[Senate Hearing 116-597]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 116-597
ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE RESEARCH
AND FORECASTING INNOVATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, OCEANS, FISHERIES, AND WEATHER
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 16, 2019
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
52-696 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,
ROY BLUNT, Missouri Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
CORY GARDNER, Colorado TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GARY PETERS, Michigan
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MIKE LEE, Utah TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin JON TESTER, Montana
TODD YOUNG, Indiana KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona
RICK SCOTT, Florida JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
John Keast, Staff Director
Crystal Tully, Deputy Staff Director
Steven Wall, General Counsel
Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
Renae Black, Senior Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, OCEANS, FISHERIES, AND WEATHER
CORY GARDNER, Colorado, Chairman TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin, Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin GARY PETERS, Michigan
RICK SCOTT, Florida
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 16, 2019..................................... 1
Statement of Senator Gardner..................................... 1
Statement of Senator Baldwin..................................... 2
Statement of Senator Blumenthal.................................. 38
Statement of Senator Sullivan.................................... 42
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 47
Witnesses
Dr. Waleed Abdalati, Director, Cooperative Institute for Research
in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder...... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Deborah A, Bronk, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences.......................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Radley Horton, Lamont Associate Research Professor, Columbia
University..................................................... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Erika Washburn, Ph.D., Director, Lake Superior National Estuarine
Research Reserve............................................... 28
Prepared statement........................................... 30
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Deborah A. Bronk,
Ph.D. by:
Hon. Richard Blumenthal...................................... 51
Hon. Edward Markey........................................... 52
Response to written questions submitted to Erika Washburn, Ph.D.
by:
Hon. Richard Blumenthal...................................... 54
Hon. Edward Markey........................................... 58
ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE RESEARCH
AND FORECASTING INNOVATION
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2019
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Science, Oceans, Fisheries, and
Weather,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in
room SD-562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Cory Gardner,
Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Gardner [presiding], Sullivan, Scott,
Baldwin, Blumenthal, and Udall.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Gardner. Thank you so much. I will call this
hearing to order.
Thank you to Ranking Member Baldwin for your work on the
subcommittee. I look forward to serving with you and working
with you in this capacity.
And thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
I would like to extend a special welcome to Dr. Waleed
Abdalati from the Cooperative Institute for Research in
Environmental Sciences, CIRES, which is based in Boulder,
Colorado. One of the many positive aspects of getting this
opportunity for the hearing today in the Senate is the ability
to showcase the best of our great State, Colorado. And Dr.
Abdalati is among the best in the country on issues related to
climate science, and I am honored that you would be here today.
I am thankful that you took the time to travel and join us.
Today's hearing is about atmospheric research and
innovation. In short, it is about the work that so many of our
scientists are doing to combat the threat of climate change. I
believe in climate change. I believe in the consensus within
the scientific community. I believe humans are contributing to
climate change, and I believe we have work to do together to
solve it.
Unfortunately, climate change has become a partisan weapon
used for more fighting than as a topic of serious discussion.
In reality, there is unreasonableness on both far ends of the
spectrum, but much in the middle where we can agree.
Last Congress, I worked closely with my colleague, Senator
Gary Peters from Michigan, to pass the American Innovation and
Competitiveness Act, legislation that updated policies at the
National Science Foundation and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. Both of those agencies do work
applicable to climate science.
After 18 months of hard bipartisan work, we passed that
bill into law, the first major science legislation to pass the
Commerce Committee and into law in nearly a decade.
It is going to take a lot of that kind of commitment and
good will on both sides of the aisle to find reasonable
solutions to climate change. I look forward to working with my
colleagues to find a path forward in that regard while we are
investing huge sums of money into clean energy resources here
in the United States and continue to work to reduce emissions.
I am looking forward to hearing from the witnesses today
and how the United States is investing in climate research, how
it is helping us tackle the challenge of climate change, and
how we can be engaging others around the world in pursuing
similar approaches to science.
