issue
before the state is how to utilize these resources in an economic,
environmentally-sensitive, and societal-acceptable manner. The next
section provides a very brief summary of the status of various
renewable energy resources and issues related to the deployment of
related commercial technologies.
Renewable Energy Technologies
Hawaii is blessed with almost every renewable energy resource
imaginable. With its high cost of electricity and fuels, wealth of
renewable resources, and stand-alone grid systems, Hawaii can serve as
a model system for the rest of the Nation in the deployment of
renewable energy systems. However, before moving onto the Hawaii energy
situation and HNEI's energy activities, I would like take a few minutes
to provide a very brief review of the status, potential and unresolved
challenges associated with the various renewable energy technologies.
Wind
Other than conventional hydroelectric power, wind is arguably the
most developed of the renewable technologies. Megawatt (MW) sized wind
turbines are available from a number of suppliers and have been shown
to be cost effective where siting and integration are not issues.
However, wind is characterized by restrictive operational constraints
in terms of its intermittency (on both a second-by-second and day-by-
day basis) that can have a substantive effect on the stability and
reliability of the electricity grid limiting the allowable penetration
onto the grid system. Siting can also be a challenge. Resource maps for
wind can be useful, but wind is a localized resource. These resources
are not always located where the electricity load is. Thus, long
distance transmission is a challenge. Additionally, there can be
localized opposition to wind due to perceived visual, noise, and
aesthetic effects. Off-shore wind development has been proposed as an
answer to land-use issues, but deployment is limited to relatively
shallow regions which open the door for visual impact concerns. This
has been part of the on-going discussions over the development of a
wind farm in the near-shore area of Cape Cod in Massachusetts. Wind
capacity factors (percent of energy relative to nameplate) are
typically around 35 percent and only 45 percent in best wind regimes.
Thus, as with other intermittent renewable resources, the utility must
have nearly equal back-up capacity for each MW of wind. Even when the
operating utility has spinning and regulating reserve on line to
control power quality and to allow rapid response to sudden losses in
wind, sudden changes in wind speeds can destabilize the grid. Power
quality and response issues increase non-linearly as wind penetration
increases and become significant at percentages in the 10 to 20 percent
range. Issues, as we are finding in Hawaii, are seen first on smaller
grid systems. However, even on a large continental-based grid,
reliability issues may arise. For example, just 2 weeks ago, the Texas
grid system almost went down when there was a sudden and significant
loss of wind.
Biomass
Biomass, organic matter of biogenic origins, is currently used as a
feedstock for the production of fuels, chemicals, power, and heat. This
flexibility to serve both fuels and power applications is a major
difference between biomass and other renewables. The three primary
sources of biomass in the U.S. today are wood, waste (e.g., Municipal
Solid Waste), and crops for alcohol and plant oil based fuels. The
first two groups are used almost exclusively for the generation of heat
and power, and in 2005 accounted for 82 percent of biomass consumption
on an energy basis. (EIA, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/
solar.renewables/page/biomass/biomass.html).
The current development efforts for biofuels in the U.S. has
focused primarily on ethanol produced from corn and biodiesel produced
from soybeans. Ethanol production from corn approached 5 billion
gallons in 2006 ( 3 percent of overall gasoline consumption) and is
expected to show continued growth. Biodiesel production was
significantly less at 100 million gallons representing only about 0.25
percent of distillate fuel consumption. The impacts of rising petroleum
prices and growth in demand for biofuels have resulted in increased
biofuel production and, even at these modest levels of production, have
led to competition with food supplies. Unlike electricity, where
several renewable technologies can be used to displace fossil fuel
power generation, renewable liquid transportation fuels are expected to
come almost exclusively from biomass.
It is generally agreed that current biofuels systems (crops and
conversion technology) are not sustainable, certainly not at the scale
needed to impact long-term energy security or climate change. To
achieve sustainable biofuels systems, production of biomass will need
to focus on the use of marginal agricultural lands, improved crop
yields, reduced production inputs (i.e., water, fertilizer, etc.),
development of non-agricultural biomass resources, and improved biofuel
production technologies and end-use efficiency. The transition from
fossil fuels to biofuels will only be achievable with development of
appropriate policy that will provide the sustainability and stability
needed for long-term investment at all points along the value chain.
The development of technology to produce transportation fuels from
materials less valuable than corn or sugar has focused on using fiber
(i.e., wood, straw, bagasse, etc.) as the feedstock. Integrated
biochemical and thermo-chemical technologies currently under
development are positioned for use in bio-refineries of the future and
show great promise. However considerable time and investment in R&D and
commercialization are required. These efforts need to be afforded a
high priority.
Photovoltaics
Solar photovoltaics are reliable and commercially available but
continue to suffer from high costs. The current market is dependent on
subsidies and/or tax credits with a significant part of the commercial
sales taking place in only a few places (Germany, California, and New
Jersey) where aggressive subsidies are provided. The majority of the
market today is served by some form of silicon wafer but a number of
thin-film and 3rd and 4th generation materials are under development.
Since a PV system includes the other module components, hardware for
mounting and installation, and balance of plant for integration to the
household or grid; cost of the actual semiconductor is only one of the
cost factors that must be addressed. Integration into the grid is
simpler than for wind (predictability better) but the relatively high
cost is likely to limit deployment except in locations with high
electricity costs such as Hawaii.
Solar Thermal
This technology is of interest in that it can provide for the use
of power even when the sun isn't shining through the use of heat
transfer and storage fluids in its system. Currently, these systems are
in use in parts of the world, such as the Negev Desert, where there is
little scattering of the incident light. Their potential, while
considerable in Hawaii, still awaits further reductions in operational
costs and in confirmation of longer term efficacy of stable operation.
Geothermal
This is a proven technology where the resource allows use of
conventional power generation technologies, i.e., geothermal resource
provides steam for power generation. Newer technologies such as
engineered geothermal systems (EGS) which use water injection to
utilize dry geothermal heat for steam production are under development.
There are positive projections of cost for EGS, but these systems have
not yet been demonstrated in a commercial setting. Under heavy use,
long term viability of a geothermal resource can be an issue. Siting
for naturally occurring geothermal fluid systems is an issue in that
they are only available in a limited number of locations. EGS systems
however have a much greater area upon which to draw and could form the
basis of a distributed generation system. Unlike most other renewable
technologies, intermittency is not an issue. Thus, geothermal energy
can be used for base load power.
Ocean Energy Technologies
Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC)--Net power production has
been demonstrated from OTEC but questions remain about the efficiency
of the process, cost, demonstrated lifetime, and design efficiency. In
addition, there is limited potential for the mainland U.S. without some
form of chemical energy transfer which today is too expensive. At the
gigawatt scale, this technology uses enormous amounts of deep sea and
surface sea water which may have significant long term environmental
impacts.
Wave --There are many (up to 40) competing wave energy technologies
worldwide. While there has been significant progress in recent years,
many ocean deployments to validate system performance have met with
limited success. Capital, including installation costs, is a
significant factor. One point that is seldom made, although obvious, is
that the ocean environment is harsh from both corrosion and simple wear
and tear. Therefore, longer term efficacy related to O&M needs to be
demonstrated. Intermittency will require back-up energy generation
technology, but rapid transients such as those associated with wind are
not expected to be apparent. Thus, high penetration is theoretically
possible.
Hydrogen and Fuel Cells
Hydrogen is an energy source, such as the sun or a fossil fuel.
Rather, hydrogen is an energy carrier like electricity. While hydrogen
is the most plentiful element in the universe it does not occur freely.
It must be manufactured from compounds in which it is bound. Hydrogen
can be produced by electrolyzing water and from the gasification of
biomass.
Hydrogen can be used to generate electrical power electrochemically
in a fuel cell or to produce mechanical energy by thermo-chemical
combustion in an internal combustion engine. In the case of a fuel
cell, the product of combustion is pure water; in an engine it is water
and some nitrogen oxide. Economics dictate that renewable electricity
is best utilized to power the utility grid with any surplus used for
hydrogen production via electrolysis.
When considering hydrogen as a potential energy carrier, all of the
elements making up the system must be considered. These elements
include the production, storage, and transport requirements, plus the
end-use utilization of the hydrogen. Although considerable progress has
been made over the past 10 years, all of these components of the
hydrogen system are in the development stage and not yet commercial.
However as the price of oil increases, the value of clean energy
solutions becomes more important, and technical progress is made,
hydrogen is expected to become an important component of future energy
systems, and Hawaii could be one of the earliest adopters.
HNEI Activities Related to Clean Energy Technologies
Hawaii imports fuel for generation of the majority of its energy
(93 percent) characterized by an unusually high dependence on oil for
power generation. This substantial reliance on fossil fuels is
juxtaposed against an abundance of renewable resources which could be
used for energy. With this array of renewable resources and the
opportunity for high productivity energy crops; renewable electricity
and bio-derived fuels offer great promise to reduce the states'
dependence on fossil fuels and for Hawaii to demonstrate for the
Nation, the potential of energy independence through renewable energy.
This was recognized in the recent MOU between the State of Hawaii and
U.S. Department of Energy where a goal of 70 percent of the state's
energy from renewable sources by 2030 was announced. While an admirable
goal, and arguably one that is necessary nationally and internationally
if we are to impact CO2 emissions and climate there are very
significant hurdles--technical, economic, and policy--to be overcome if
there is to be significant progress toward this goal within the
critical 10 to 15 year time-frame in which consensus estimates agree
that world-wide conventional oil and gas resources will not meet
demand. Although the goals are less aggressive, in 2004, the State
enacted a new Renewable Portfolio Standards law (S.B. 2474) setting a
renewable energy goal of 20 percent for 2020. However, implementation
even at this modest level of penetration remains a challenge.
As summarized in the introduction, HNEI conducts research and
development in a number of technology areas. HNEI has also committed
substantial resources and effort to development of public-private
partnerships which will: (1) provide for development of analysis and
tools to identify the optimal path(s) forward and (2) identify critical
projects to validate key renewable technologies and the ability to
integrate these technologies into the energy mix. It is these latter
integration activities which can most quickly effect change in the
state and for that reason, will be the focus on my discussion today of
HNEI activities.
Renewable Energy Deployment: There are a number of commercial and
emerging technologies such as wind, solar, and ocean energy systems
that offer the potential for large scale penetration of renewable
electricity into the grid. However, each of these technologies is
inherently more variable and less dispatchable than conventional
generation. Their implementation will require utility system planners
and operators to adopt new technology and new strategies to ensure
reliable and efficient electric grid operation. HNEI, in partnership
with the local utility, GE Global Research Center, the state, and U.S.
DOE, has developed a substantial program to identify potential
solutions to high penetration of renewables. HNEI holds a unique
position in being able to merge interests and funding from a variety of
public and private resources.
The thrust of this current project is to develop models and other
analytical tools that can be used to evaluate the future development of
renewable energy systems on each of the islands, addressing specific
island energy systems and resources. This effort was initiated on the
Big Island, now includes Maui, and is expected later this year to
include Oahu and Kauai. Using the Big Island effort as an example,
operations and modeling show that the electricity that is available
from existing wind power on the island can compromise the stability and
reliability of the grid. At the same time, the state Renewable
Portfolio Standard is mandating additional renewable energy
installation between now and 2020 and independent power producers are
pushing for increased use of wind by the utility. Use of these scenario
analysis and management tools is providing information on approaches
for placing more renewable energy systems on the Big Island. These
analyses also demonstrate the need for development, demonstration, and
deployment of enabling technologies for renewable systems. These
enabling technologies will necessarily include electricity storage
systems (for both second-by-second response and for bulk storage),
advanced power electronics, and demand-response technologies.
These scenario analysis and management tools also allow
characterization of the benefits, costs, performance issues,
environmental and societal issues, and impacts of various solution
scenarios for each of the main islands.
Additional projects in these areas have been proposed using the
existing partnerships to leverage resources to validate technology
integration solutions through field demonstrations. As discussed in
more detail below, these analyses also help provide robust policy
analysis to support legislative solutions to ensure a systematic and
reliable transformation of Hawaii's energy systems. The Department of
Energy is interested in this work, since the current stability and
reliability issues facing the Big Island are expected to be replicated
on the mainland.
Tropical Biofuels: In the biomass arena, there are numerous
technologies in various stages of development in Hawaii and elsewhere
with potential to contribute to Hawaii's energy solutions. Analogous to
the integration issues being addressed for high penetration of
renewables onto the electricity grid, cost-effective deployment of
these emerging biomass conversion technologies for power or fuels
production require substantial integration to effectively utilize the
biomass resource. Additionally, many of the biomass resources and
conversion technologies are yet to be validated for commercial
deployment. HNEI has embarked on a number of partnerships to address
these issues.
Researchers in HNEI and the College of Tropical Agriculture and
Human Resources are working collaboratively to develop new bioenergy
production systems for Hawaii. Crop production research activities
include screening candidate crops suited for the tropics under
different soil and climatic conditions (benchmark locations) and
selecting for high yielding varieties with the greatest energy
production potential. The feedstock properties that are important in
bioenergy conversion vary between crops and may depend on environmental
factors. These properties are quantified for selected candidate
feedstocks and conversion tests are performed in laboratory or bench-
scale equipment to optimize biomass conversion methods across the range
of fuel properties. The economic feasibility and energy productivity of
an integrated bioenergy system based on the production of candidate
crops and selected conversion technology options are evaluated. This
integrated approach provides necessary analysis in support of bioenergy
systems development.
Finally, HNEI is working with private industry to demonstrate
promising biofuel technologies in small scale tropical biorefinery.
Under this activity, HNEI is undertaking technology assessment
including models of resource requirements for crop production and
conversion technologies, integrated systems evaluation including
characterization of benefits, costs, performance issues, and
environmental and societal impacts of various systems. The eventual
goal of this work is pre-commercial demonstration of a tropical
biorefinery system.
The latter activity will be used to validate key process components
and production targets and provide continuous, operational data at a
scale sufficient to lower the technical risks associated with financing
future commercial plants. All three tasks will seek to build
partnerships with entities (land owners, businesses, State agencies,
etc.) in the Hawaii biomass community and with groups from outside
Hawaii that can provide technology, capabilities, and significant
leveraging of project funds to help overcome the technical, economic,
and resource barriers which have, to date, prevented significant
progress in the development of new bioenergy projects in Hawaii.
Policy: HNEI is working closely with the U.S. DOE, the State Energy
Office, the PUC, and energy providers to provide unbiased information
for development of a set of policies which can help move the state
forward. This project effort and other HNEI activities allow for the
integration of knowledge gained from technology assessment with public
policy analysis. One of the most efficient paths forward for
commercializing new technology in this area is to link technology
advances with public policy tools and initiatives. The information
gained from this effort will provide the state Public Utilities
Commission, for example, with information on how new power purchase
agreements may be configured to reduce costs to the rate payer. This
project can also provide information to commercial technology interests
on how best to modify and configure their technologies for emerging
electricity markets that are increasingly dependent on renewable and
distributed energy. In short, there are many means and mechanisms for
how public policy initiatives and technology development can be linked
to provide benefits to consumers and--more broadly--to the state and
nation. HNEI is working on ensuring that these mechanisms are as
effective as possible.
Closing Remarks
Hawaii can and should be a ``living laboratory'' to explore the
potential for validating the performance of various renewable energy
technologies in commercial deployment. Our state also can provide a
unique environment to allow for a quantitative evaluation of grid
integration and commercialization of new technologies, not only for our
state, but for the country as a whole. The active interest by state
government, Congress, the energy community and the private sector
allows for the integration of technology, commercial deployment and
policy. While these are initially directed to Hawaii, in the future
they can be applicable to national needs. This is particularly
important for many of the larger scale issues facing our energy
systems. It is unlikely that either the public or the private sectors
can solve any of the large scale issues independently of the other.
These issues--global climate change, energy security, grid
modernization, and critical infrastructure, to name a few--require
concerted and collaborative efforts and continuity of funding to be
solved in the national interest.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Dr. Kim?
STATEMENT OF KARL KIM, Ph.D., PROFESSOR AND CHAIR,
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING,
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI`I AT MANOA
Dr. Kim. Good morning, Senator Inouye. Thank you very much
for this opportunity to testify. I'm honored to have this
opportunity to speak about the impacts of climate change, and
the response in island communities.
I'm also happy to follow my distinguished colleagues which
make my testimony all that more easy.
I've just come from Tokyo, and the United Nations
University, where I've been participating in meetings related
to climate change, sustainability, disaster management and
renewable energy. I'm also engaged in some research related to
the modeling of efforts to reduce carbon emissions through
urban planning and transportation, with the National Institute
for Environmental Studies in Japan, and I'd like to report to
you that these organizations are very much concerned about the
anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gases.
Earlier today there was mention of a report issued by the
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, which
I'm a member of. Next year, they will be focusing on the
impacts of climate change on transportation infrastructure.
I've prepared a paper for presentation at that meeting, so I
want to again reiterate that there are many science-based
organizations that are taking, very seriously, these issues of
climate change, global warming and sea level rise.
Much of my research involves modeling the impacts of
climate change, especially on critical infrastructure and on
the social and economic life of communities, particularly in
Hawaii. Cities or urban areas are, at once, both a cause and a
solution to the problem of climate change.
On the one hand, as we've heard this morning, they consume
tremendous amounts of land, resources, and energy, and generate
vast amounts of greenhouse gases--cities store heat and are
constructed of impervious surfaces contributing to runoff,
flash-flooding and other ecological problems. And urban
expansion, then, has also meant, globally, the loss of forests,
agricultural lands, and other sinks for carbon sequestration.
So, but at the same time, cities also provide opportunities
for increased density of development--reduction of travel
distances for work, shopping, education, and opportunities to
use new technologies for energy, communications, commerce and
economic development. Adoption of sustainable, renewable green
design planning and building techniques will not only help
reduce the ecological footprint of cities and urban areas, but
will also provide a pathway for continued growth and
prosperity.
And it's really critical that our planning regime,
including our comprehensive plans, our general plans, our
development plans, our zoning codes, our building codes and
other various community plans and project plans are realigned
to address the conditions and needs created by climate change.
If we start now, we can change this regime.
There have been some really important recent studies that
have looked at, for example, the costs and benefits of
hardening the shoreline versus managed realignment strategies,
in which you encourage development to occur further inland.
This is work that we can do now over the long term that will
make a lot of sense.
And there are obvious technological issues, as well as
political and social issues associated with these policy
changes. And I think our University can play a critical role,
in not just developing these technologies, but also working to
re-train planners and other policymakers that are involved in
this type of forward-thinking, forward decisionmaking.
As you've noted in your introductory comments, and as we've
heard this morning, already, climate change greatly impacts
island communities. In my written testimony, I've summarized
some of the key research. Fortunately, most of it was published
after 2005, so I feel safe with it.
Some of the pieces that I cited were done in 1998, and
before the more dire predictions of sea level rise were
identified. The way that I look at this is, even back before
these dire predictions came out, the impacts upon Pacific
Islands, on small island settings, were well-noted. So, it can
only get worse.
In order to lessen the probability of these natural events,
and climate-induced events from turning into disasters, there's
a need to develop effective programs, training and an
integrated system of disaster preparedness, response, and
recovery. An integrated system includes Federal, State and
local governments, as well as international agencies, non-
governmental organizations and the private and volunteer
sectors.
A comprehensive approach includes consideration of all
phases of the disaster cycle, including preparedness response,
recovery, mitigation, development and adaptation to
environmental change.