With that, I will turn it over to Senator Baldwin.
STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN
Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure
to open the first hearing of the new Science, Ocean, Fisheries,
and Weather Subcommittee with you and especially on a topic
that is so important to both of our States, research that helps
us better understand our changing climate and how our
communities can respond to the challenges they face because of
it.
I know our esteemed witnesses will describe the knowledge
we have gained about this challenge that has impacts at the
local level and across the globe. I believe it is critical that
we use that information to support our communities as they face
new and growing challenges to health, public safety, and
economic stability. And as we review this information, this
hearing is a perfect example of a guiding force in my state,
something we call the Wisconsin Idea. It is the idea that
public research is not intended to just gather dust on a shelf.
Rather, its purpose is to improve the lives of the public,
address threats to our economy, and to innovate to improve
lives for the next generation.
This is urgently important right now as we are presented
with an abundance of strong research findings that show that
climate change is happening rapidly. We know that substantial
and swift action is needed to reduce the impact of these
changes, as well as to help our communities prepare for and
recover from the increasingly intense weather events that
impact our safety and economic stability.
I would like to talk a bit about the changes that we are
seeing in my State and what they mean for the people of
Wisconsin. We are seeing more extreme storm events.
Infrastructure that has weathered storms for decades is now
failing. Our infrastructure was not built to handle rain like
the rain we are seeing. Bridges and roads are being washed away
literally, people cutoff from lifesaving services and urgent
medical treatment. Heavy rain events are overwhelming our storm
water systems, and this leads to more contamination released
into our lakes and it threatens our drinking water supplies.
These are not inconveniences. These are fundamental and
dangerous disruptions to people's lives. And after a bridge
washes out, communities need the tools, funding, and
information to build better and more resilient infrastructure
that can withstand this new reality of more severe weather.
Many communities in Wisconsin are focused on building back
stronger and more resilient because they know and live the
realty of a changing climate every day, and they know the
enormous local costs to taxpayers of having to replace
infrastructure and manage public health and safety risks. It is
our job to help give them the tools that they need to succeed.
Unfortunately, a lot of the tools communities have right
now are delaying or even preventing actions to rebuild in a
stronger and more resilient way. The disjointed Federal
disaster response process can be hard for communities to
navigate. Aid for rebuilding can be delayed, making it
difficult to move forward with repairs critical to daily life.
Sometimes regulations make it harder for communities to act on
current information and make strategic investments for their
future.
Climate change is certainly a big and global problem, but
it is also just as importantly a very local reality. Things are
changing. Communities are struggling to have the resources to
stay ahead of those changes, and we need to do more.
Fortunately, people across Wisconsin and across the country
are leading the way when Washington has failed to respond to
these threats. Local leaders are championing infrastructure
design for the very rainfall that their communities will face
in the future and making investments now that use taxpayer
dollars strategically and guard against future loss of life and
property. Businesses are looking at these risks, implementing
strategies to avoid losses from weather events, and the supply
chain disruptions.
Our faith communities are also leading the way,
acknowledging the important reality that people with less means
will also be less able to protect themselves and their families
from the costs of recovering from natural disasters, facing
heat waves, and managing higher costs for food, water, and
other necessities.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your leadership and having a
discussion on this important research that gives our
communities good information so they can make informed
decisions for their future.
And now I would like to welcome a leader in research and
community resiliency from Superior, Wisconsin, our own Dr.
Erika Washburn. Dr. Washburn, I know that you and your team
have helped respond to many emergencies across northern
Wisconsin over the past several years from floods to water
monitoring after a refinery explosion in your community. Our
communities have been better equipped to react to these
challenges because of your expertise and leadership. Thank you
for the work you do and thank you for making the trip to share
that expertise in this important discussion.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Baldwin.
And to Dr. Bronk and Dr. Horton, if you want a special
call-out in opening statements, you are going to have to move
to Wisconsin or Colorado. All right?