While there's been research and training on various aspects
of response and preparedness, there's a need for more research
and training on adaptation, and addressing the vulnerabilities
of populations exposed to natural hazards. There is particular
need to address natural hazards in the Pacific Region, and in
many areas throughout the Nation.
With the creation of the Department of Homeland Security,
significant effort has gone toward the prevention and response
to acts of terrorism. The National Domestic Preparedness
Consortium was established in September 1998, and reconfirmed
in public law in 2001. The original members, the Center for
Domestic Preparedness, LSU, Nevada Test Site, New Mexico Tech,
Texas A&M--these original members of the consortium addressed
counterterrorism preparation needs, within the context of
chemical, biological, radiological and explosive weapons of
mass destruction. Not a one of these centers is focused on
natural hazards.
Reauthorized in the Homeland Security legislation in 2007
through 2011, the consortium was expanded, as you know, to
include all hazards, including technological and natural
hazards. The two new members that were added include the
Transportation Technology Center in Colorado, and the National
Disaster Preparedness Training Center at the University of
Hawai`i. And, within the DHS, the consortium is located within
FEMA now, under the National Preparedness Directorate.
The focus of our center, the National Disaster Preparedness
Training Center, is on building community resiliency to all
hazards, by developing and providing training to first
responders, decisionmakers, policy analysts and urban planners.
Our center will partner with key Federal, State, local,
international partners to develop and implement training on
disaster preparedness, response, recovery, relevant to the
special needs and conditions of Pacific Island communities, and
others at risk from natural and technological hazards.
We will provide training consisting of formal degrees and
certificate programs, as well as specialized courses,
workshops, conferences, and coordinate the sharing of data and
information related to preparedness, mitigation, response and
recovery, and serve as an incubator for new ideas,
technologies, businesses and partnerships between the
University, business and government.
To date, we have attended two meetings, two quarterly
meetings, of the consortium, to learn about the training
activities of the other six centers. We've also had productive
and informative meetings with the Emergency Management
Institute under FEMA, and others within the Department of
Homeland Security.
We've interacted with the Natural Hazards Center at the
University of Colorado, Boulder, as well as other national and
international training partners.
We've also been working very closely with entities and
organizations within Hawaii, involved with disaster management
to become a model of how information and technology can be
shared across our community. And it is evident that the Center
will play an important role in addressing the needs of both
island communities as well as other coastal communities and
those affected by natural disasters throughout the Nation.
I want to, on behalf of the University and the State and
others involved in this area, I want to thank you for your
efforts in this area, in creating the National Disaster
Preparedness Training Center.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Kim follows:]
Prepared Statement of Karl Kim, Ph.D., Professor and Chair, Department
of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Hawai`i at Manoa
Introduction
Good morning, Senator Inouye and Members of the Committee. I am
Karl Kim, Professor and Chair of the Department of Urban and Regional
Planning at the University of Hawaii. I am honored to have this
opportunity to speak to you about the impacts of climate change and
responses in island communities. I have just come from Tokyo and the
United Nations University where I have been participating in meetings
related to climate change, sustainability, disaster management, and
renewable energy. I am also engaged in research related to modeling of
efforts to reduce carbon emissions through urban and transportation
planning with the National Institute for Environmental Studies in
Japan. I also serve as an Advisor to the Korea office of the
International Council of Environmental Initiatives, which is focused on
sustainable development in the Asia-Pacific region. I would also note
that I am a member of the Transportation Research Board, National
Research Council which will also be addressing the impacts of climate
change on transportation at its Annual Meeting in 2009. I am currently
working on a study estimating the impacts of climate change and sea
level rise on coastal roadways and business activities in Hawaii. My
current research also involves modeling evacuation decision-making in
coastal communities. Much of my research over the past two decades has
involved sustainable development and urban and transportation planning.
Climate Change and Urban Planning
Cities are both a cause of and a solution to the problem of climate
change. They consume tremendous amounts of land, resources and energy
and generate vast amounts of greenhouse gases. Cities store heat and
are constructed of impervious surfaces, contributing to urban runoff,
flash flooding, and other ecological problems. Urban expansion has also
meant the destruction and loss of forests, agricultural lands, and
other sinks for carbon sequestration. Cities also provide opportunities
for increased density of development, reduction of travel distances for
work, shopping, and education, and opportunities to utilize new
technologies for energy, communications, commerce, and economic
development. Adoption of sustainable, renewable, green design,
planning, and building techniques will help to not only reduce the
ecological footprint of cities, but also provide a pathway for
continued economic growth and prosperity. It is critical that the
planning regime, including comprehensive and general plans, development
plans, zoning and building codes and various community and project
plans, is realigned to address the conditions and needs created by
climate change. Turner, et. al. (2007) have recently examined the costs
and benefits of hardening the shoreline versus managed realignment of
development further inland. There are technological issues with obvious
political and economic consequences to these policy changes. The
University of Hawaii plays a critical role in not just developing but
also applying new technologies to the planning and design of human
settlements. Islands provide a unique opportunity for studying the
impacts of climate change, and, more importantly, for designing and
implementing appropriate responses.
Climate Change Greatly Impacts Island Communities
Island communities are disproportionately affected by climate
change. See Huang (1998) for a summary of the vulnerabilities of small
islands to the impacts of climate change and State of Hawaii (1998) for
a comprehensive discussion of the impacts of climate change in Hawaii.
Like all coastal communities, the effects of sea level rise in terms of
erosion and inundation of roadways, urban infrastructure, and coastal
assets have become a matter of national concern. In addition to the
potential loss of beaches and other areas important to our island
economy, sea level rise also threatens our water system and increases
the risk of sewage spills and toxic releases into our environment
(Schiedek, et. al., 2007). Climate change means increased variability
in weather conditions with an increase in extreme events such as both
heavy rainstorms and also periods of drought. See New Scientist (2007)
for a discussion on how climate change will lead to more wild weather.
Heavy rainfall increases the probability of urban floods while drought
increases the risk of wildfire. Native trees, especially in rainforest
areas are not as resistant to either drought or wildfire, so climate
change can also affect the make-up of forests and in turn affect
wildlife habitat. Drought also increases municipal and agricultural
ground water use which increases the chance of salt water intrusion
into the aquifer. Increased temperatures as well as prolonged rainfall
can also contribute to the increase in vector-borne diseases such as
dengue fever which is also spread by both urbanization and the
increased movements of human hosts between remote locations across the
planet. See Haines, et. al. (2006) for more discussion of the impacts
of climate change on public health.
In the Pacific region, climate change, global warming, sea level
rise, and extreme weather events have increased the risk of natural
events becoming disasters. Because more people and activities have
located in coastal and other hazard prone areas, the risks of weather
and natural events (hurricanes, storms, tsunamis, earthquakes, floods,
droughts, wildfires, and others) turning into disasters where people
are killed, injured, or lose their homes, property, businesses, jobs,
and other assets are increased. Worldwide, there is increasing concern
about the impacts of climate change on visitor destinations (Phillips
and Jones, 2006). More people living and working in hazard prone areas
means more exposure to disaster. The International Red Cross/Red
Crescent describes a disaster as ``an exceptional event which suddenly
kills or injures large numbers of people.'' The Center for Research on
the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) defines a disaster as a
``situation or event which overwhelms local capacity, necessitating a
request to a national or international level for external assistance.''
Because of the increased risks of natural disaster, there is need for
further efforts focused on preparedness, response, relief, recovery,
and mitigation in the region.
Response to Climate Change
In order to lessen the probability of natural events turning into
disasters, there is a need to develop effective plans, training
programs, and integrated systems of disaster preparedness, response,
and recovery. An integrated system includes Federal, state, and local
governments as well as international agencies, non-governmental
organizations, and the private and volunteer sectors. A comprehensive
approach involves consideration of all phases of the disaster cycle
including: (1) preparedness; (2) response; (3) recovery; (4)
mitigation; (5) development; and (6) adaptation to environmental
change. While there has been research and training on various aspects
of response and preparedness, there is need for more research on
adaptation and vulnerability (Smit and Wandel, 2006). Each of these
phases require different tools, methods, technologies, resources, and
commitments. It should be noted that an ``all-hazards'' approach is one
in which many of the same concepts, methods, and resources are
transferable across different natural, technological, and human caused
disasters.
There is a particular need to address natural hazards in the
Pacific region and in many areas throughout the Nation. With the
creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), significant
effort has gone toward the prevention of and response to acts of
terrorism. The National Domestic Preparedness Consortium was
established by Congressional Mandate in September 1998 (House
Conference Report [H.R. 2267]) and reconfirmed in Public Law 107-273 in
2001. The original members (Center for Domestic Preparedness, Louisiana
State University, Nevada Test Site, New Mexico Institute of Mining and
Technology, and Texas A&M University) of the Consortium addressed
counterterrorism preparedness needs of our Nation's emergency
responders within the context of chemical, biological, radiological,
and explosive (Weapons of Mass Destruction [WMD]) hazards. Re-
authorized in Homeland Security legislation (H.R. 1) in 2007 through FY
2011, the Consortium's mission was expanded to include all hazards,
including technological and natural hazards. Two new members were added
to the Consortium (Transportation Technology Center, Inc. and the
National Disaster Preparedness Training Center at the University of
Hawaii). Within DHS, the Consortium is located within the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the National Preparedness
Directorate.
National Disaster Preparedness Training Center
On August 3, 2007, President Bush signed H.R. 1 ``Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007'' which authorized
the establishment of the National Disaster Preparedness Training Center
(NDPTC) at the University of Hawaii. Housed at the University of
Hawaii, a premier research university, the NDPTC is uniquely positioned
to develop and deliver natural disaster preparedness training to
governmental, private, and non-profit entities, incorporating urban
planning with an emphasis on community preparedness and at-risk
populations.
The focus of the NDPTC is on building community resilience to all
hazards by developing and providing training to first responders,
decisionmakers, policy analysts and urban planners.
The NDPTC will partner with key Federal, state, local and
international partners to develop and implement training on disaster
preparedness, response, and recovery relevant to the special needs and
conditions of Pacific island communities and others at risk from
natural and technological hazards.
The NDPTC will provide training consisting of formal degrees and
certificate programs, as well as specialized courses, workshops and
conferences; coordinate the sharing of data and information related to
disaster preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery; and serve as
an incubator for new ideas, technologies, business and partnerships
between academia, business and government.
As a land, sea, and space grant institution with national and
international recognition for its academic and research excellence in
the fields of urban planning and earth sciences, the University of
Hawaii has the expertise and research and training programs in the
fields of disaster management and related topics to conduct research
and develop specific models and tools for monitoring natural hazards
and evaluating risk to urban areas. Planning for the response, recovery
and reconstruction of communities affected by natural disasters will
include a special emphasis on islands and at-risk, vulnerable
populations.
To date, we have attended two quarterly meetings of the Consortium
to learn about the training activities of the other six centers. We
have also had productive and informative meetings with the Emergency
Management Institute (FEMA) and others within the Department of
Homeland Security involved with training and community preparedness,
response and recovery. We have also interacted with the Natural Hazards
Center at the University of Colorado, Boulder as well as other national
and international training and research partners. We have been also
working closely with other entities and organizations within Hawaii and
the region involved with disaster management. It is evident that the
work of the NDPTC will play an important role in addressing needs of
both Pacific island communities and also other coastal communities as
well as those affected by natural disasters throughout the Nation.
References
Haines, A., R.S. Kovats, D. Campbell-Ledrum, and C. Corvalan.
(2006) Climate Change and Human Health: Impacts, Vulnerability and
Public Health. Public Health. 120. Pp. 586-596.
Huang, J.C.K. (1998) Climate Change and Integrated Coastal
Management: A Challenge for Small Island Nations. Ocean and Coastal
Management. Vol. 37. No. 1. Pp. 95-107.
New Scientist (2007). 2100: A World of Wild Weather. January 20,
2007. Pp. 6-7.
State of Hawaii (1998). Hawaii Climate Change Action Plan.
Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, Energy,
Resources and Technology Division and Department of Health, Clean Air
Branch. State of Hawaii. Honolulu. HI.
Phillips, M.R. and A.L. Jones (2007) Erosion and Tourism
Infrastructure in the Coastal Zone: Problems, Consequences and
Management. Tourism Management. 27. Pp. 517-524.
Schiedek, D., B. Sundelin, J. Readman, and R. Macdonald. (2007)
Interactions Between Climate Change and Contaminants. Marine Pollution
Bulletin. 54. Pp. 1847-1856.
Smit, B. and J. Wandel. (2006) Adaptation, Adaptive Capacity and
Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change. 16. Pp. 282-292.
Turner, R.K., D. Burgess, D. Hadley, E. Coombes N. Jackson. (2007)
A Cost-Benefit Appraisal of Coastal Managed Realignment Policy. Global
Environmental Change. 17. Pp. 397-407.
The Chairman. Dr. Uehara?
STATEMENT OF DR. GORO UEHARA, COLLEGE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE
AND HUMAN RESOURCES, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI`I AT MANOA
Dr. Uehara. Thank you, Senator Inouye for this opportunity
to describe some opportunities and challenges when climate
change hits us.
Agriculture in Hawaii is undergoing constant change, and
for over the 30 years we have been involved in finding new
crops in new locations in Hawaii, and involved in obtaining
grants with your help, and looking at international transfer of
technology from one location to another.
And, basically, in the past these changes have been
compelled and forced upon Hawaii by economic reasons. From here
on, we will be forced to look for new crops, because of climate
change. This presents new challenges for agriculture.
One of the crops we are currently looking for in Hawaii is
to replace, not only food and fiber crops, but to begin to
introduce energy crops to Hawaii. We feel that Hawaii presents
tremendous opportunity with new technologies to provide Hawaii
with alternative feedstock for biofuels production, as Dr.
Rocheleau has indicated.
Hawaii and the Pacific Islands vary in environments,
greatly. Hawaii's environment ranges from balmy beaches, to
snow-capped mountains. It ranges from drenching rainforests to
scorching deserts, and we must find different crops for these
environmental niches. The question is, how do we do this?
Hawaiians--the early Hawaiians brought taro and sweet
potato, they brought ulu. And over the years, over 100 years,
they were able to transform the few taro varieties they brought
to Hawaii, into 100 varieties. So, we have the capacity to find
new crops for new locations.
There are three ways to find new crops for new locations,
we call this matching the biological requirements of crops to
the physical characteristics of land. Climate change will bring
about a mismatch between crops and environment, and we now must
find new crops to match the changing environment.
The three ways of matching crops to land is one, the most
common way, is trial and error. Now, we have been doing this
for years, since Captain Cook, we have been introducing
hundreds of varieties to Hawaii--pineapple, papaya, sugar
cane--these are all introduced crops. We have also introduced
hundreds of other crops which are, today, invasive species. We
can no longer depend on the slow and costly process of
introducing new crops to Hawaii by trial and error.
There is a second way of looking for new crops when climate
changes. This is called ``transfer by analogy.'' We must travel
around the world, look for similar environments, and see what
grows in different environments that are similar to Hawaii's.
And we have been introducing crops to Hawaii from different
parts of the tropics based on this analogy concept. And if you
travel around the world, you also see Hawaiian sola papaya, you
see Hawaiian pineapple, you see Hawaiian macadamia nut, and how
would these technologies take into different areas? By analogy.
So, we have trial and error, and we have analogy.
Unfortunately, these methodologies are too slow and too
costly, and will not allow us to accommodate the rapid changes
that climate change will bring about.
There is a third way of bringing technology and crops to
Hawaii, and this is called systems analysis and simulation,
using crop models. And some 20 years ago, the University of
Hawai`i established an international project to begin to use--
not trial and error experiments to find new crops, but to use
knowledge--to capture and condense this knowledge in computer
simulation models, to show how crops will perform in different
environments at different times.
There are two things that are needed to drive these
simulation models, and I have given in my written testimony, an
example of how we have used these techniques to try to locate
new crops for Hawaii by this method. It is fast, it is simple,
and it is relatively accurate.
Unfortunately, this method requires historical weather as
inputs into the simulation models. The historical weather gives
you a full range of variability in the climate, it needs a
mean, the average climate, and the variance, extremes, the
tails of the distributions, the storminess. Means and
variances.
Unfortunately, these models which are currently used, these
models developed by the University of Hawai`i, currently used
by NOAA, it's also used by world meteorological organizations,
used widely, globally today, will not be useful during climate
change, because we can no longer use historical weather to
drive these models. It's the problem of stationariness,
scientists call this.
So, I will just simply close that we have trial and error,
we have analogy, and we have system simulation. We will all use
these three methods to find new crops for Hawaii. However, the
success and the capability of Hawaii and the Pacific Islands to
find replacement crops for Hawaii will depend not on what
agricultural scientists do and what economists do, but it will
depend on atmospheric science to be able to forecast with a
high degree of accuracy, means and variances of climate in the
future.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Uehara follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Goro Uehara, College of Tropical Agriculture
and Human Resources, University of Hawai`i at Manoa
Agriculture cannot remain constant in the face of climate change
and thus must change as climate changes. The question, therefore, is
when and how this change will occur, and what options decisionmakers
ranging from policymakers to producers will have to meet this
challenge. But before we answer this question, we need to know the bio-
physical factors that link agriculture to climate.
Agriculture is the art and science of matching the biological
requirements of crops (plants and animals) to the physical
characteristics of land. Farming is about minimizing mismatches between
crops and environment to optimize agricultural performance, and abrupt
changes in the amount and distribution of rainfall and temperature will
widen mismatches and lower performance.
It is important to note that reduced yields associated with climate
change will not necessarily be caused by diminished land quality, but
will primarily be a consequence of mismatches between crops and land
characteristics currently cultivated on a given parcel of land. In fact
climate change may transform land now too dry or cold into prime
agricultural land to expand the land area suitable for food production.
The issue therefore is to have in hand, effective methods to match crop
requirements to changing land characteristics in a timely and cost-
effective manner.
There are three ways to match crops to suitable agro-environments.
The first and most frequently used method is by trial-and-error. Our
ancestors carried seeds of their favorite crops as they migrated to new
unoccupied lands, and preserved seeds of those plants that performed
well in the new location. Some wise farmers saved seeds from the best
performing plants, and were able to improve farm productivity by
repeating this process for many plant generations. The early Hawaiians
were able to produce over a hundred taro varieties through this
process. But the Hawaiians had centuries to complete this task and taro
is no longer the primary food staple in Hawaii. The trial-and-error
method of matching crops and crop varieties to locations with suitable
growing conditions is too slow and costly. With climate change already
upon us, we no longer have the luxury of time and resources to conduct
endless trial-and-error field trials.
There is second and better ways to find crops that will do well on
your land. This method called matching by analogy depends on assuming
that crops that perform well on land similar (analogous) in soil and
climate to your land will perform well on your land. This approach is
possible in the U.S. and Hawaii because the entire country has been or
is in the process of being inventoried and mapped in detail according
to soil type and climate. This system of inventorying our land
resources on the basis of soil and climate was developed by the Natural
Resource Conservation Service of USDA (USDA Staff, 1999). Using this
method, one can search for crops that are suitable for a particular
location in Hawaii by looking for analogous soils in Botswana, Guam,
India or Panama and see what crops perform well there. In 1974, the
University of Hawai`i conducted a 10-year project to test the
applicability of the approach on an international scale and showed that
test crops not only performed well in similar soils and climates in
Brazil, Indonesia, Cameroon, Philippines and Hawaii, but responded to
similar management practices to attain high grain yields (Silva, 1985).
The limitation of matching crops to land characteristics by analogy is
its exclusion of crops that have never been grown in that particular
type of environment. We need a method that enables growers to evaluate
the profitability of growing the widest possible range of crops on
their land quickly and at prices they can afford.
This brings us to the third methods of identifying crops to replace
those that have become unprofitable from the effects of climate change.
It is worth repeating that a crop or crop variety that performs poorly
in one location can regain its yield potential in another location
where its biological requirements are more adequately met. Climate
change does not require us to abandon or discard existing crops and
crop varieties, but requires finding new environments for them. In
Hawaii this may mean growing Kapoho papaya in Mountain View. Does this
also imply that Mississippi soybean can be transferred to Minnesota
with global warming? Unfortunately Mississippi and Minnesota differ in
day length and photoperiod sensitive soybean that performs well in the
southern U.S. will not do well in the northern states. But should
climate change shift moisture from Mississippi to Arizona, it should be
possible to transfer photoperiod sensitive crops between the two
states.
Mismatches between crops and land characteristics caused by climate
change will not only cause yields to decline but most probably will
also cause yield variances to increase. Every grower's goal is to
produce high yields and profit, and to avoid high yield variances, or
feast to famine fluctuations in yield and profit. High yield variance
adds risk and uncertainty to farming and is sufficient in itself to
cause farmers to abandon farming. Random, uncontrollable meteorological
factors introduce risk and uncertainty to farming and compel decisions
to gamble with nature.
Gambling is a risky game of probabilities. Thus, to determine how a
crop will perform in a new climate requires many years of testing to
expose hidden dangers which one or 2 years of on-farm trials cannot
reveal. Since the risk of crop failure and income loss resides in the
tails of probability distributions, climate change requires scientists
to develop tools capable of generating whole probability distributions
of production outcomes.
Whole probability distribution cannot be generated by conducting
trial-and-error experiments or by searching for crops in analogous
environments. Whole probability distributions can only be generated by
systems analysis and simulations using dynamic, process-based models.
There are too many factors that influence means and variances of crop
yield and profit, and there are insufficient resources and time to
conduct experiments to explore even a fraction of the range of
outcomes.
In the next three to four decades, the world must double production
with a new kind of agriculture to feed, cloth and house a global
population that will increase not only in size but in aspirations. It
will be challenging enough just to double production, but we are now
being asked to do so without compromising the stability and resiliency
of the ecosystem, and to complicate matters even more, this increased
production will now need to be achieved in the context of uncertain
global climate change. It is not surprising then, that there is now
widespread agreement that business as usual will not do and a new kind
of agriculture will need to be created to meet the challenge of food
security for all.
In 1983, the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources of
the University of Hawaii established a project called the International
Benchmark Sites Network for Agrotechnology Technology Transfer (IBSNAT)
project with Federal funds to produce a software called Decision
Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) capable of
predicting the growth, development and yield of the major food cereal,
grain legume and root crops anywhere in the world using historical
weather data to drive the model.
DSSAT generates whole probability distributions of outcomes based
on simulated crop yields taking into account daily, seasonal and annual
weather variations over many decades. This ability to generate and
display means and variances of production outcomes enables users to
analyze risk and seek alternative crops and/or crop management
strategies to maintain high yields and minimize risk. DSSAT not only
generates information on crop yields, days to maturity, crop responses
to rate and timing of inputs, but enables users to compute cost of
production and perform economic analysis.
The capability of DSSAT is illustrated by the attached paper
(Ogoshi et al., 1998), which describes the authors' response to a
request to assess the economic feasibility of producing soybean on land
formerly used to grow sugar cane. To simulate performance in different
locations of the land area, DSSAT needed input information on soil,
weather and soybean varieties. Since no soybean study had been
conducted in the area, DSSAT was asked to determine the best variety
based on yields obtained at multiple locations, planted at 12 different
date, at several different planting densities. A typical task DSSAT
would be asked to perform might be to evaluate 4 varieties at 6
locations at 12 (monthly) planting dates and 4 population densities for
30 consecutive years. DSSAT can complete this task in a few hours, but
a trial-and-error field experiment would involve installing 34,560
field plots over a 30 year period.
As powerful as DSSAT is today, climate change adds a new dimension
to the task of matching crops to land and compels DSSAT to look for
help to remain relevant and useful. DSSAT now operates on the
assumption that historical weather data mimics means and variance of
current weather. Climate change will invalidate this assumption.
DSSAT is a product of agricultural scientists and economists. It
now needs the help of atmospheric scientists to develop climate models
that can generate means and variances of weather conditions that apply
to a given parcel of land. Our capacity to match crops to land will
depend on the climate forecasting capability of atmospheric science.
References
USDA, Staff. 1999. Soil Taxonomy. A basic system of soil
classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd ed. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
Silva, J.A. ed. 1985. Soil-based Agrotechnology Transfer. Benchmark
Soils Project, Department of Agronomy and Soil Science, Hawaii
Institute of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of
Hawaii. 292 pp.
Ogoshi, R.M., Tsuji, G.Y., G. Uehara, and N.P. Kefford. 1998.
Simulation of Best Management Practices for Soybean Production in
Hawaii. Cooperative Extension Service, College of Tropical Agriculture
and Human Resources, University of Hawaii.
______
Soil and Crop Management--Oct. 1998--SCM-2--Cooperative Extension
Service--College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources,
University of Hawai`i at Manoa
Simulation of Best Management Practices for Soybean Production in
Hawaii
Ogoshi, R.M,\1\ Tsuji, G.Y.,\1\ G. Uehara,\1\ and N.P. Kefford \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Department of Agronomy and Soil Science.
\2\ Rural Economic Transition Assistance program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A method is presented that assesses economic profit, management
practices, and risk involved with soybean production for three
locations on the North Shore of Oahu, Hawaii, where soybean has not
been planted before. Simulations of soybean growth and economic
analysis using 768 combinations of cultivar, plant density, irrigation,
and planting date over 20 seasons for each of three locations were made
using the computer program Decision Support System for Agrotechnology
Transfer (DSSAT. v. 3.0). Economic profit was calculated as the
difference between revenue generated from grain yield and the total
cost incurred from water, seed, labor, and other inputs. High economic
profit and low variation of the profit from season to season were the
criteria that identified the best management scheme out of the 768 for
each location. Results from the simulations indicate profitable soybean
production at each location is possible if a cultivar adapted to the
mid-Atlantic states, ``Bragg,'' is planted in the spring. In addition,
high plant density and irrigation are necessary. Revenue from increased
yield outweighed the costs accrued from extra seed and water. The
expected economic profit ranged from $789 to $829 per hectare (2.47
acres; see conversions). Agronomic modeling with economic analysis was
shown to be an effective tool for the rapid generation of knowledge
necessary for decision-making on crop production based on expected
economic profit and an assessment of risk. Such decisions are key to
the timely selection of alternative crops and practices in areas
previously planted to other crops.
Introduction
Two critical objectives in any agricultural enterprise are to
minimize cost and maximize production. Economic feasibility of the
enterprise depends on revenue being greater than cost. Other worthy
objectives such as minimizing environmental impact or maintaining
biodiversity may be included, but for this study, minimizing cost and
maximizing revenue are the objectives.
Minimizing cost and maximizing production depend on the local
environment where the crop is grown. An effective way to minimize cost
is to match crop growth requirements to the biophysical environment,
which includes soil fertility, rainfall, and temperature. With a good
match, inputs and their associated costs are minimized. However,
environments seldom match crop requirements perfectly. Irrigation,
fertilization, and liming are often necessary to correct fertility or
moisture deficiencies, or an alternative location must be used to
fulfill temperature requirements. At each location, the combination of
these interventions to correct mismatches is probably unique.
Therefore, determination of the best management practices to produce
crops will require information on the crop, weather, and soil; the
effects of particular management practices; and their combined impact
on yield.
Information needed to manage environmental mismatches for crop
production is generated in one of two ways: through trial-and-error
field experimentation or systems simulation. The scope of the
information generated in these two ways is different. In field
experiments, the scope includes the specific responses of a crop to the
environment as influenced by genetics, plant competition, and soil
amendments at a particular time and place. Field experiments seldom
integrate climate with crop response to soil and soil amendments
because this involves multi-year and multi-location experiments, which
are extremely expensive. Because field experiments can rarely be
conducted over many years and locations, simulated outcomes of such
experiments are useful. Crop simulation models are designed to imitate
the behavior of real plants by integrating their known response to
weather, soil, and amended conditions. Models can estimate crop
production under many conditions to define precise differences that can
occur from year-to-year or location-to-location, or as a consequence of
finely graded management practices. Specific field experiments are
still necessary to generate the new information on crop responses to
factors that are not included or not well simulated in the model.
Trial-and-error experiments and systems simulations generate
information that are complementary. Field experiments produce new data
that improves our understanding of plant and soil processes. Crop
models integrate the improved understanding into new knowledge of crop
performance.
The purpose of this study was to determine the agronomic and
economic feasibility of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) production at
selected sites on the North Shore, Oahu, Hawaii, as part of a rural
stabilization program based on alternative crops for former sugarcane
land. Feasibility will be appraised with projections from a soybean
simulation model. Since large-scale soybean production has never been
done on the North Shore, the model will be used to estimate yields that
result from management decisions such as location, planting date,
cultivar, plant density, and irrigation. With this information, the
combination of management practices likely to give high, stable yield
and economic profit will he determined.
Procedure
Predicting soybean yield requires a biophysical description of the
sites to give the model information on the environmental factors that
affect soybean growth. Kawaihapai, Waialua, and Opaeula, sites on the
North Shore, were selected for simulating soybean growth and yield
(Fig. 1). Based on experience with soybean production outside Hawaii,
these three locations were assessed to contain the fewest constraints.
Records characterizing the unique weather and soil of each site
were found in the archives of the Hawaii Agricultural Research Center
(Osgood, personal communication) and Ikawa et al., (1985). All sites
have a weather pattern typical of low-elevation, leeward areas in
Hawaii. Solar radiation and temperature are high in the summer months,
and rainfall is high in the winter months. Annual solar radiation is
highest at Waialua, while Kawaihapai and Opaeula have similar, lower
values (Fig. 2). Mean daily temperature is highest at Kawaihapai and
lowest at Opaeula throughout most of the year (Fig. 3). Opaeula
receives the most rainfall, 1046 mm a year, while Kawaihapai and
Waialua receive 880 and 846 mm, respectively. (Fig. 4). Soil texture,
bulk density, pH. and organic carbon content determine the amount of
water the soil can hold, water movement in the soil profile, and root
penetration. These soil attributes are derived from soil physical and
chemical characteristics in each layer of the soil profile at
Kawaihapai (Ustollic Camborthid, fine, kaolinitic. isohyperthermic),
Waialua (Vertic Haplustoll, very fine, kaolinitic, isohyperthermic),
and Opaeula (Tropeptic Eutrustox, clayey, kaolinitic, isohyperthemic)
(Table 1). Each combination of weather and soil characteristics
establishes the environmental conditions in which soybean growth was
simulated.
Climatic conditions at the three study sites.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1. Soil physical and chemical characteristics of the top layer of
soils at the test sites. Site
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soil Kawaihapai y Waialua z Opaeula z
characteris
tic
Clay % n.a. 51.1 43.7
Silt % n.a. 38.9 37.7
Sand % n.a. 10.0 18.6
Bulk density 1.33 1.28 1.31
(g/cm\3\)
Organic 2.0 4.1 1.5
carbon %
pH 7.7 7.2 5.2
y SCS 1976, z Ikawa et al., 1965
After specifying the environmental conditions, management practices
can he chosen to test how well soybean would yield under a prescribed
set of practices. Options for management practices may include
cultivar, plant density, irrigation regime, planting date,
fertilization, row spacing, and organic residue application. For this
study, cultivar, plant density, irrigation, and planting date were
combined in the simulations to identify the best management scheme to
grow soybean on the North Shore. Four cultivars (cvs. `Evans', `Clark',
`Bragg', and `Jupiter'), four plant densities (150, 300, 450, and 600
thousand plants per hectare with rowspace 0.6 m), four irrigation
regimes (no irrigation, 25 percent trigger, 50 percent trigger, and no
stress), and 12 planting dates (the first day of every month) were
combined for a total of 768 schemes (equal to 4 4 4
12). The four cultivars represent types that are grown in
latitudes from Minnesota (cv. `Evans') to Florida (cv. `Jupiter'). The
irrigation regimes of 25 percent trigger, 50 percent trigger, and no
stress were implemented by allowing the soil water-holding capacity at
a 20 cm depth dry down to 25 percent, 50 percent, and 99 percent of
field capacity, then irrigation was applied to reach field capacity.
The 99 percent trigger was used as a control treatment and will be
referred to as ``no stress.'' Soybean growth was simulated for each of
the 768 possible schemes over 20 unique weather sequences.
Predicted soybean growth and yield were simulated using CROPGRO-
soybean (Hoogenboom et al., 1994a). CROPGRO-soybean simulates soybean
progress through its life cycle at a daily time-step and is dependent
on the cultivar, temperature, and daylength. Photosynthesis is
simulated through the capture and conversion of sunlight and carbon
dioxide to carbohydrate, the building material for plant tissue.
Protein production is simulated from nitrogen uptake through the roots
and biological nitrogen fixation. CROPGRO-soybean distributes the
carbohydrate and protein among plant organs (roots, stems, leaves,
pods, and seeds) as affected by the stage of its life cycle, water or
nitrogen stress, daylength, and temperature. At the end of the
simulated season, the final seed weight is designated to be the yield.
CROPGRO-soybean was designed to mimic soybean behavior and has been
successfully tested under a wide range of environments (AVRDC 1991,
Egli and Bruening 1992, Hoogenboom et al., 1994b, Swaney et al., 1983).
Simulation of the 768 combinations of cultivar, plant density,
irrigation, and planting date over 20 seasons was facilitated with the
software package Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer
v3.0 (DSSAT v3) (Tsuji et al., 1994).
To decide which management scheme was best, a mean-variance
analysis was conducted for each location. This technique presumes that
the two important factors in deciding which strategy is best are the
amount of economic profit and its riskiness. Economic profit is simply
the revenue generated from selling the grain minus the cost of its
production. Since the alternative to producing soybean in Hawaii is
shipping grain from Seattle, Washington, the price of soybean grain was
assumed to be the market price of the grain on the U.S. mainland plus
shipping, or $449 per metric ton of dry grain in March 1997. Local
production cost scenario was based on a 300 hectare farm on leased land
and equipment purchased with a loan (M. McLean, personal communication)
(Table 2). The basic production cost for the non-irrigated and
irrigated farm was $1,602 and $1,772 per hectare. The costs for
irrigation water, irrigation application, and seed were $0.10 per 1,000
gallons, $1.30 per application, and $0.66 per kg, respectively (M.
McLean, personal communication). The riskiness of a strategy is
represented by the standard deviation of profit derived over the 20
years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2. Base production cost for producing irrigated soybean in Waialua on a 300-hectare farm.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating costs
A. Pre-harvest costs units/ha in units $/unit $ cost/ha
1. Land preparation
a. Labor to clear land 6.7 hours 20 134.00
b. Machinery to clear land 6.7 hours 35 234.50
2. Planting
a. Labor to plant seed 3.7 hours 20 74.00
b. Machinery to plant seed 1.9 hours 35 66.50
3. Pest control
a. Herbicide: Roundup 1.4 gallons 75 105.00
b. Labor to spray 2.47 hours 20 49.40
c. Sprayer operation 2.47 hours 35 86.45
4. Irrigation
a. System setup costs 3 sprinkler 20 60.00
B. Harvest costs
1. Harvesting
a. Labor to harvest 1.2 hours 20 24.00
b. Combine operation 1.2 hours 35 42.00
2. Commission and excise tax 294,852 $ gross 0.0417 40.98
Ownership costs
A. Management resource gross $ % gross
1. Management 294,852 5 49.14
2. Office overhead 294,852 2 19.66
B. Capital resources
1. Depreciation (est.) on invested $ % depreciation depreciation $
a. Machinery and equipment 270,000 14 37,800 126.00
b. Irrigation system 300,000 5 15,000 50.00
loan $ % interest interest $
2. Interest expense on loan 270,000 10 27,000 90.00
equity $ % equity opportunity $
3. Opportunity cost on equity 300,000 6 18,000 60.00
C. Land resource assessed $ % tax tax
1. Property tax 300,000 1 30,000 100.00
premium $
2. Property insurance 16,000 53.33
payment $
3. Leasehold 92,000 306.67
Total 1771.63
With the mean profit and its standard deviation, the best strategy
to produce soybean can he found based on a few assumptions. Mean-
variance analysis assumes that most people prefer high profit and low
risk, and most are willing to accept a lower profit if risk can he
reduced to a ``comfortable level.'' When the mean profit is plotted
against the standard deviation, the best strategies are those with high
mean and low standard deviation found in the upper left corner of the
graph (e.g., Fig. 9).
Further discrimination among the remaining strategies was done with
stochastic dominance analysis (Thornton et al., 1994). Ultimately, only
one strategy was selected as best for each location.
Outcome
Results from the Simulation
The simulation showed that differences in the daylength sensitivity
of cultivars profoundly affected yield. The yield differences result
from increases in the time from planting to flowering as daylength
increases, i.e., in spring (Fig. 5). This permits more leaf growth,
which supports greater yield. `Jupiter', the cultivar adapted to low
latitudes, is the most daylength-sensitive cultivar as seen in its
greatly prolonged time to flowering when planted in the summer months.
The least daylength sensitive cultivar, `Evans', had a relatively
constant time to flowering regardless of planting date (Fig. 5).
The greatest yield for the daylength-sensitive cultivars was
obtained with spring planting dates, while the lowest was with fall
planting dates (Fig. 6). Meanwhile, the daylength-insensitive cultivar
`Evans' had a relatively stable yield regardless of planting date. The
close relation between yield and time to flowering suggest that yield
depends on leaf area. However, yield differences among cultivars across
planting dates were not completely dependent on leaf area differences.
For any planting date, `Jupiter' was a larger plant than `Bragg' (data
not shown), yet `Bragg' had greater yield than `Jupiter' in the spring
plantings (Fig. 6). The yield reduction in the spring for `Jupiter'
resulted from nitrogen deficiency stress that may have been induced by
excessive top growth. So, the best yielding cultivar changes with
planting date: `Bragg' had the highest yields when planted from March
to June, while `Jupiter' produced the highest yields for other planting
dates.
Increased plant density can increase yield, but seed costs make the
yield gain expensive. At all planting dates, increased plant density
raised soybean yield (Fig. 7). The mean yield for plant densities was
1,739 kg/hectare at 150,000 plants/hectare, 2,059 kg/hectare at 300,000
plants/hectare, 2,286 kg/hectare at 450,000 plants/hectare, and 2,437
kg/hectare at 600,000 plants/hectare. The diminishing gain in yield for
each increase in plant density indicates that yield per plant was
greatly lowered as plant density was raised. The reduced yield per
plant resulted from increased competition among plants for water,
sunlight, and nutrients.