[Laughter.]
Senator Baldwin. Dr. Bronk hails from Wisconsin.
Senator Gardner. Hails from Wisconsin. OK, very good. You
are always welcome. So very good.
But I will just quickly introduce all the witnesses
together. As I mentioned, Waleed Abdalati is the Director of
the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental
Sciences, also known as CIRES, in Boulder. Dr. Deborah Bronk,
the President and CEO of Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences
of East Booth Bay, Maine; and Dr. Radley Horton--welcome--
Associate Research Professor at Lamont-Doherty Earth
Observatory at Columbia University Earth Institute, Palisades,
New York. And of course, as talked about by Senator Baldwin,
Dr. Erika Washburn, Director of the Lake Superior National
Estuarine Research Reserve in Superior, Wisconsin. I very, very
much appreciate all of your willingness and testimony today,
looking forward to our conversation.
And, Dr. Abdalati, if you would start, and then we will
just go down the line. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF DR. WALEED ABDALATI, DIRECTOR,
COOPERATIVE INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH
IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES,
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO BOULDER
Dr. Abdalati. So thank you, Chairman Gardner and Ranking
Member Baldwin and other distinguished members of the
Committee, for inviting me to provide testimony at this
important hearing.
I also thank you for your ongoing support of weather and
drought-related research, which directly impacts our national
economy, health, livelihood, and prosperity.
As was said, I am the Director of CIRES at the University
of Colorado, and as part of our broad research portfolio, CIRES
scientists directly support NOAA in its weather forecasting
efforts and climate research by developing key insights into
atmospheric and related phenomena, building modeling and
analytical tools to improve forecasts and projections.
In the last 5 years, forecast model improvements made by
NOAA and the research community have greatly improved
forecasting of thunderstorms, blizzards, floods, and even smoke
from wildfires. Forecast error has gone down 25 percent in that
time, and we find even greater improvement in some areas. For
example, our skill in pinpointing the location of precipitation
has improved by 50 percent in the last 5 years.
Despite these successes, however, there remain critical
needs for more accurate forecasts and better lead-time. In the
longer term, seasonal and sub-seasonal forecasting and longer-
term climate projections, as well as information at more local
levels are needed.
Achieving these objectives requires continued development,
maintenance, and operation of super computers, the effective
use of cloud computing, and support for research on techniques
such as improving code, advancing machine learning, and
improving data analytics.
Improvement in these areas also requires key observational
capabilities such as surface weather stations, weather balloons
and aircraft, radar and satellites, targeted field studies and
novel innovative methods such as webcams and crowd-sourced
observations, which can be especially valuable in remote or
rural areas.
In the coming decade, there are likely to be new satellite
capabilities based on the recommendations of the National
Academy of Sciences' Earth Science Decadal Survey, which I have
the privilege of co-chairing. If the high priority
recommendations put forth in the report are implemented,
particularly those related to clouds, precipitation, aerosols,
winds, ice, and other phenomenon, the observational information
to inform the physics and meteorological and climate modeling
will tremendous.
Another critical area of advancement is in the social
sciences because the full value of our weather and climate
forecasting capabilities and risk assessments can only be
realized when they are used and understood by people beyond the
community, people other than the experts. And these kinds of
capabilities could never be realized without Federal
investments in both the research and operational domains. The
returns on these investments in both dollars and capabilities
are tremendous, and because much of this investment flows
through universities, it supports the development and training
of a capable workforce that will contribute to the strength,
health, and safety of our Nation in the future.
Another area in which CIRES is very active is in the
development and implementation of the National Integrated
Drought Information System, or NIDIS. NIDIS coordinates and
integrates drought research from various sources, and drought
will be a key manifestation of climate change. Drawing from
existing capacity in states and universities and across Federal
agencies, NIDIS works to improve the nation's capacity to
manage drought-related risks by providing the best information
available and tools to assess potential impacts of drought and
to support drought preparedness. Their improved drought
forecasting and monitoring provides the kind of objective and
timely information that farmers, water managers,
decisionmakers, and State and local governments need for
effective drought risk management and response, none of which
would be possible without the Federal investment and structure
provided through NIDIS.