While irrigation generally increased yield over raided soybean,
efficient water use in soybean production depended on the planting date
and location. Except for the fall plantings, which had virtually the
same yield for all regimes, irrigation increased yield over rainfed
crops for all planting dates (Fig. 8). The 25 percent trigger
irrigation regime gave a larger yield than the rainfed crop, but
smaller than the 50 percent trigger and no stress regimes. The 50
percent trigger irrigation regime generated yield nearly the same as
the no stress regime, but was sometimes higher, probably due to
waterlogged conditions in the no stress regime. The most water-use
efficient irrigation regime to produce soybean can be calculated from
irrigated yield minus rainfed yield, divided by the amount of
irrigation water used (Table 3). With the ratios 8.23 and 8.40 kg/
hectare per mm of water, the 25 percent trigger regime was most
efficient for producing soybean grain at Kawaihapai and Opaeula. At
Waialua, the 50 percent trigger irrigation regime was the most
efficient at 7.90 kg/hectare per mm of water.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3. Ratio of difference between irrigated soybean grain and rainfed
yield (kg/ha) to irrigation water used (mm) for soybean grown at three
sites on Oahu. Ratio (kg/ha per mm of water) z
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location 25% trigger 50% trigger No stress
Kawaihapai 8.23 7.74 4.57
Waialua 7.80 7.90 3.41
Opaeula 8.40 7.77 4.19
z Yields and irrigation water averaged over four cultivars, four plant
densities, and 12 planting dates.
Agronomic Interpretation of the Simulation Results
In summary, simulated soybean yields varied with site and the
management practices of cultivar, plant density, irrigation, and
planting date.
Daylength sensitivity among the cultivars had the greatest effect
on yield. Soybean flowers earlier in short days, and delays flowering
in long days resulting in a larger plant with more leaves capable of
supporting greater yield. However, too much vegetative mass can divert
carbohydrate and protein resources away from grain growth. Hence, the
cultivar of choice should be one that increases leaf area and supports
greater yield, not one with vegetative growth that curbs yield.
Plant density must balance the beneficial effect of capturing the
greatest amount of sunlight and the harmful effect of increased plant
competition for water and nutrients.
Irrigation supplies essential moisture to plants, but in excess can
create waterlogged conditions that inhibit root growth with increased
water cost.
Because weather patterns proceed through annual cycles, changing
the planting date alters the daylength, rainfall, solar radiation, and
temperature the plant is exposed to. As previously discussed, seasonal
daylength, in conjunction with the daylength sensitivity of the soybean
cultivar, greatly affects plant size and yield potential.
Cyclical rainfall governs soil moisture status that influences
water stress and irrigation frequency as planting date changes. With an
inverse relation to rainfall, solar radiation exhibits an annual cycle
that affects yield as plants compete to intercept the sun's energy.
Planting date has important implications on yield as affected by plant
size, soil moisture, and plant competition.
Given the above information, estimates on profit can be based on
the expected yield and the expected costs of seed, water, and
``overhead.'' However, this information is inadequate to provide
options to make a decision on the best production scheme since a trade-
off exists between seed and water costs and revenue, and that tradeoff
depends on weather that changes from year to year.
Selecting the Best Management Scheme
The better management schemes based on economic profit and
riskiness show that generating more revenue can overcome the extra
costs incurred to increase grain yield. For each location, the mean
economic profit per hectare for each management scheme was plotted
against its standard deviation for the 20 seasons (Fig. 9). The better
schemes are those found along the outer edge of the upper left quadrant
in the scatter. These schemes have high profit, low risk, or both.
Generally, these better schemes result when fields are planted with
`Bragg' or `Clark', are planted in April or May, and mostly irrigated
when the soil moisture reaches 50 percent of field capacity. The plant
density for the better schemes range from 300 to 600 thousand per
hectare. While irrigation and high seeding rate increased the cost of
production, the revenue generated from higher yield of irrigated crops
planted in these 2 months offset the cost.
The best management scheme is the same for the three locations, but
the expected profit is different. Stochastic dominance analysis was
applied only to the better management schemes. The best management
scheme is identified as the function furthest to the right that does
not cross over other functions (Fig. 10). The best management scheme
was `Bragg' planted in April at 600, 000 plants per hectare with
irrigation triggered when soil moisture reached 50 percent of field
capacity. This management scheme was the best for all three locations.
The expected profits for Kawaihapai, Waialua, and Opaeula were $789,
$811, and $829 per hectare, respectively.
The worst schemes, in terms of mean economic profit, had several
management practices in common. A negative mean economic profit
resulted from schemes with any one of the following practices: cultivar
`Evans', a plant density of 150,000 plants per hectare, rainfed, or a
planting date in January, February, July, August, September, October,
November, or December. The cultivar `Evans' had consistently lower
yields, because of early flowering as discussed previously, that did
not generate enough revenue from yield to compensate for the costs
incurred for basic production. Planting at a density of 150,000 per
hectare was too low to produce high yield. Rainfed crops lacked the
moisture to produce adequate yield and planting from July to February
either did not place the crop in favorable moisture or solar radiation
conditions to yield well as previously discussed.
Conclusions
This study shows that an agronomic model and economic analysis are
useful tools for agricultural decision-making. In Hawaii, the
agricultural environment is complex due to the fact that crops can grow
year-round and topographical influences on weather and the many soil
types create many unique niches. Finding agricultural management
practices to deal with this complexity has been difficult but is
possible with careful extrapolation of results from field experiments.
However, field experiments are time-consuming and do not quantify the
variation in yield that can be expected from month to month and year to
year. The soybean model coupled with economic analysis helps to
overcome both of these problems.
In this study, crop models shortened the time needed to test and
determine suitable management schemes to produce crops in specific
locations. This analysis took approximately 1 week to complete. To
achieve the same results, 768 field experiments would have had to be
done over 20 years. The faster result is possible because the crop
model has the ability to integrate weather, soil, and management
information from a site and make realistic predictions on crop
performance. With predicted yields, a fast economic analysis can be
done to identify feasible management schemes based on profit and risk.
Predicting crop performance can have a profound impact on land-use
decisions requiring this information. For this study, the question of
whether soybean can be produced on the North Shore was answered from
the viewpoint of an entrepreneur. Others who may benefit from this
information include farmers who want to know whether alternative crops
can be produced on their land, bankers who need to quantify the risk
involved in an agricultural enterprise applying for a loan, and
policymakers who need information on land capabilities. Armed with this
information, decisions to commit a plot of land or investment capital
to crop production are not answered with a simple yes or no but with
estimates of economic profit, options for management practices to
produce this profit, and an assessment of risk.
Acknowledgments
The authors extend their appreciation to Dr. PingSun Leung for his
help with the economic analysis, Dr. Robert Osgood for making weather
data available, Dr. Michael McLean for providing the cost-of-production
spreadsheet, and Ms. Juvi Pagba for production assistance with this
publication.
This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture through a special research grant under the Tropical/
Subtropical Agricultural Research program Special Agreement No. 93-
34135-8811 managed by the Pacific Basin Advisory Group (PBAG) and a
contract with the Rural Economic Transition Assistance program.
References
AVRDC, 1991. 1990 Progress Report. Asian Vegetable Research and
Development Center. Shanhua, Tainan, Republic of China.
Egli, D.B. and W. Bruening, 1992. Planting date and soybean yield:
Evaluation of environmental effects with a crop simulation model:
SOYGRO. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 62:19-29.
Hoogenboom, G., J.W. Jones, P.W. Wilkens, W.D. Batchelor, W.T.
Bowen, L.A. Hunt, N.B. Pickering, U. Singh, D.C. Godwin, B. Baer, K.J.
Boote, J.T. Ritchie, and J.W. White. 1994a. Volume 2-2: Crop models.
In: Tsuji et al, op. cit.
Hoogenboom, G., J.W. Jones, K.J. Boote, N.B. Pickering, W.T. Bowen,
and W.D. Batchelor, 1994b. A new and improved soybean simulation model:
CROPGRO-Soybean. World Soybean Research Conference V, Chiang Mai,
Thailand, Feb. 20-27, 1994.
Ikawa, H., H.H. Sato, A.K.S. Chang, S. Nakamura, E. Robello, Jr.,
and S.P. Periaswamy, 1985. Soils of the Hawaii Agricultural Experiment
Station, University of Hawaii: Soil survey, laboratory data, and soil
descriptions. HITAHR Res. Ext. Series 022.
Soil Conservation Service, 1976. Soil survey laboratory data and
descriptions for some soils of Hawaii. Soil Conservation Service, U.S.
Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 29, U.S.
Government Printing Office 212-613.
Swaney, D.P., J.W. Jones, W.G. Boggess, G.G. Wilkerson, J.W.
Mishoe, 1983. Real-time irrigation decision analysis using simulation.
Trans. American Society of Agricultural Engineers 26:562-568.
Thornton, P.K., G. Hoogenboom, P.W. Wilkens, and J.W. Jones, 1994.
Volume 3-1: Seasonal Analysis. In: Tsuji et al., op. cit.
Tsuji, G.Y., G. Uehara, and S. Balas (eds), 1994. DSSAT v3.
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Conversions
1 kg = 2.2 lb
1 lb = 0.454 kg
1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acre
1 acre = 0.405 hectare
$1.00/ha = $0.405/acre
1 kg/ha = 1.12 lb/acre
1 lb/acre = 0.89 kg/ha
1 mm = \4/100\ inch
1 inch = 25.4 mm
20 +C = 70 +F, 25 +C = 77 +F
The Chairman. All right, thank you very much, Dr. Uehara.
Your testimony has been most helpful.
I think I should point out a few facts of life in the
Congress.
After about 30 years, I'm pleased to tell you that my
Committee passed a fuel efficiency law. It was carried out with
the opposition, powerful opposition, of automobile companies
and such, but it's now part of the laws of the United States.
The Center that you spoke of, Dr. Kim, and the other
programs, like the Tropical Agricultural Center on the Big
Island, and the grants that you speak of, have been calculated,
but they're all earmarks. I'm certain you've heard of that
nasty word ``earmark,'' and ``add-ons.''
As you know, I've been condemned because of my success in
getting these earmarks, and I'm not embarrassed by them. If we
didn't have the earmarks, you wouldn't have your Center, you
won't have the Tropical Agricultural Center on the Big Island.
So, it may interest you to know, although you're not involved
in it, the very popular East-West Center is an earmark.
And so, you'll hear all of these politicians speaking about
doing away with earmarks. I hope they'll look at the
Constitution, because the Constitution says the Congress of the
United States has a role to play.
Well, if these grants and earmarks were not provided, what
would your operation be like, Dr. Kim if your Center wasn't
there?
Dr. Kim. Well, the Center provides a tremendous opportunity
to do things that we are doing right now, but to a much larger
scale. In part, what we have is a tremendous amount of
research, good research, outstanding, world-class research
that's conducted at the University of Hawai`i. What's needed is
to translate this research into effective policies, programs
and training programs. And what's needed is some special
sensitivities that, I believe, that we have at the University
of Hawai`i, and in this region.
I mean, the first is our exposure to a broad range of
natural hazards. The second issue that we have that makes us
all the more important is our vulnerability--our remote
location. It's the combination of these risks that we face, but
also what would happen in the event that we have a very serious
natural disaster occurring, and we've had so many recent
disaster declarations that suggest this is a problem.
So, it's something just about improving our community, but
by developing effective programs to prepare, respond and
recover from these hazards, we can really serve as a model. We
can avert the disaster which happened with Katrina, and in
other places as well, too, because we have both the resources
and the concentration of policymakers and decisionmakers and
others, in this community, that's really unlike any other place
in the world.
One of those things that I would like to point out, is I
went to graduate school in Massachusetts, which has 351 cities
and towns. As you're aware, in Hawaii, we have four units of
local government. We have a tremendous degree of
centralization, and good programs that have been developed at
the local level, and a real opportunity to work closely with
State, local, and Federal Government, and with the University
of Hawai`i. I think that's unlike any other Center.
And when I've talked with my counterparts, they realize
that we do have certain locational advantages, both in terms of
the hazards that we face, the vulnerabilities, but also the
opportunities to build a training program.
You know, I came from these meetings with the United
Nations University, and there were many of our Pacific Island
partners attending this meeting--from American Samoa, from
Guam, from other parts of the flag territories, Vanuatu, Fiji,
even places that are not part of the United States, but--and
they really look to Hawaii for leadership, assistance,
technical support, training in this area, and in other areas.
And so, I think we have a broad mission, in addition to
addressing the needs of the Nation, as a whole, coastal
communities, in particular, others exposed to the range of
similar natural hazards from flooding to earthquakes to
hurricanes--I think we also have a special obligation and
responsibility for work in the region.
The Chairman. Well, I hope you'll speak up when someone
says nasty things about earmarks.
Dr. Kim. Absolutely.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Well, I can assure you that your
Congressional delegation is well aware of the importance of
Hawaii in this battle to keep our planet viable.
We know, as Dr. Leong pointed out, 85 percent of the coral
beds in the United States are found here. We also know that
because of its isolation, Hawaii is the most dependent State on
fossil fuels. As a result, we have been doing our best to bring
in activities here that could make Hawaii a model, could make
Hawaii a test lab.
For example, it may interest you to know that the first
military hydrogen bus operated here in Hawaii. And I can assure
you, the military didn't want to get involved with that,
because they said, ``It's none of our business,'' you know? The
first electric bus was developed at the University of Hawai`i.
And so, we do get involved in activities of this nature,
and if it weren't for the grants, I think that your research
program would be nil.
Dr. Kim. That's correct.
The Chairman. And, I'd like to, if I may, because these
questions would take much concern, can we submit to you,
questions that you can respond to? They are highly technical in
nature, I want to be able to present to my Committee, a full
portfolio of issues, reactions, and what we can do about it.
So, with that, I'd like to thank you all for your
testimony, it's been extremely helpful. And I can assure you
that it won't be wasted.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye to
Fred T. Mackenzie, Ph.D.
Question 1. NSF expects the impact of the FY08 cuts to be 1,000
fewer new research grants awarded, 230 fewer Graduate Research Fellows
hired, and several major solicitations delayed for at least a year,
including in the areas of computer science, cyber-infrastructure, and
mathematics and physical sciences. Do you anticipate your programs
experiencing repercussions from the lower than expected FY 2009
President's request?
Answer. Yes, our programs have not been keeping up over the years
with grant needs of excellent scientists and a budget that only meets
last fiscal year's will result in proposal success rates that are at
even lower levels than 10-20 percent.
Question 2. Do you feel that more could or should be done to
explicitly bolster education programs at the University of Hawaii and
Hawai`i Pacific University?
Answer. Yes definitely, and especially in earth system and global
environmental science. Every educated university undergraduate student
should be required to take such a course, just like they take freshman
English.
Question 3. Since 2004 the state has been making climate change
mitigation and adaptation a priority through increased dedication and
investment in the research and development of clean energy
technologies. How has legislation passed in recent years benefited your
research or commercial goals?
Answer. No direct benefit and I do not feel the state is making the
effort needed to meet the challenges of peak oil, the fact that 90
percent of our energy comes from oil, mainly foreign, and is doing
little to adapt to the global climate changes of the future. Mitigation
is almost useless for Hawaii since we produce so little greenhouse gas
relative to much of the rest of the world. We need to pay more
attention to adaptation.
Question 4. Dr. Mackenzie, in your testimony, you indicated that
regional climate models are not yet as robust as global climate models.
What do we need to get to the point where the regional models are as
useful as the global models?
Answer. I feel there are at least two major things we require--more
regional data on climate variables like temperature, precipitation, and
seawater CO2 and carbon chemistry and development of new
models for the influences of global climatic change on the regional
scale ocean-atmosphere system and marine and terrestrial ecosystems.
The model complexity needs to be on the order of the models that have
been developed for El Nino-Southern Oscillation events. Data
acquisition requires more use of satellite technology and in situ
networks of instrumentation to measure the changes in the major
physical variables of climate and the important physical, chemical and
biological properties of the oceans on a regional scale.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye to
Jo-Ann C. Leong, Ph.D.
Question 1. Have you found evidence of increasing ocean temperature
around Hawaii's reefs and have you observed a correlation to bleaching
events or disease?
Answer by Paul Jokiel, Research Professor, HIMB. HIMB scientists
have been working on this question for the past 40 years. In the early
1970s studies on the impact of elevated temperature on coral reefs were
initiated by Paul Jokiel and Steve Coles in order to understand the
possible impact of a proposed Hawaiian Electric Co. power plant in
Kaneohe Bay. Their reports show that a warming of one degree above
summer maximum temperature will lead to bleaching of corals and high
mortality (Jokel and Coles 1974, 1977). Field and laboratory studies at
Kaneohe Bay and at Enewetak Atoll led to the generalization that corals
in the tropics as well as the subtropics are living within 1 degree of
bleaching during the summer months (Coles et al., 1976). This
generalization has been shown to be true throughout the world (Jokiel
2004). Jokiel and Coles (1990) also predicted that Hawaii would
experience a major coral bleaching event with rising sea water
temperature in a manner similar to locations throughout the tropics.
The first major bleaching occurred in the main Hawaiian Islands in 1996
followed by bleaching in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands in 2002.
These events are documented in by Jokiel and Brown (2004), and they
clearly link rising global temperature to the bleaching events. The
history of Jokiel's involvement in this question is summarized in
Fig.1.
Fig. 1. Increasing temperature in Hawaiian waters, prediction of
bleaching (1990) and bleaching event summary.
At the present time Paul Jokiel is continuing his global climate
change studies in collaboration with Dr. Bob Buddemeier (Univ. Kansas)
and others. They have produced a model that quantitatively describes
the future changes on Hawaii coral reefs over the next century given
various scenarios of carbon dioxide emissions (Buddemeier et al., in
press). Other studies by Jokiel and colleagues show that ocean
acidification, expected to occur in this century as a result of
anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, will have severe impact on
coral reefs (Kuffner et al., 2008, Jokiel et al., 2008).
References
Jokiel, P.L., and S.L. Coles. 1974. Effects of heated effluent on
hermatypic corals at Kahe Point, Oahu. Pac. Sci. 28(1):1-18.
Coles, S.L., P.L. Jokiel and C.R. Lewis. 1976. Thermal tolerance in
tropical versus subtropical Pacific reef corals. Pac. Sci. 30:156-166.
Jokiel, P.L., and S.L. Coles. 1977. Effects of temperature on the
mortality and growth of Hawaiian reef corals. Mar. Biol. 43:201-208.
Jokiel, P.L. 2004. Temperature Stress and Coral Bleaching. 2004.
pp. 401-425 In Coral Health and Disease (E. Rosenberg and Y. Loya
Eds.). Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
Jokiel, P.L. and Eric K. Brown. 2004. Global warming, regional
trends and inshore environmental conditions influence coral bleaching
in Hawaii. Global Change Biology 10:1627-1641.
Kuffner, Ilsa B., Andreas J. Andersson, Paul L. Jokiel, Ku`ulei S.
Rodgers, and Fred T. Mackenzie (2008) Decreased abundance of crustose
coralline algae due to ocean acidification. Nature Geoscience 1: 114-
117.
Jokiel, Paul L., Ku`ulei S. Rodgers, Ilsa B. Kuffner, Andreas J.
Andersson, Evelyn F. Cox, Fred T. Mackenzie (2008) Ocean acidification
and calcifying reef organisms: a mesocosm investigation. Coral Reefs
DOI 10.1007/s00338-008-0380-9.
Buddemeier, R.W., P.L. Jokiel, K.M. Zimmerman, D.R. Lane, J.M.
Carey, G.C. Bohling, J.A. Martinich. (in press) A modeling tool to
evaluate regional coral reef responses to changes in climate and ocean
chemistry. Limnol Oceanogr.
Question 2. NSF expects the impact of the FY08 cuts to be 1,000
fewer new research grants awarded, 230 fewer Graduate Research Fellows
hired, and several major solicitations delayed for at least a year,
including in the areas of computer science, cyber-infrastructure, and
mathematics and physical sciences. Do you anticipate your programs
experiencing repercussions from the lower than expected FY 2009
President's request?
Answer by Steve Karl, Associate Research Professor at HIMB. An NSF
Small Grant for Exploratory Research (SGER) funds our research on
genetics and the health of coral reefs. These grants are ``. . .
recommended for innovative, smaller-scale research ideas that are high-
risk/high-reward . . .'' (NSF website). We were very fortunate to have
received this award because the research that we proposed is on a
spatial scale (micro--i.e., meter and centimeter) commonly ignored but
not known to be irrelevant and an idea that has never been tried
(understanding the genetic relatedness of every coral colony on a
reef). Through this research we hope to better understand the physical,
ecological, and genetic spatial heterogeneity in a reef and its
relationship to coral reef robustness, resilience, and health. With
overall risk-adverse nature of the NSF and reduced funding, these types
of grants are likely to be hardest hit. Although it will not directly
effect our research, other high-risk proposals that also have the
potential for high-reward will likely be strongly reduced.
We are in the process of writing a larger proposal to NSF that uses
what we've learned to expand to the most exciting and rewarding areas
our results support. Given that the NSF Biological Oceanography funding
rate currently hovers around 10 percent, under the best of
circumstances it is unlikely that we will be successful in our first
submission. Currently, due to the number of worthy proposals exceeding
the available funds, even worthy and well-founded research proposals
are very unlikely to be granted in the first submission. Worthy
proposals that were not accepted this year due to lack funds have a
better chance if resubmitted and considered in subsequent years. Since
we will be submitting for the first time, it is unlikely (regardless of
the quality of the science) we will be funded. A smaller budget for NSF
makes this more likely to happen this year and again next year when we
resubmit. Unfortunately, some of the momentum that we have in the
research simply won't last 2+ more years for funding to be approved.
Since no other agency funds this type of fundamental research we likely
will be forced to change the direction to applied questions that are
more attractive to other funding sources (e.g., Sea Grant). Experience
has shown, however, the innovation frequently comes from basic
research. Applied research is generally too narrowly focused to result
in fundamentally new ideas. NSF is the only real source for basic, non-
medical science.
Answer by Malia Rivera, Faculty Marine Education Coordinator at
HIMB. In addition to research grants, NSF funds projects associated
with education targets at various levels, including graduate,
undergraduate and K-12 students (e.g., REU, NSF GK-12, COSEE), as well
as informal public audiences (e.g., ISE and CRPA). Presumably, cuts in
the overall NSF budget will impact not only research, but these types
of important science education related programs as well. Marine science
education programs associated with academic research institutes such as
those at the Hawai`i Institute of Marine Biology are uniquely
positioned to create and deliver educational opportunities that bridge
and leverage real scientific research (which engages graduate and
undergraduate students) with meaningful science education and
scientific literacy at the K-12 and public audience levels. Certainly
it would be expected that the projected cuts to the President's request
would diminish the availability of these opportunities that otherwise
would have served to contribute to the enhancement of science literacy
in the public audiences and encouragement of the pursuit of higher
education in science disciplines by local students.
Question 3. What resources are needed to carry out the proper level
of monitoring and research of coral reefs?
Answer by Steve Karl, Associate Research Professor at HIMB. A
considerable amount of funding is going to environmental sensing on
global and broad regional scales such as NSF Ocean Research Interactive
Observatory network (ORION). This view of the physical marine
environment is useful for things like predicting the frequency and
severity of hurricanes in the Atlantic, understanding how El Nino and
La Nina contribute to changing climates, and assessing the role of
elevated sea surface temperature in the 1997-1998 Indo-Pacific and 2005
Caribbean mass coral bleaching events. The success of an individual,
however, is more strongly dependent on very small-scale processes that
the individual experiences throughout its life. These small-scale
processes likely are not reflected in the larger, more regional studies
that are more common. Our research in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, however, is
indicating that there is micro-spatial heterogeneity on coral reefs and
that these differences are stable over time. We have been monitoring
the water temperature at points 4 meters apart across a patch reef. We
are finding that adjacent sites separated by 4 meters can be nearly a
degree different in temperature. Even more surprising is that these
differences are stable over time and not associated with the depth of
the water. This is significant because other researchers have shown
that coral bleaching occurs at a threshold temperature and temperatures
even one-degree higher cause coral bleaching. Furthermore, if the
temperature is sustained the coral colony is unlikely to recover and
will die.
Currently, we are collecting the temperature data by using small
temperature data loggers. These loggers record the temperature every 25
minutes and store it in memory. Within a month the memory is full and
we retrieve the data loggers, download the data, clear the memory, and
put them back out in the field. This is exceedingly time consuming. We
would also like to collect other measurement (solar irradiance,
salinity, water movement, etc.) but this is time prohibitive. What is
urgently needed to further this sort of monitoring are wireless,
underwater data loggers. Since we have over 100 temperature data
loggers, it is untenable to have them wired to a central receiver.
Currently, the technology for underwater wireless communication of data
is lacking. The appropriate types of monitors would also need to be
developed so that micro-spatial analyses were possible. In general,
considerably more resources need to be directed to understanding the
dynamics at all physical scales from the micro to an ocean basin.
Question 4. Do you feel that more could or should be done to
explicitly bolster education programs at the University of Hawai`i and
Hawaii Pacific University?
Answer by Judy Lemus, Faculty Academic Programs Specialist at HIMB.
Undergraduate enrollment in science majors is declining all over the
country and I think it would be helpful to look at that more closely,
specifically within the context of Hawaii and develop objectives at UH
that could help to reverse that trend. Certainly engaging more minority
and underrepresented groups is needed as the demographics of
universities move toward parity with the general population. But more
broadly, I think it also has to do with changing our approach to
teaching science in a way that keeps up with contemporary culture, is
more enriching and engaging, and is better in tune with career
opportunities. So this would require investments in revising curricula
and also providing more resources for immersive and authentic science
experiences for undergraduates. I think there is potentially a huge
need for this at the University of Hawai'i.
Toward outreach education, the university functions within the
continuum of a broader educational system and culture, including K-12
education and free-choice, life-long learning of adult citizens. As
such, and as the pinnacle of the formal education system, the
university should certainly be engaged in bolstering education
throughout that continuum. For science in particular, if the academic
science community disregards the education needs and interests of the
public, it risks alienating that public audience and potentially
eroding support for publicly funded science, and therefore diminishing
our capcity in science and technology (two of the fastest growing
sectors of the global economy). We have already seen how difficult it
is to enage any disenfranchised sector of the public. For the
University of Hawai`i, there needs to be better coordination of the
many worthwhile outreach efforts that are happening.
Answer by Malia Rivera, Faculty Marine Education Coordinator at
HIMB. In early 2007 the HIMB Education Program, with the help of the
University of Hawai`i Office of Institutional Research, compiled
statistics from the Fall 2006 semester on the number students at UH
Manoa (UHM) majoring in undergraduate degrees from majors associated
with the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST--of
which HIMB is a part), in Zoology, and in Marine Biology (the latter
two departments whose curricula are most closely associated with the
mission of HIMB). Despite an overall student body at UHM made up of 60
percent undergraduate students that graduated from Hawaii high schools
(that is, students presumably from the State of Hawaii), the proportion
of students from Hawaii that have declared majors in SOEST was only 15
percent, in Zoology only 17 percent, and in Marine Biology only 27
percent. In other words, most of the undergraduates majoring in these
disciplines do not enter UHM as residents from the state, but rather
are from either the mainland or other countries. Given recent efforts
by the state to encourage STEM education to help diversify Hawaii's
future economy away from its reliance on tourism, there is a need to
create more opportunities for our local students to pursue science and
technology disciplines as a course of study and as an eventual career.
To do this, pathways that help students journey through the sciences
from the K-12 through the undergraduate and graduate levels of study,
and eventually job placement, are critical. While the good news is that
more and more programs like these are emerging, the numbers of our
students enrolling in these types of majors are still markedly low.
Cuts to funding at NSF that have supported these efforts would likely
thwart the progress made thus far.
Question 5. Since 2004 the state has been making climate change
mitigation and adaptation a priority through increased dedication and
investment in the research and development of clean energy
technologies. How has legislation passed in recent years benefited your
research or commercial goals?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director of HIMB. The America
COMPETES Act with the reauthorization of NSF has been instrumental in
providing funding for many of the HIMB faculty. The importance of this
funding is documented in the previous answers. As of May 2008, 10 of 15
HIMB faculty members have competitive research grants from NSF. The
cumulative amount of this funding, i.e., for multiyear grants, is
$3,844,288. Some of that funding will end in 2008 and, like all faculty
members in academic research units, are working very hard to renew
their funding. Projected cuts will have a major impact on these
efforts.
Question 6. What types of trends have you witnessed in regard to
the erosion of corals here in Hawaii?
Answer by Charles Fletcher, Professor and Chairman, Dept. of
Geology and Geophysics, School of Ocean and Earth Science and
Technology, UH-Manoa. ``No trends have been witnessed in this regard .
. . coral erosion is not a worry--bleaching and acidification are
worries and perhaps they are referring to this. The reason no trends
have been witnessed is that no one is watching. There are no moitoring
programs set up to look for this effect, and the effect is not expected
to be manifest for several decades in any case. Of far greater concern
are coastal run-off, poor water quality in restricted circulation
areas, and other human impacts.''
Question 7. Have we seen an increase in the last decade of disease
events on corals reefs? If so, do you believe this to be attributed to
increasing ocean temperatures or another event?
Answer by Greta Aeby, Assistant Researcher, Hawai'i Institute of
Marine Biology, OEST, UH-Manoa. Dr. Greta Aeby, in her response to your
question regarding research on corals' resistance to climate change,
documents the evidence that suggests a correlation between bleaching
and disease.
Question 8. Is HIMB conducting any long-term monitoring and
research of threats to coral reefs such as coral bleaching?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director at HIMB. The Hawai'i
Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP) was created during
1997-98 by leading coral reef researchers, managers and educators in
Hawaii . The initial task was to develop a state-wide network
consisting of over 30 long-term coral reef monitoring sites and
associated database. Upon completion of the monitoring network the
focus was expanded to include rapid quantitative assessments and
habitat mapping on a state-wide spatial scale. Today the emphasis is on
using these tools to understand the ecology of Hawaiian coral reefs in
relation to other geographic areas. Led by Paul Jokiel, Ku`ulei
Rodgers, Eric Brown, and Alan Friedlander, CRAMP is housed at HIMB and
the data gathered by the Hawaii CRAMP over the last 7-years from 32
sites across the Main Hawaiian Islands has been utilized by county,
state and Federal managers in their efforts to manage the resources of
Hawaii.
Question 9. What resources are needed to carry out the proper level
of monitoring and research of coral reefs?
Answer by Florence Thomas, Associate Research Professor at HIMB.
One of the major tasks facing ocean scientists in the 21st century is
to unravel the complex interaction of physical, chemical, and
biological processes that underlie the function of oceanic ecosystems.
We are in an era of rapidly developing technology and are beginning to
approach science in a cross disciplinary fashion which is providing a
means to examine these complex interactions rather than focusing on
single processes or disciplines. Thus we are poised to examine oceanic
ecosystems in a way that has previously been impossible.
Over the past 10 years there has been considerable development of
sensors capable of monitoring aspects of the environment at
increasingly small scales and with accuracy that meets the level of
biological responses. To fully understand how corals and coral
associated organisms respond to a changing environment we need to
invest in the deployment of small-scale sensor arrays in locations
where corals and associated organisms can be continually monitored for
responses using modern molecular and more traditional methods.
Many biological processes are influenced by the physical and
chemical characteristics of the environment. For example, hydrodynamic
regime can determine the rate at which chemicals are delivered to or
from an organisms or community. This rate in turn can impact biological
processes such as photosynthesis, nutrient uptake, coral bleaching, and
algal productivity. Further changes in light and temperature may impact
normal biological function. While we know from land-based experiments
that these physical parameters can impact biology, little is known
about the small-scale fluctuation in physical parameters in the field
and how organisms in situ respond to naturally occurring changes. To
date, we do not know which scales of environmental variation may be
most important in driving changes in ecosystem function. By mapping
measures of response at the gene, metabolism, and community scale onto
shifts in environmental parameters taken continuously at scales
relevant to organisms we can begin to determine the factors underlying
such shifts. Knowing how organisms respond to large scale and long-term
perturbations in environmental parameters singly is not enough. We need
real-time, small scale monitoring of multiple environmental factors at
the scale of the organism if we are to understand changes in coral reef
ecosystems.
Question 10. Research has shown that some corals are able show a
greater tolerance to climate change and coral bleaching than others due
to the different species of algae that live within their tissues. What
research has been done to explore resistance of Hawaiian corals to
climate change?
Answer by Greta Aeby, Assistant Researcher, HIMB. Corals have a
narrow range of thermal tolerance and so are extremely susceptible to
temperature stress. Studies are now starting to show there is a link
between coral disease and ocean warming. Several diseases show seasonal
patterns where higher levels of disease are found during the warm water
seasons. For example, Willis et al., (2004) found a fifteen fold
increase in acroporid disease on the GBR during the summer surveys as
compared to winter surveys. Disease outbreaks have also been found to
follow water temperature anomalies or bleaching events. On the GBR,
Bruno et al., (2007) found a significant relationship between frequency
of warm temperature anomalies and the incidence of white syndrome and
Miller et al., (2006) found significant coral mortality (26-48 percent
losses in coral cover) from coral disease on reefs in the U.S. Virgin
Islands following an extensive bleaching event. High temperature
anomalies may drive outbreaks of disease by hindering the corals'
ability to fight infection and/or by increasing the pathogen's
virulence (Harvell et al., 2007).
In Hawaii, we are just now developing the capacity to determine
whether ocean warming, is currently or will in the future, result in
increases in coral diseases on the reefs of Hawaii. Within the past
couple of years, baseline disease surveys have been completed and
focused studies on diseases of concern initiated. So while we do not
yet know whether water temperatures have affected coral disease levels
on the reefs of Hawaii, disease outbreaks have already been documented
in both the northwestern Hawaiian Islands (Aeby 2006) and in Kaneohe
Bay, Oahu within the main Hawaiian Islands (Aeby et al., unpub. data).
The recent disease outbreaks in Hawaii are worrisome and raise concerns
about Hawaii's reefs ability to tolerate conditions associated with
global climate change. Research is desperately needed to understand
coral disease processes in Hawaii and thus be able to predict the
trajectory of the health of Hawaii's reefs in the face of increasing
anthropogenic stressors and warming ocean temperatures.
Literature cited
Aeby, G.S. 2006. Outbreak of coral disease in the Northwestern
Hawaiian Islands. Coral Reefs 24(3):481.
Bruno, J., Selig, E., Casey, K., Page, C., Willis, B., Harvell, D.,
Sweatman, H. and A. Melendy. 2007. Thermal Stress and coral cover as
drivers of coral disease outbreaks. PLoS Biology 5(6):e124.
Doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050124.
Harvell, D., Johdan-Dahlgren, E., Merkel, S., Rosenberg, E.
Raymundo, L., Simth, G., Weil, E. and B. Willis. 2007. Coral disease,
environmental drivers, and the balance between coral and microbial
associates. Oceanography 20(1):59-81.
Miller, J., Waara, R., Muller, E. and C. Rogers. 2006. Coral
bleaching and disease combine to cause extensive mortality of reefs in
U.S. Virgin Islands. Coral Reefs 25:418.
Willis, B., Page, C. and E. Dinsdale 2004. Coral disease on the
Great Barrier Reef. Pages 69-104 in E. Rosenberg and Y. Loya (eds).
Coral Health and Disease. Springer-Verlag, Germany.
Question 11. I have heard that Hawaii is an ideal place for the
establishment of carbon offset forestry. Does using forestry to offset
Hawaii's CO2 emissions seem like a viable option?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director of the Hawai'i
Institute of Marine Biology. This is a very interesting question and
should best be answered by an expert in Forest CO2
sequestration. I have referred it to Boone Kauffman, Director,
Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, Pacific Southwest Research
Station, USDA Forest Service, 60 Nowelo Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720.
Here are some factors that might help in the discussion:
1. Hawaii in 2005 was generating approximately 23.05 million
metric tons of CO2 (EPA, Comparison of EPA State
Inventories and the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Sinks, last updated Feb. 25, 2008).
2. Hawaii's existing forests are already acting as a carbon
sink for 108 million tons of CO2 (EPA State Action
Policies: Hawaii, at the following website: http://
yosemite.epa.gov/gw/statepolicyactions.nsf/uniqueKeyLookup/
BMOE5P9LGZ?OpenDocument).
3. The State of Hawai'i Action Plan (koa reforestation and
longer rotation of high value forest plantations) indicates
that reforestation has the potential to sequester an additional
26 million tons of carbon.
4. According to the DBEDT plan, the reforestation projection is
economically viable as a carbon sequestration strategy.
Please note that these figures are just estimates. I was not able
to verify the figure for Hawaii's forests as tons or metric tons.
Question 12. Scientific evidence has suggested that one potential
impact of climate change will be the increased expansion of invasive
species. Hawaii has already suffered as the result of more than 70
marine invasive species. What kinds of monitoring and research are
being performed to address invasive species in the Hawaiian Islands and
what do we need to do to prevent future invasions?
Answer by L. Scott Godwin, Research Specialist, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology, SOEST, UH-Manoa. The native species of the marine
and terrestrial environments of the Hawaiian Archipelago arrived as
natural biological invasions through historical time, and through
evolution and adaptation became the present communities associated with
the ecosystem. The advent of modern history has created new human-
mediated biological invasions through non-natural mechanisms. The
natural species invasion process is measured in geologic time but the
invasions attributed to human-mediated sources are occurring at greater
frequency than by natural means.
Disturbance, both natural and man-made, can create a situation in
which competition dynamics can be altered in coral reef habitats.
Physical damage, whether by storms or anchor damage, can lead to gaps
that can be exploited by both native and non-native species. Once this
has begun it is nearly impossible to take measures that can halt the
process. From the standpoint of non-native species invasions, measures
to minimize the likelihood of exposure by new non-native species are
the best approach for resource managers. These measures take the form
of monitoring both the marine communities that can be affected and the
mechanisms that can expose these communities to non-native species.
Monitoring of marine communities involves baseline surveys to
determine what native and non-native species exist so that new
introductions can be identified and the spread of established non-
natives can be followed (and possibly prevented). The baseline survey
of organisms in marine communities is a lengthy process and requires
taxonomic expertise to identify both native and non-native species.
This expertise is rarely centered in the location of the survey efforts
and requires collaboration with institutions throughout the world.
Identifying the mechanisms of non-native species transport requires
a ``pathway analysis'' that takes into account all present and future
vectors that could affect a region. Most pathways are associated with
the movement of commercial commodities via maritime and air shipping
hubs but other means also exist. Activities of public and private
sector research and conservation entities can also be responsible for
transport.
In Hawaii, a variety of surveys conducted under the auspices of the
Hawaii Biological Survey (http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/) and the Hawai`i
Institute of Marine Biology (HIMB) have identified marine non-native
species throughout the archipelago and the common transport mechanisms.
The majority of the species are associated with natural and man-made
shorelines in conjunction with maritime shipping hubs but there are
many species established in shallow and deep water coral reef habitats.
Most species are found within the Main Hawaiian Islands but some have
become established in the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument
(PMNM). Specific management focus on marine non-native species and
transport mechanisms for the PMNM has been conducted by the Hawai`i
Institute of Marine Biology (http://cramp.wcc.hawaii.edu/Downloads/
Publications/TR_Godwin_et_
al%20_Invasives_Final%20Draft.pdf). A pro-active management plan that
requires surveys of all maritime vessels applying for permits for entry
into the PMNM was developed in conjunction with HIMB and has been in
place since 2006. Presently, HIMB is also conducting work in the PMNM
involving the survey of established non-native species populations to
determine if expansion is occurring and the level of transport
associated with derelict fishing gear. Researchers are providing
developing genetic techniques for early detection of marine non-native
species and taxonomic expertise for surveys of native and non-native
species.
Question 13. Warmer seas are believed to contribute to increased
numbers of harmful algal blooms. These blooms produce toxins which can
be passed onto humans through the seafood that we eat. Will it be
necessary to increase seafood monitoring and testing to protect
Hawaiians from shellfish poisoning?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology. Senate Bill 2688: Commercial Seafood Consumer
Protection Act, if enacted should provide much needed capacity for the
FDA and NOAA to carry out ``testing and other activities'' to ensure
seafood safety for the American public. Current data indicate that the
spatial and temporal incidence of harmful algal blooms is increasing
and despite the cause, warmer seas or increased pollution (phosphorus
and/or nitrogen in the environment), Hawaii will have to increase its
capacity to test for and make predictions regarding harmful algal
blooms that might impact its seafood.
Question 14. There has been concern that climate change could
result in increases in the prevalence of diseases, specifically dengue
fever. Does Hawaii need to worry about potential increases of diseases
that have not been historically abundant?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology. The World Health Organization in its report on
Climate Change and Human Health (2003) points to observations that
mosquito-borne diseases like malaria increases around five-fold in the
year after an El Nino event (Bouma and van der Kaay, 1998). The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 236-F-98-007e, Sept. 1998) reports
that warming and other climate changes may expand the habitant and
infectivity of disease-carrying insects, increasing the potential for
transmission of diseases such as malaria and dengue fever. Although
dengue fever is currently uncommon in the United States, conditions
exist in Hawai`i that make it vulnerable to the disease. Dengue
outbreaks have also occurred in Hawaii. Warmer temperatures resulting
from climate change could increase this risk.
Bouma, M. and H. van der Kaay, The El Nino Southern Oscillation and
the historic malaria epidemics on the Indian subcontinent and Sri
Lanka: an early warning system for future epidemics? Tropical Medicine
and International Health, 1(1): p. 86-96. (1996).
Question 15. One of many effects of sea level rise will be salt
water contamination of drinking water. What efforts are being taken to
look into salt water purifying systems to ensure that Hawaiians will
have fresh water to drink?
Answer by Charles Fletcher, Chairman and Professor, Geology and
Geophysics, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology,
University of Hawai`i at Manoa. In reality we use no drinking water
from the coastal plain--our drinking water comes from higher elevations
above the reach of sealevel impacts. There are real threats to drinking
water, i.e., decreased rainfall in an El Nino type future (one of many
model results), lowering water tables and rising chlorinity levels, but
these are from over-use and sea level rise will not have an important
impact. Hence, sea level rise is not a threat to drinking water. The
low lying coastal plains are where we inject our waste water on all
islands through thousands of injection wells . . . sea level rise may
impact these, but the injection is already done into the salty ground
water, so I don't think this is a major concern. There are potentially
severe impacts from sea level rise you may want to consider: beach loss
and accelerated coastal erosion, increased vulnerability to tsunami and
storm surge, loss of coastal plain drainage into storm drains, stream
flooding where they meet the ocean, increased frequency of wave
overtopping on crucial highways . . . and others.
Question 16. Corals and other marine resources in Hawaii may be
significantly impacted by both climate change and ocean acidification.
Changes in temperature, salinity, and sea level would directly impact
coral reefs and related fisheries. Corals are susceptible to small
increases in temperature, which may result in deadly coral bleaching.
Studies have also confirmed that our oceans are becoming more acidic
due to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. These
conditions are predicted to adversely impact coral growth, and may also
be harmful to commercially important fish and shellfish larvae. Such
organisms are also important food sources for other marine species.
Approximately half of all federally-managed fisheries depend on coral
reefs and related habitats for a portion of their life cycles. The
National Marine Fisheries Service estimates that the annual dockside
value of commercial U.S. fisheries from coral reefs exceeds $100
million. For Hawaii, however, the economic value of coral reefs is
estimated at more than $360 million annually, when reef-related tourism
and fishing are taken into account. Coral reefs in Hawaii are not just
critical habitats for marine animals, they also support the economy
through fishing and tourism. Which is the more pressing issue for the
health of Hawaii's coral reefs, ocean acidification or the increasing
sea surface temperatures? Why?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology. Ocean acidification and increasing sea surface
temperatures are considered the result of rising concentrations of
CO2 in the atmosphere. Thus, increased sea surface
temperature and acidification are related phenomena. Many of us
consider both to be important. In the case of sea surface temperatures,
if the increase in temperatures happens rapidly (over decades rather
than centuries) there will be bleaching and some corals and their
symbionts will be unable to adapt to prolonged exposure to higher
temperatures. There should be corals that survive the temperature
increase, but we cannot predict what species will survive and how many
of these species will remain. Measuring resilience of coral reefs is
critically important to determine whether coral reefs will be available
in the future to provide habitat for fisheries and to protect our
coastline.
Ocean acidification may reduce the recruitment of coralline
crustose algae, the ``glue'' that holds the reefs together and provides
the signal for coral larvae to settle. Other studies have shown that
stony corals will lose their calcareous skeleton and essentially look
like soft corals under acidic conditions in the laboratory. Again, we
don't have enough data to predict the effects of ocean acidification on
coral reef ecosystems (not single coral pieces in aquaria). We are in
need of research facilities in the United States with large mesocosms
that house coral reef ecosystems where water temperatures and seawater
acid pH balance can be manipulated.
Question 17. What role does Hawaii play in providing answers for
the impact of climate change and ocean acidification on coral reefs?
Answer. The Hawaiian Archipelago is the most isolated archipelago
in the world. It is a site where 70 percent of the Nation's reefs
reside and these reefs are situated on sites that were derived from
geological processes operating on a well established time line, 30+ mya
(Kure Atoll) to less than 1 mya (Hawaii Island). The marine environment
of the different high islands, atolls, and reefs in the Hawaiian
Archipelago are microcosms of environmental diversity with exposure to
anthropogenic stresses in the southern part of the chain (Main Hawaiian
Islands) to the relatively pristine part of the chain (Northwestern
Hawaiian Islands). Hawaii is also close to the northernmost latitude
for shallow water coral reefs and thus, climate changes are predicted
to reach this site rather early. The number of species in Hawaii's
coral reefs is largely unknown but estimates place the number at 7,000
and approximately 20-25 percent of these species are found nowhere else
in the world.
All of these characteristics make Hawaii the prime place for the
study of climate change on coral reefs. Nowhere else are there similar
reefs distributed along a gradient of anthropogenic stress, gradient of
geologic age, a gradient along a North-South longitude, and isolation
from the influence of large land masses. The Federal, state, and
university research and management enterprises in Hawaii have made a
major investment in hiring experts to study coral reefs. A ``critical
mass'' of talent is available in Hawaii to conduct these studies. The
proximity of coral reefs to modern, technologically equipped
laboratories is also a major advantage. Moreover, Hawaii can play a
role in providing research capabilities and education opportunities for
the six jurisdictions that the U.S. maintains in the Pacific including
American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, the
Republic of Palau, the Republic of Marshall Islands, and the Federated
States of Micronesia.
Question 18. What is the trend with regards to the erosion of
corals here in Hawaii?
Answer by Charles Fletcher, Chairman and Professor, Geology and
Geophysics, SOEST, UH-Manoa. In Hawaii, sea-level rise resulting from
global warming is a particular concern. Riding on the rising water are
high waves, hurricanes, and tsunami that will be able to penetrate
further inland with every fraction of rising tide. In addition, the
coastal groundwater table is likely to crop out above ground level and
lead to widespread flooding. The physical effects of sea-level rise
fall into 5 categories. These are:
1. Marine inundation of low-lying developed areas including
coastal roads,
2. Erosion of beaches and bluffs,
3. Salt intrusion into aquifers and surface ecosystems,
4. Higher water tables, and
5. Increased flooding and storm damage due to heavy rainfall.
Assessing the impact of these on Hawaii requires identifying a
likely global sea-level scenario. Global sea level is principally the
product to two phenomena: (1) melting ice on Antarctica, Greenland, and
among alpine glaciers, and (2) thermal expansion of seawater due to
surface warming. The first detailed observations of Antarctic ice
reveal net melting; the melting rate on Greenland has increased 250
percent in the past decade; there is widespread retreat and thinning of
mountain glaciers, and together these major ice sources contribute
about 2.0 mm/yr to global sea-level rise. Thermal expansion is
calculated from the amount of heat stored in the upper ocean as
revealed by increased water temperature. While changes in water
temperature over past decades have been difficult to measure, studies
indicate that thermal expansion increased from an average rate of about
0.36 mm/yr in past decades, to 1.6 mm/yr in the most recent decade. The
total contributions to global sea level ( 3.6 mm/yr) agree remarkably
well with the observed rate of rise ( 3.4 mm/yr) as measured by
satellites.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted future
sea-level changes to the year 2100 in the range 18 to 58 cm. However,
these projections do not include a component based on ice behavior, and
hence, are widely considered to underestimate the potential for
flooding. Two studies published in 2007, both by German climate
researcher Stefan Rahmstorf and colleagues, indicate a more likely
scenario of future climate change and sea-level rise. In one study,
Rahmstorf compared projections of future atmospheric warming and sea-
level rise made in 1990 by the IPCC to observations in 2006. Results
indicate that the climate system, in particular sea level, may be
responding to global warming more quickly than models specify. Observed
temperature changes are in the upper part of the range projected by the
IPCC and sea level has been rising faster than even the extreme
scenarios projected by the models. Notably, Rahmstorf found that the
rate of sea level rise for the past 20 years is 25 percent faster than
the rate of rise in any 20-year period in the preceding 115 years. In
his second paper of 2007, Rahmstorf estimates 21st century sea-level
change on the empirical relationship between 20th century temperature
changes and sea-level changes. The study establishes a proportionality
constant of 3.3 cm of sea-level rise per decade per +C of global
temperature warming. When applied to future warming scenarios of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, this relationship results in
a projected sea-level rise in 2100 of 0.5 to 1.4 m above the 1990
level. On the basis of Rahmstorf's research, and the documented
accelerations in melting of both the Greenland and Antarctic ice
sheets, it seems highly likely that a sea level of approximately 1 m
above present could be reached by the end of the 21st century.
In Hawaii, as the ocean continues to rise, natural flooding occurs
in low-lying regions during rains because storm sewers back up with
saltwater, coastal erosion accelerates on our precious beaches, and
critical highways shut down due to marine flooding. The Mapunapuna
industrial district of Honolulu adjacent to the airport is a good
example. If heavy rains fall during monthly highest tides portions of
the region flood waist deep because storm drains are backed up with
high ocean water. The undercarriages of trucks suffer a rust problem
because floodwaters become salty at high tide. Even when it does not
rain, the area floods with salt water as it surges up the storm drain
into the streets and local workers report seeing baby hammerhead sharks
in the 2-foot deep pools.
Using sensitive topographic data collected by NOAA and the Army
Corps of Engineers, it is possible to map the contour line marking 1 m
above present day high tide. This ``blue line'' identifies the portion
of our communities that fall below sea level when seas reach the 1 m
mark later in the century. This dramatic map has roughly 30 cm
accuracy. Those lands that are closer to the ocean are highly
vulnerable to inundation by seawater during high waves, storms,
tsunami, and extreme water levels. Hotel basements will flood, ground
floors will be splashed by wave run-up, and seawater will come out the
storm drains on most of the streets in Waikiki and along Ala Moana
Boulevard.
Don't think that waves will be rolling down the streets and
reaching the blue line. More likely, lands lying below sea level in the
future will be dry at low tide during arid summers. But they will have
high water tables, standing pools of rainwater, and backed up storm
drains when it rains and tides are high. Beaches will be mostly gone
and we'll have built large seawalls lining most of our shores. Despite
the wet conditions, most of the buildings will probably still be
inhabited and residents will have to time their movement between the
tides, just as they do today in Mapunapuna. Back up in the McCully and
Makiki areas residents won't see any seawater, they will see the
wetlands of the 19th century reemerging as the water table rises above
ground level in some areas (not all areas). Under these conditions,
when it rains, we will have a real problem. The runoff will raise the
water table, the storm drains will be full of seawater except at the
very lowest state of the tide, and standing pools of water will
accumulate throughout the region without a place to drain. Travel will
be limited and many lands will turn to wetlands, there may be some
areas of permanently standing water.
References:
Rahmstorf, S., 2007, A semi-empirical approach to projecting sea
level rise. Science, 315, 368-370.
Rahmstorf, S., et al., 2007, Recent climate observations compared
to projections. Science, 316, 709.
Figure 1. The blue line marks the contour of high tide when sea
level is 1 m above present. Lands makai of the line are highly
vulnerable to coastal hazards. These are targets for redevelopment to
increase resiliency to natural hazards.
Question 19. Have we seen an increase in the last decade of disease
events on corals reefs? If so, could this be attributed to increasing
ocean temperatures or another event?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology. Surveys of coral reefs for disease status was not
undertaken in Hawaii until 2002 and in the short period of time since
then, there appears to be an increase in the incidence of disease
events in coral reefs. We do not have sufficient data to attribute
increasing ocean temperatures to coral disease incidence in Hawaii. A
critical need we have identified is a quarantine facility that will
enable researchers to conduct laboratory studies that would lead to the
identification of pathogenic agents of coral disease and an
understanding of the possible responses of coral to infection and
physical insult. Please see Dr. Greta Aeby's response to Question 7
above.
Question 20. Invasive species cause damage by diminishing
fisheries, fouling ships, clogging intake pipes, and spreading disease.
The United States spends $120 million annually to control and repair
damage from more than 800 invasive species. Hawaii has 73 known marine
invasive species, 42 percent of which are considered harmful. I
understand that climate change may contribute to an increase in the
number of invasive species. Given that Hawaii is already affected by
more than 70 marine invasive species, what kinds of monitoring and
research are being conducted here to address this?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology. CRAMP (Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring
Program), a program with partners in NOAA-PIFSC, HIMB at UH-Manoa,
Bishop Museum, and Hawaii Dept. of Land and Natural Resources, and the
Hawai'i Biological Survey based at the Bishop Museum have been
monitoring different reef ecosystem in the Main Hawaiian Islands for
potentially invasive organisms on an annual basis and selected reef
ecosystems in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands once every 2 years.
There is not enough funding or manpower to monitor the entire Hawaiian
Archipelago as often as is needed. Ships that enter the
Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument undergo hull inspections.
There is certainly a need for more monitoring and research that targets
the pathways for marine invasions, i.e., hull fouling and ballast
water, and provides methods to reduce or eliminate these pathways for
marine invasions.
Question 21. What can we do to prevent future invasions?
Answer by Jo-Ann Leong, Professor and Director, Hawai`i Institute
of Marine Biology. I would refer you to the report available at the
CRAMP website by L. Scott Godwin: http://cramp.wcc.hawaii.edu/
Downloads/Publications/TR_Godwin_et_al%20_Invasives_Final%20Draft.pdf.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye to
Richard E. Rocheleau, Ph.D.
Question 1. Historically, Hawaii has had some of the highest
utility and fuel costs in the Nation. This is in large part due to
Hawaii's isolated location, which makes it difficult to connect a power
grid. In addition, over 90 percent of the state's energy production
comes from costly imported fossil fuels.
In recent years, Hawaii has taken impressive strides to address
these issues by investing in the research and development of clean
renewable energy technologies. By becoming a test bed for clean energy
technologies, Hawaii has positioned itself to attract investment and to
cut the state's dependence on costly imported fossil fuels. What
renewable technologies are best suited to the state?
Answer. Hawaii is blessed with a varied and substantial abundance
of renewable energy resources such that nearly all commercial renewable
technologies can contribute to Hawaii's energy mix. Unfortunately, not
all technologies are at a state of technical readiness to contribute.
Additionally, the small grid systems with no interconnections between
islands impose a number of practical constraints on the use of many of
the technologies that will require additional effort and investment in
order to maximize their contribution.
Wind, solar, and geothermal technologies are well-suited to Hawaii
but each has limitations to their deployment. Biofuels are also
expected to play a significant role but water resources, cost, and
competing land-use are significant issues that may limit their
availability from local sources. In the future, ocean energy
technologies and advanced bioenergy systems such as algae could play a
significant role but they are as yet unproven at the commercial scale.
Although not normally included in a discussion on renewable
technologies, end-use energy efficiency and energy efficient buildings
is an area that is critically important to Hawaii and all other states.
Additional but brief comments on each of these technologies follow.
Wind: Without doubt, wind is one of the best technologies for use
in Hawaii. Overall, Hawaii has an excellent wind resource and wind
technology is very mature and cost effective. The islands of Hawaii and
Maui already get a significant amount of their energy from wind and
both have the resources and potential sites for substantially more. At
high penetration levels wind can, however, have negative impacts on the
operability of the grid. The intermittency and difficulty of
forecasting also can limit the maximum amount that can be accepted.
Storage can help mitigate these effects but storage at this scale
remains costly. HNEI is working with GE Global Research Center and the
utilities to address these issues to allow higher penetration. Oahu,
whose energy use is many times that of the other islands, is limited by
resource and by siting. Efforts to develop wind on Molokai and/or Lanai
for export to Oahu are underway, but land use is an issue and cost/
permitting for an interconnection cable of the needed size are
significant issues.
Solar: Solar photovoltaics (PV) is another technology that is
extremely well-suited to Hawaii. PV is proven albeit somewhat expensive
technology. Applications include utility scale, commercial roof, or
residential roof systems. Tax credits are very important to help
mitigate the current high cost of PV. As is the case for wind, solar is
an intermittent resource and so PV may be limited in the total
penetration level that can be achieved before grid operability is
affected.
Geothermal: Geothermal is a reliable and cost effective renewable
energy technology in areas where the resource exists. The best resource
is on the island of Hawaii. Undersea cabling from Hawaii to the other
islands has been examined in the past. Water depth and resource issues
make that a very complex issue to overcome. Hot spots also exist on
other islands (e.g., Maui) but technology to economically extract
energy from these lower temperature resources remains unproven.
Engineered Geothermal Systems (EGS) which extracts heat by creating a
subsurface fracture system to which water can be added through
injection wells is a technology currently under development that may be
a candidate for Hawaii.
Biofuels: Solid (direct fired) and liquid biofuels have the
potential to make significant contributions to both the electricity and
transportation sectors. Historically, bioenergy in Hawaii took
advantage of waste biomass from the various agricultural sectors (e.g.,
bagasse from the sugar industry). This contribution has decreased in
recent years as agriculture has decreased. Hawaii also has regulations
requiring 10 percent ethanol in gasoline. This ethanol is currently
imported from the national and international markets. Large scale local
production of feedstock for biofuels is envisioned but will be
complicated by a number of issues including availability of water,
competing land uses, and social issues (e.g., food vs. fuel). The State
of Hawaii has contracted the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute to develop
a comprehensive plan for the development of bioenergy systems in
Hawaii. Significant effort will also be needed to identify the best
crops and agricultural practices for these to be sustainable
activities. Crop development must be coordinated with the availability
of conversion technologies. The Federal Government continues to have
active programs supporting the development of conversion technologies.
There has been substantial discussion recently about the potential
for photosynthetic algae to be a significant contributor to the
biofuels energy mix. If commercial economically viable algal systems
can be developed, the high growth rates and the absence of competition
for food crops would be significant advantages. However, there are both
biological and process engineering questions that remain unanswered at
this time. Certainly, given the potential and the many unanswered
questions, continued support of this research area is warranted.
Ocean Energy: Ocean energy can include wave energy, current, and
ocean thermal technologies. Hawaii has some of the Nation's best wave
energy resources and has near-shore sites with temperature
differentials that make ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC)
possible. Planning studies and/or pilot scale testing is underway in
Hawaii in both these areas. While promising for the future, neither
wave nor OTEC can be considered commercially available or economically
viable at this time. Although energy from ocean currents is somewhat
more developed than either wave or OTEC, Hawaii does not have a
significant tidal range and only a very limited ocean current resource.
Question 2. The European Union (E.U.) has become a world leader in
renewable energy technologies; it possesses half the world renewable
market and its industry employs 300,000 people with annual revenues of
$20 billion. The E.U. has committed to investing $1.5 billion in
renewable technology and energy efficiency, a 40 percent increase over
the previous commitments. How does the United States compare to others
around the world in the renewable energy technologies industry?
Answer. REN21 estimates that $71 billion was invested in renewable
energy capacity worldwide in 2007, up from $55 billion in 2006 and $40
billion in 2005. Almost all of this increased investment was in solar
PV and wind power with much smaller amounts in solar hot water,
hydropower, biomass, and geothermal. PV and wind then provide useful
technologies to use for comparison of the U.S. to others around the
world in the renewable energy technologies industry.
It is almost a cliche answer, but it is fair to say that in many
instances the U.S. has led the world in the research and development of
various renewable energy technologies only to see other countries adopt
their use, develop manufacturing capability, and eventually surpass
U.S. industry in the manufacture and sales of these technologies. This
is most clearly the case for photovoltaics. The development of wind
technology occurred among a more diverse mix of countries, but, while
the U.S. is currently seeing some of the strongest growth in the
installation of wind systems, U.S. industry is not gaining market share
in this field. The attached charts show current installation and
manufacturing specifications for these two technologies.
Figure 1 shows the annual installation of photovoltaic systems by
country or region between 2000 and 2007. The substantial increase of PV
installations in Germany is a direct result of the large subsidy for PV
in that country. The same was true for Japan. More relevant to this
question is Figure 2 which shows annual PV production worldwide. The
U.S. was the largest producer in the world through 1998 before falling
behind Japan. By 2007, the U.S. was only the 4th largest producer,
behind Japan, Europe, China, and Taiwan.
China, which almost tripled production in 2006 and then doubled it
again in 2007 is poised to gain an ever larger share of the worldwide
market. Although a late entry to the marketplace, China's Suntech is
now the 3rd single largest producer of PV modules.
The picture for wind, while somewhat different than PV in that
installation of wind turbines in the U.S. is keeping pace with
installations in other countries (see Fig. 3) shows similar troubling
trends in turbine manufacturer. While GE, the only U.S. turbine
manufacturer in the top 10 worldwide in 2007 retained its ranking as
the 3rd largest manufacturer worldwide, its market share slipped, from
17.5 to 15.5 percent in 2007, behind Vestas (Denmark) and Gamesa
(Spain). Merrill Lynch reports that ``GE will face fierce competition
for market share from new entrants to its markets and without a high
level of vertical integration, it also looks disadvantaged in the near-
medium term'' Enercon (Germany) and Suzlon (India) have both seen
increased market share during this period. Currently, there are no
Chinese companies exporting turbines. However, many recent reports
indicate that two Chinese companies, Goldwind and Sinovel, have big
export plans with others not far behind. The Chinese companies are
expected to present a formidable challenge to existing turbine
companies.
Question 3. Do you think we are at risk of falling behind others in
research and development? Is it conceivable that if we don't make the
proper investments, we may end up importing this technology from other
countries in the future, just as we are importing oil today?
Answer. The U.S. has long been a leader in research and development
of renewable energy technologies. It is imperative that industry,
state, and Federal Government continue to invest in renewable energy
R&D, especially in the emerging technologies such as future generation
photovoltaics, biofuels, ocean energy technologies, and advanced end-
use efficiency technologies. However, using PV and wind as examples, it
seems apparent that investment in R&D is not sufficient to ensure that
the U.S. will not become an energy technology importer as it is today
for oil. There must be sufficient support to validate emerging
technologies so that end-users (e.g., utilities and large scale energy
users) will accept them and to assist companies to move promising
technology beyond the demonstration phase and into the marketplace.
These are complicated issues that go beyond the support of research
that has been typical of U.S. energy programs.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye to
Dr. Goro Uehara
Question 1. While the many conversations about climate change
revolve around carbon dioxide, other gases such as nitrous oxide and
methane also contribute to climate change. What impact are these gases
having on Hawaii's climate?
Answer. Agriculture clearly contributes to NOX and
methane emissions, but carbon dioxide from burning of imported fossils
fuels is clearly the dominant green house gas in Hawaii. NOX
and methane are primarily generated in our taro fields and wetlands,
but taro production in Hawaii is declining so human generated
NOX is most likely not a major factor in climate change for
Hawaii. We need to be aware of other green house gas emissions, but out
main efforts at this point should be focused on carbon dioxide.
Question 2. The Hawaii Climate Change Action Plan presents several
options to utilize abandoned sugarcane and pineapple farmlands for
forest cultivation. Is forestry something we should consider as a way
to absorb carbon dioxide?
Answer. Farmland formerly in sugarcane and pineapple is too
valuable for growing trees to absorb carbon dioxide. Hawaii has a great
opportunity to show the tropical world how the state's agriculture and
economy can be transformed from a fossil to a fiber based clean, energy
future by using its land for energy crops production. Plant fiber
consists mainly of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin which can be
converted into biofuels through biochemical or thermal conversion
processes. Each ton of fiber can be converted into 70 gallons of
ethanol by biochemical mean and/or 110 gallons of ethanol by thermal
conversion processes. In tropical Hawaii, where we enjoy year long
climate for crop production, each acre of land can produce from 20 to
40 tons of fiber annually or 2,200 to 4,400 gallons of ethanol from
each acre of land each year. Hawaii needs to be ready for the day when
commercial scale cellulosic conversion technology becomes a reality.
Hawaii has a huge potential for taking advantage of carbon trading
based on a carbon offset market. This will, however, depend on the
price of offset carbon and what is permitted as offset carbon. This is
especially true in Hawaii, where 90 percent of our energy needs is now
based on fossil fuels.
Question 3. In many of our island communities, we rely on fossil
fuels for electricity. To what extent can agriculture contribute to
carbon capture to mitigate the effects of centralized power plants of
the type we have in Hawaii?
Answer. Renewable energy in the form of solar, wind, and geothermal
is probably better suited to replace fossil fuel for power and heat
generation in Hawaii than bioenergy from agriculture. Agriculture's can
play a more important role in replacing gasoline and diesel for
transportation fuel with biodiesel and ethanol in Hawaii.
Question 4. In the longer term is it possible to establish
decentralized or distributed electric generating system and, if so, can
agriculture play a role in carbon capture at these distributed systems?
Answer. Bioenergy is ideally suited for developing a distributed
electric energy systems in isolated rural communities such as those
that exits in the outer island. Biomass is bulky and transporting it
over long distances to a central location defeats the purpose of
lowering energy costs. Small, compact gasification units that convert
biomass into syngas for power generation can provide electricity for
farms and small communities and even generate income by returning
excess power to the grid. With households on outer island currently
paying as much as 40 cents per kilowatt hour, distributed power
generation systems need to be evaluated for outer island communities.
Feedstock for operating such systems can be agricultural waste,
invasive plants and high yielding energy crops specifically cultivated
for conversion into biofuels or electricity.
Question 5. If agriculture provides carbon capture opportunities,
will the ``revenue streams'' from carbon capture be sufficient to
justify agricultural production? Or, will multiple product systems of
the type ``sugar, molasses, bagasse, electricity'' be required to
justify a long term investment in agriculture in our island
communities?
Answer. Historically, agriculture was practiced to produce food,
feed and fiber. In the coming century, agriculture's new challenge is
to add clean, renewable energy to the list of items it produces. Our
ancestors depended on fiber (wood) for heating and cooking. We now need
to use fiber to produce transportation fuel. Today, each acre of
pineapple after the last fruit is harvested is burned or plowed to
clear the land of biomass. In the future, we can convert the 30 tons of
pineapple fiber that is now burned into 3,000 gallons of ethanol or ten
tons of charcoal. Charcoal can be used to substitute for potting
material imported by the plant nursery industry, as a metal reductant
(e.g., for producing silicon for photovoltaics), and as a soil
amendment. We are currently testing charcoal as a soil amendment to
rejuvenate degraded soils as was done centuries ago in the Terra Preta
soils of the Amazon jungles by natives living there.
Charcoal has a half life of more than an thousand years so it can
replace compost as a permanent means to improve soils quality. We are
just beginning to appreciate the potential of biomass not only for
energy, but for its potential to produce new bioproducts and
biochemicals.
In the long term, a sustainable bioenergy and bioproduct producing
agroecosystem must have four characteristics. First it must be highly
productive and profitable; second, it must be stable and be free from
``feast to famine'' fluctuations in productivity; third, it must be
highly resilient and be able to recover quickly from perturbations and
stresses imposed on it such as climate change, and fourth, it must be
highly equitable so that there is equal sharing of the benefits derived
from the system.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye to
Bill Thomas
Question 1. Hawaii has positioned itself as a leader on many fronts
addressing the impacts of climate change. What do you see as the big
questions that we need to focus on answering now for the impacts of
climate change on island communities?
Answer. A broad set of potential climate change impacts have been
identified; these include deteriorating coastal conditions, increased
severity of coastal hazards, storm surge and erosion, shifts in
regional water supplies, increased energy demand, greater public health
threats, enhanced probability of flooding, and ecological changes.
Potential climate impacts on Pacific Island coastal communities are
highlighted here because of the likelihood that coastal communities
will be more negatively affected by climate change than inland
communities. For example, coastal communities face higher risk of
coastal flooding and greater exposure of residents, their property, and
coastal wetlands to inundation from sea level rise. The transportation
infrastructure is also vulnerable to potentially hazardous flooding
events. The possible costs associated with damages and losses to
coastal communities, environments, and infrastructure in the Pacific
Islands are extremely large.
In order to address these regional impacts, NOAA's Pacific Region
has developed several programs that use an integrated approach to
dealing with issues of climate change in the Pacific. These programs--
the Pacific Risk Management `Ohana, the Pacific ENSO (El Nino Southern
Oscillation) Application Center, the Pacific Climate Information
System, the Pacific Islands Regional Integrated Science and Assessment,
and the Pacific Region Integrated Coastal Climatology Program--have
provided innovative approaches and a governance structure to address
the ever-increasing need for information, products and services. These
Pacific Regional programs work in concert with the public and private
sector, as well as non-governmental organizations, to collaboratively
address these issues of mutual concern.
The following highlights the major questions these groups have
focused on, to address the impacts of changing climate conditions on
our island communities:
1. How do changing climate conditions affect individual island
groupings and communities in the Pacific? In order to
understand this, improvements in the regional resolution of
climate models, better documentation of current conditions and
trends through enhanced observing systems as well as general
improvements in our ability to document, model and assess the
impacts of changing climate conditions on ecosystems and
natural resources in the Pacific region is required. This also
requires research on the local impacts of climate change on
ecosystems, communities and businesses in the region as well as
support for vulnerability assessment programs that support a
collaborative, participatory process through which scientists,
decision-makers and other public leaders can explore effective
options for climate change mitigation and adaptation.
2. How do changing climate conditions affect extreme events
such as hurricanes, strong wind and high wave events, droughts
in the Pacific? NOAA is working toward improvements in models,
as well as enhanced understanding of how climate change will
affect the intensity, frequency and tracks of hurricanes and
other storm events. This also involves the analysis of the
historical context for extreme events. A related question
involves developing an improved understanding and ability to
model/predict how climate change will alter patterns of El
Nino/La Nina events which are the primary drivers of changes in
rainfall, temperature and tropical cyclones in the Pacific on a
year-to-year basis.
3. How does climate change affect sea level and patterns of
coastal storms? In most Pacific islands, the people,
agricultural land, tourist resorts and infrastructure
(including roads and airports) are concentrated in the coastal
zones, and are thus especially vulnerable to any rise in sea
level. Determining how severe this problem is, or might be, is
complicated by natural shifts in sea level associated with the
recurring ice ages. Increased global temperatures are causing a
rise in sea level from thermal expansion as the sea warms up
and from melting of the planet's ice caps. However, while most
recent data have shown that changes in sea level are related to
many variables, accurate forecasting of these changes is years
away. Thus, NOAA is engaged in activities to understand long-
term sea level rise and how sea level rise combines with
changing patterns of strong winds, high seas and heavy rains to
produce coastal flooding along with a vulnerability assessment
program to support the development of effective adaptation
measures and policies.
4. How does ocean acidification affect coral reefs and other
critical coastal and marine resources? Ocean acidification is
an emerging issue that may have long-term implications for the
global carbon cycle and climate, although the range and
magnitude of biogeochemical and biological effects and their
socio-economic impacts are currently too uncertain to
accurately quantify. However, such impacts are likely to be
substantial. Consequently, especially important in this context
will be understanding the combined effects of rising
temperatures, sea level rise and lower pH on coral reefs. NOAA
has a burgeoning ocean acidification research program.
5. What are public agencies in the region doing to develop
adaptations to a changing climate? Some public agencies in the
Pacific region, especially in Hawaii, have begun planning to
help the region adapt to climate change impacts. This includes
considering the environmental, human health, water management,
and infrastructure issues associated with a changing regional
climate. Public agencies at all levels (national, regional,
state, county, metropolitan, and city) have begun to
investigate plans or actions for adaptation to climate change.
Much of what is happening now is focused on research and risk
assessment. The research deals with a range of topics including
human health, water management, and protection of the built and
natural environment. NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research has invested in a long-term grant that looks at many
of these issues through the Pacific Islands Regional Integrated
Science and Assessment. This grant will be recompeted in Fiscal
Year 2009.
6. What role can the private sector play in adapting to climate
change? Many in the private sector, especially multinational
corporations and regionally-based business coalitions have
begun to address the issue of adaptation to climate change.
Although many private sector activities are focused on reducing
greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency, such
activities improve the region's capacity to deal with warming
in general and heat waves in particular.
7. What are the impacts of climate change on the cultural
resilience (i.e., cultural identity, traditional knowledge, and
customary practices) of island economies? Over the next 100
years, a major concern will be the potential loss of cultural
identity and connection as a result of mitigation efforts. For
example, relocating indigenous coastal communities out of flood
zones or after major storms; further loss/erosion of ancestral
land connections due to sea level rise and coastal inundation;
loss of traditional knowledge in impacted areas; shifts in
artisinal and customary resource use patterns; and occupational
shifts due to loss of livelihoods.
In island communities that are prepared for such impacts and
ready to respond and adapt to climate impacts, cultural
resilience will be higher and socioeconomic impacts to the
islands will be reduced (e.g., meeting basic dietary/protein
needs of human populations following major natural hazard
events thanks to resilience in the fishing community). NOAA's
National Integrated Drought Information System and Regional
Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) program have been
funding a pilot program since 2007 to look at Local and
Indigenous knowledge networks in climate and drought. This is a
collaboration between the Pacific, Southwest and Alaska RISAs
to build expertise in strategies for coping with drought and
increasing climate resilience.
Question 2. Where is the greatest gap or deficiency in scientific
research and information?
Answer. NOAA agrees with the scientific findings of the 2007 Fourth
Assessment Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC-AR4).
IPCC-AR4 states that small island communities, like those in the
Pacific, are particularly vulnerable to climate variability and change.
The IPCC-AR4 identified several key uncertainties and research gaps
with respect to climate science and small islands:
Observations: Ongoing observations are required to monitor
the rate and magnitude of changes and impacts, over different
spatial and temporal scales. For example, in situ observations
of sea level help to understand relative sea level change on
regional and local scales. Two examples of regional observing
networks are: the Pacific Islands Global Climate Observing
System and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission Sub-
Commission for the Caribbean and Adjacent Regions Global Ocean
Observing System;
Improved Models: Projections for changes in precipitation,
tropical cyclones, and wind direction/strength are critical for
small islands, and are currently limited by climate model
resolution. Projections based on outputs at finer resolution
are needed to inform the development of reliable climate change
scenarios for small islands (e.g., regional climate models and
statistical downscaling techniques). Further, hydrological
conditions, water supply, and water usage on small islands pose
different research problems from those in continental
situations. These need to be investigated and modeled over the
range of island types (different geology, topography and land
cover).
In addition to the climate science gaps identified above, the IPCC-
AR4 identified several key gaps in contemporary research on the impacts
of climate change on small islands. These include:
The role of coastal ecosystem (mangroves, coral reefs,
beaches) in providing natural defenses against sea-level rise
and storms;
Establishing the response of terrestrial upland and inland
ecosystems (including woodlands, grasslands, wetlands) to
changes in mean temperature and rainfall extremes;
Considering how commercial agriculture, forestry, and
fisheries will be impacted by the combination of climate change
and non-climate-related forces;
Expanding knowledge of climate-sensitive diseases in small
islands through national and regional research (vector-borne as
well as skin, respiratory, and water-borne diseases);
Identifying the most vulnerable island sectors and systems;
and
Increasing understanding of climate in decision-support,
including how to translate climate information into tools and
products that are easily accessible and interpreted by
decision-makers.
Question 3. What impacts should we be most concerned about? Over
what time scales?
Answer. NOAA agrees with the scientific findings of the 2007
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's IPCC-AR4, which contains
updated projections of changing climate conditions (i.e., temperature,
rainfall, sea level, and extreme events) and the impacts for Pacific
Islands and other small island states. IPCC-AR4 confirms the
vulnerabilities identified in the 2001 Pacific Islands regional
assessment, and provides insights into climate-related challenges such
as ocean acidification. The time scale for these impacts varies
broadly, ranging from decades to multidecadal.
The IPCC-AR4 and similar climate assessment reports state that
small island communities, like those in the Pacific, are particularly
vulnerable to climate variability and change. Small island impacts
include:
Deterioration of coastal conditions is expected to affect
local resources and reduce their value as tourist destinations
(e.g., the combined effect of increased ocean temperatures and
ocean acidification on coral reef resources);
Sea level rise is expected to exacerbate coastal hazards
such as inundation, storm surge and erosion as well as
reduction of freshwater availability due to saltwater
intrusion, especially in low-lying islands;
Climate change is projected to reduce water resources in
many small islands (Pacific and Caribbean) to the point where,
by mid-century, resources may be insufficient to meet demand
during low rainfall periods;
Invasion of non-native species is expected to occur with
rising temperatures; and
Climate change will exacerbate other existing human
influences on fisheries and marine ecosystems such as over-
fishing, habitat destruction, pollution, and excess nutrients.
Question 4. What are the top three actions we should take now to
improve our ability to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate
change?
Answer. NOAA is committed to expanding climate services for all
user communities and enhancing climate research. The FY 2009
President's budget request identifies three key, specific climate-
related activities for which NOAA has requested increases: developing
the National Integrated Drought Information System; investigation into
ocean current circulation and its relationship to abrupt climate
change; and the development of satellite climate sensors. Combined with
continued support for NOAA's existing climate-related projects, these
activities will improve our ability to mitigate and adapt to climate
change.
In addition to the key climate-related research activities
highlighted in the FY 2009 President's Budget Request, NOAA's Pacific
Region is engaged in a number of ways to help the Pacific Islands plan
for, mitigate against, and adapt to climate change (please see response
to Question 6 for a detailed list of activities). NOAA's Pacific Region
will continue to work with our island communities to develop tools,
products, and services to move toward realizing NOAA's vision of, ``an
informed society that uses a comprehensive understanding of the role of
the oceans, coasts and atmosphere in the global ecosystem to make the
best social and economic decisions.''
Question 5. In recent weeks, articles have been circulated among
Members of the Congress that suggest the climate change issue is
overstated, and that what is actually happening is a natural
phenomenon. What do you think about this suggestion?
Answer. NOAA agrees with the scientific findings of the 2007
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC-AR4) that warming of
the climate system is unequivocal, and most of the observed increase in
globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very
likely due to the observed increase in greenhouse gases caused by
humans. The IPCC-AR4 also pointed out that uncertainties remain, such
as the rate of warming, including the potential for abrupt and extreme
changes, as well as region-specific climate variation and change.
NOAA's responsibility is to provide critical information on the
amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and their impact on
climate, so that policymakers can make informed decisions about what is
best for our Nation.
Question 6. The 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Assessment reports that global temperature has increased substantially
over the last 100 years, due in large part to the burning of fossil
fuels. Increases in carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere
lead to increased ocean temperatures, which threaten coral reef
ecosystems through more frequent and severe coral bleaching, rising sea
levels, and possibly storm activity. What future programs or products
is NOAA planning for the Pacific to monitor the oceans' response to
growing carbon dioxide levels? What information will be provided for
decision-makers for guidance on mitigation options?
Answer. NOAA's Pacific Region is engaged in a number of ways to
help the Pacific Islands plan for, mitigate against, and adapt to
climate change. NOAA's Pacific Region will continue to work with our
island communities to develop tools, products, and services to move
toward realizing NOAA's vision of, ``An informed society that uses a
comprehensive understanding of the role of the oceans, coasts and
atmosphere in the global ecosystem to make the best social and economic
decisions.'' Highlighted below are some prominent efforts:
The Pacific Risk Management `Ohana
The Pacific Risk Management `Ohana (PRiMO) is a network of partners
and stakeholders involved in the development and delivery of risk
management-related information, products, and services in the Pacific,
and is led by the NOAA Pacific Services Center. Established in 2003,
this multi-agency, multi-organizational, multi-national group brings
together representatives from agencies, institutions, and organizations
involved in Pacific risk management-related projects and activities
with the overall goal of enhancing communication, coordination, and
collaboration among the `Ohana (family) of partners and stakeholders
involved in this work. As a result of this collaboration, several ideas
that emerged over the years have led to the development of decision-
support and community planning tools that aid a cross section from
managers to the general public in better understanding risks and in
making the best possible socio-economic decisions. Examples of these
collaborations include:
Decision Support Tools
Hazard Assessment Tools have been developed in partnership
with NOAA's Pacific Region, local governments in American
Samoa, Guam, and Hawaii (County of Kauai). These tools use
Geographic Information Systems maps to integrate hazard risk
information, such as sea level rise projections, along with
local information on infrastructure, natural resources, and
administrative boundaries to improve both short and long term
decisionmaking.
The Hazard Education and Awareness Tool is a template which
allows any organization the ability to create a simple website
which provides public access to local hazard maps for their
community. Additional information on appropriate response and
preparedness actions are also included.
The Nonpoint Source Pollution and Erosion Comparison Tool is
a decision support tool which allows coastal managers to
compare potential water quality impacts of land cover change
that may occur from changes in climate.
Data
The Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) is a nationally
standardized database of land cover and land change
information, developed using remotely sensed imagery, for the
coastal regions of the United States. C-CAP products inventory
coastal intertidal areas, wetlands, and adjacent uplands with
the goal of monitoring these habitats by updating the land
cover maps every 5 years. Its primary objective is to improve
scientific understanding of the linkages between coastal
wetland habitats, adjacent uplands, and living marine
resources. Land cover data from C-CAP has been developed for
Hawaii from satellite images acquired in both 2000 and 2005.
High resolution elevation data for Hawaii was collected in 2005
using Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar. This elevation
data provides resource managers with the highest resolution
elevation data currently available for Hawaii. This data is
invaluable for determining potential impacts of changes in
climate, such as sea level rise, in areas where higher
resolution data may not be available.
Community Planning Tools
The Coastal Community Resilience Guide presents a framework
for assessing resilience of communities to coastal hazards. The
work was the result of a partnership funded through the Indian
Ocean Tsunami Warning System Program and is being piloted for
application in Hawaii. The framework, developed in concert with
over 140 international partners, encourages integration of
coastal resource management, community development, and
disaster management for enhancing resilience to hazards,
including those that may occur as a result of climate change.
The Pacific ENSO Application Center
Pacific Island communities continually deal with dramatic seasonal
and year-to-year changes in rainfall, temperature, water levels and
tropical cyclone patterns associated with the El Nino Southern
Oscillation (ENSO) cycle in the Pacific. This dynamic system involving
the Pacific Ocean and the atmosphere above it can bring droughts,
floods, landslides, and changes in exposure to tropical storms.
Fourteen years ago, NOAA joined forces with the University of Hawai`i,
the University of Guam, and the Pacific Basin Development Council to
begin a small research pilot project designed to develop, deliver, and
use forecasts of El Nino-based changes in temperature, rainfall, and
storms to support decisionmaking in the American Flag and U.S.-
Affiliated Pacific Islands. That pilot project--the Pacific ENSO
Applications Center (PEAC)--continues its work today as part of the
operational National Weather Service programs in the Pacific. The PEAC
experience has demonstrated the practical value of climate information
for water resource management, disaster management, coastal resource
planning, agriculture, and public health.
The Pacific Climate Information System
The experience gained from PEAC and the Pacific RISA has helped
inform the emergence of a comprehensive Pacific Climate Information
System (PaCIS). As an integrated organization that brings together
NOAA's regional assets as well as those of its partners, PaCIS
provides, on a regional scale, a programmatic framework to integrate
ongoing and future climate observations, operational forecasting
services, and climate projections, research, assessment, data
management, communication, outreach and education that will address the
needs of American Flag and U.S.-Affiliated Pacific Islands. Within this
structure, PaCIS will also serve as a United States' contribution to
the World Meteorological Organization's Regional Climate Centre for
Oceania and represents the first integrated, regional climate service
in the context of emerging planning for a National Climate Service.
Scientists and decision-makers in Pacific Island communities are
now engaged in individual and collaborative efforts to understand the
nature of the climate change impacts described in IPCC-AR4 and explore
our options for both mitigation and adaptation. This shared effort
involves NOAA, other Federal programs, state agencies, university
scientists, community leaders and nongovernmental organizations.
Together these groups are focusing their unique insights and
capabilities on a number of critical climate programs and activities
including: contributions to global and regional climate and ocean
observing systems; operational forecasts of seasonal-to-inter-annual
climate variability; development and analysis of improved models that
provide long-term projections of climate change; multi-disciplinary
assessments of climate vulnerability, climate data stewardship, the
development of new products and services to support adaptation and
mitigation in the Pacific; and education and outreach programs to
increase the climate (and environmental literacy) of Pacific Island
communities, governments, and businesses.
Future planning for a number of climate programs in the Pacific
will be organized in the context of PaCIS including building upon the
PEAC, the Pacific Islands Regional Integrated Science and Assessment
(Pacific) program and other related climate activities in the region.
In addition to meeting the specific needs of U.S. affiliated
jurisdictions in the Pacific, PaCIS will also provide a venue in which
to discuss the role of U.S. contributions to other climate-related
activities in the Pacific including, for example, observing system
programs in the region, such as the Pacific Islands Global Climate
Observing System (PI-GCOS) and the Pacific Islands Global Ocean
Observing System, as part of an integrated climate information system.
In order to further define the roles and capabilities of PaCIS, a
steering committee has been established, made up of representatives of
institutions and programs working in the fields of climate
observations, science, assessment, and services in the Pacific
(including PEAC, the Pacific RISA, PI-GCOS, and the National Weather
Service), as well as selected individuals with expertise in similar
regional climate science and service programs in other regions. The
PaCIS Steering Committee will provide a forum for sharing knowledge and
experience and guide the development and implementation of this
integrated, regional climate information program.
The Pacific Region Integrated Coastal Climatology Program
Over the past decade, discussions with disaster management agencies
and coastal managers in the Pacific Islands have highlighted concerns
about sea level rise, and the associated coastal inundation, as one of
the most significant climate-related issues facing coastal communities
in the Pacific. In light of this need, NOAA, through its IDEA Center,
with support from the Pacific Services Center, and working with
colleagues throughout NOAA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Geological Survey and university scientists in Hawaii, Guam, Alaska,
and Oregon, initiated the Pacific Region Integrated Coastal Climatology
Program (PRICIP). PRICIP recognizes that coastal storms and the strong
winds, heavy rains, and high seas that accompany them pose a threat to
the lives and livelihoods of the people of the Pacific. To reduce their
vulnerability, decision-makers in Pacific Island governments,
communities, and businesses need timely access to accurate information
that affords them an opportunity to plan and respond accordingly. The
PRICIP project is helping to improve our understanding of patterns and
trends of storm frequency and intensity within the Pacific Region, and
develop a suite of integrated information products that can be used by
emergency managers, mitigation planners, government agencies, and
decision-makers in key sectors including water and natural resource
management, agriculture, fisheries, transportation, communications,
recreation, and tourism.
As part of the initial build-out, a PRICIP web portal is serving a
set of historical storm ``event anatomies.'' These event anatomies
include a summary of sector-specific socio-economic impacts associated
with a particular extreme event as well as its historical context
climatologically. The intent is to convey the impacts associated with
extreme events and the causes of them in a way that enables users to
easily understand them. The event anatomies are also intended to
familiarize users with in situ and remotely-sensed products typically
employed to track and forecast weather and climate.
Hawaiian Archipelagic Marine Ecosystem Research
The Hawaiian Archipelagic Marine Ecosystem Research Plan is a
collaborative planning process to develop sustainable conservation and
management throughout Hawaii's marine ecosystem through improved
understanding of the unique physical and biological attributes of the
Hawaiian archipelagic marine ecosystem, their interconnected dynamics,
and their interactions with human beings. By using Hawaii as a large-
scale archipelagic laboratory for the investigation of biophysical
processes, comparing the protected Northwestern Hawaiian Islands to the
heavily used Main Hawaiian Islands and integrating socioeconomic
information, Hawaii and comparable marine ecosystems worldwide should
realize improvements in resource management and community response to
changes in climate.
While this project is in its formative stages, the information
generated by this projected 10-year multi-agency, collaborative program
will:
Fill critical and important research gaps in the underlying
science of marine ecosystem dynamics;
Complement national, international, and state ecosystem
research initiatives;
Improve understanding of the behavior of humans in a marine
ecosystem approach to conservation and management;
Formulate predictive theory of ecosystem dynamics relative
to physical and biological variables; and
Generate useful information for conservation managers.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Inouye to
Karl Kim, Ph.D.
Question 1. Climate change experts have forecasted changes in the
worldwide climate that will impact forest productivity, ecosystems,
agriculture, water resources, and energy. Among these impacts is sea
level rise, increased and intensified flooding, and higher storm surges
along vulnerable coasts. A combination of these possibilities could
pose a threat for Hawaii in the form of intensified storms and other
natural disasters.
In the 9/11 bill, the Committee authorized the creation of the
National Disaster Preparedness Training Center. This purpose of the
center is to develop plans to prepare for, mitigate, and respond to
disasters in Hawaii. The Center would serve as a databank, develop
scientific models and tools for monitoring natural disasters, and
evaluate potential risks to urban populations. As an island community,
Hawaii must be proactive in preparing for varied natural threats, as
well as manmade. Can you tell us about the potential for adverse
impacts from sea level rise on the population centers of the Central
and Western Pacific, particularly with respect to port and road
infrastructure, coastal habitats, living marine resources, and
vulnerability of towns and villages to extreme coastal events like
tsunami?
Answer. There are a wide range of adverse consequences now being
predicted with increasing levels of probability for Hawaii, the Central
and Western Pacific, and Pacific region generally. The State of Hawaii,
in its 2007 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, utilizes the Fourth
Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as a source
for information about impacts and vulnerabilities, and researchers at
the University of Hawai`i are also generating useful primary data and
modeling tools to assess the potential effects of sea level rise. Some
consensus points on expected impacts include:
Coastal areas are projected to be exposed to increasing risks
of coastal erosion, and this will be exacerbated by population
pressures in the coastal areas.
Flooding will increase in coastal areas, particularly the low-
lying areas, and the increase is expected to accelerate over
the coming decades.
Salt water incursion into water tables will increase, with
particularly severe consequences for small island communities
with already tenuous water supplies.
Low-lying zones are heavily correlated with population density
and urbanization throughout the Pacific region, compounding the
vulnerability of these zones to other hazards, such as tropical
storms and localized coastal erosion and subsidence.
Coastal and low-lying zones are also heavily correlated with
structural infrastructure, i.e., roads, ports, business
districts, airports, fuel depots, and communications networks.
Sea level rise and related increased levels of inundation,
storm surge and coastal erosion pose heightened threats to
vital infrastructure.
These infrastructural vulnerabilities will have direct adverse
effects on livelihoods and island economies. Deterioration of coral
resources due to sea rise-related thermal changes may impact fisheries,
and loss of beaches and related natural resources will have detrimental
effects on tourism, a major economic activity on island communities. To
illustrate the potential impact, a one meter rise in sea level would
inundate most of Honolulu's Waikiki district, essentially eliminating a
major component of the state's economic activity.
Question 2. Where are the most vulnerable areas, and how are they
kept informed and prepared?
Answer. Vulnerability is widespread in the Pacific region, and
differs based upon considerations such as geography, geology,
bathymetry, atmospheric conditions and other environmental variables.
Along with environmental science based parameters, vulnerability has a
distinct social character, with variability based upon income, access
to education and communications technologies, experience with recent
disasters and development of coping skills, and the level of local
government proactivity, as examples.
Vulnerability mapping models are being developed to provide
improved understanding of the location of vulnerable populations, and
these technologies are also useful in disaster response planning and
implementation, improving situational awareness at all stages of the
disaster management process. Despite these advances, remote areas and
localized concentrations of persons disadvantaged due to socio-economic
factors, linguistic minorities, persons with disabilities and other
issues continue to present challenges to effective messaging about, and
preparation for, disasters.
Question 3. What is the current state of Hawaii's disaster
preparedness and is it adequate to address Hawaii's unique and varying
threats?
Answer. Following the devastation of Hurricane Iniki in 1992, the
State of Hawaii has made disaster preparedness a priority. State and
local Civil Defense operates at a high level of professionalism, and
local first responders have been sensitized to the need to be prepared
for the wide variety of natural disasters which may occur in Hawaii.
Numerous state and Federal agencies are working individually and
collectively to identify and mitigate hazards in Hawaii and the region.
However, funding constraints, gaps in training and educational
resources, and the twin challenges of rapidly accelerating hazard and
disaster threats and rapidly expanding populations in hazardous areas
illustrate the need for a significant increase in preparedness at all
levels.
As one example, Hawaii State Civil Defense has effectively promoted
the development of tsunami inundation maps, and disseminated these
widely through placement in all telephone books in the state, improving
public awareness of hazard zones and evacuation procedures. With newly
developed modeling methods, significantly improved maps are now
possible which will greatly improve the utility of these maps, but
creating them will require new commitment of funding, engineering and
information management skills and talents. In other words, risk levels
continue to rise, and mitigation technologies are improving, but
demands on resources often outstrip local capacity.
The indelible lesson of Hurricane Iniki, reinforced by recent
natural disasters in other tropical coastal areas, is that given the
vulnerability of Hawaii's tropical island location, the remoteness of
any feasible outside relief assets, and the difficulties inherent in
inter-island transport in a crisis, island communities must develop a
high level of local resilience, or remain vulnerable to catastrophic
loss when extreme events occur.
Question 4. How would the National Disaster Preparedness Training
Center fill any gaps in Hawaii's current disaster preparedness program?
Answer. The NDPTC, as part of the National Domestic Preparedness
Consortium, will aim at addressing disaster preparedness in Hawai'i and
the U.S. Pacific Islands on the one hand, and sharing the experience of
training for disaster in one of the most hazard vulnerable regions with
our collaborating centers and the national disaster community as a
whole on the other. These are mutually reinforcing roles, and will aid
in addressing gaps in disaster preparedness both locally and
nationally.
Based at the University of Hawai`i, the central focus of this
center is to address knowledge gaps in the natural disaster management
system. Universities have a unique and increasingly critical
contribution to make in disaster risk reduction research as well as in
institutional capacity building for disaster response. Universities
house the basic scientific research and applied technology development
relevant to disaster risks, and train future professionals in vital
constituent disciplines. The University of Hawai`i has particular
strengths in Ocean and Earth Sciences, Civil, Ocean and Environmental
Engineering, Urban and Regional Planning, Architecture, Tropical
Agriculture and Natural Resource Management, Medicine and Public
Health, and Law that are highly relevant to disaster risk management.
The NDPTC will address the knowledge gap by adapting leading edge
findings from academic sources and the best practice experience of our
dynamic community of disaster management organizations to create
training and education products for every level of practitioner. The
need to broaden understanding of the technical nature of hazards and
increase familiarity with the latest tools, models and methods used in
mitigating their impacts, extends from first responders right up
through management and planning to policy and decision-making.
Increasing the level of knowledge held in common across disciplinary,
agency and community boundaries will have a direct effect in improving
the coherence of disaster planning, and the promotion of community
resilience.
The training and education products developed at the NDPTC will
substantially improve readiness in Hawaii and the U.S. Pacific Island
jurisdictions. However, these same products will be made available for
training programs throughout the U.S. As the first of the National
Domestic Preparedness Consortium institutions to focus specifically on
natural disasters, the NDPTC will also contribute to the effort to
assure that all hazards are addressed, and that preparation
incorporates a broad view of the nature of hazard.