Finally, these weather and drought processes I am referring
to occur against an evolving backdrop, which as Senator Gardner
mentioned, is climate change. Climate change has implications
for weather, seasonal climate, drought, air quality, sea
levels, storm surge, human health, and many other aspects of
our environment that affect the way we live.
Our success as a society really in the face of climate
change is going to depend on four things: the magnitude of
those changes, the rate at which they occur, our ability to
anticipate them, and how well equipped we are to deal with
them. It is critical that we invest in and use our
understanding of the physical, chemical, ecological, and social
dimensions of the earth system to understand these issues and
best position us for success in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Baldwin. I
appreciate your invitation to testify before this important
committee, and I look forward to the Committee's questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Abdalati follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Waleed Abdalati, Director,
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences,
University of Colorado Boulder
Thank you, Chairman Gardner and Ranking Member Baldwin and the
other distinguished members of the committee, for holding this
important hearing today, and for allowing me to provide testimony. It
is an honor to be here today to speak about the state and importance of
such critical environmental matters as weather forecasting, drought
management, and related issues. I thank this committee for its efforts
to equip the Nation to face challenges of human and economic importance
through advancing atmospheric research in ways that have improved
weather forecasting, our understanding of air quality, and our ability
to understand and deal with drought. Investments by the Federal
government in research in these and related areas are critical to
positioning individuals and the Nation to successfully meet the
challenges posed by varying weather and climate conditions with which
our economy, livelihood, and prosperity are so intertwined.
From the earliest days of civilized society, people have sought to
understand the world around them and the conditions in which they live
in order to be successful in the face of challenges, and to capitalize
on opportunities presented. In few places is the value of such
understanding more immediately evident in than in the areas of weather
and drought, which is why I am happy to be here to discuss the current
state of knowledge, the value of that knowledge, and ways in which that
knowledge can be improved.
I am the director of the Cooperative Institute for Research in
Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at the University of Colorado Boulder.
CIRES is NOAA's largest cooperative institute, and we support the
agency in the execution of its mission and carry out a wide range of
research aimed at understanding many aspects of the Earth's
environment--from the surface of the Sun to the depths of the Earth's
interior. A key part of our mission is directly supporting NOAA in its
weather forecasting efforts, developing key insights into atmospheric
phenomena, and building modeling and analytical tools to improve
forecasts. Another area in which we are very active is in the
development and implementation of the National Integrated Drought
Information System (NIDIS), which seeks to ``Advanc[e] drought science
and preparedness across the nation'' (https://www.drought.gov/drought/
).
I would like to focus my initial comments on weather forecasting
and improvement, then provide some perspectives on NIDIS, and finally
speak a little bit about the broader backdrop against which these key
societally critical activities lie.
Weather Forecasting and Improvement
In the last five years forecast model improvements made by NOAA
researchers and their colleagues (through partnerships such as the
cooperative agreements with CIRES and our sister institute, the
Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere [CIRA], based in
Fort Collins at Colorado State University, as well as grants to other
researchers) have meant we are doing a significantly better job
forecasting thunderstorms, blizzards, floods, and even smoke from
wildfires. One measure of forecast error, Root Mean Square Error
(RMSE)--or the difference between what was observed and what was
predicted--is down 25 percent in last 5 years alone, and we find even
greater improvement in some areas. Our skill in pinpointing the
location of precipitation in, for example, has improved by 50 percent
in the last 5 years.
However, limits in prediction capability and the lag from research
to operations can come at a high cost. As a tragic example, in 2013,
the HRRR model (High-Resolution Rapid Refresh) estimated strong
thunderstorm winds would reach a Yarnell, Arizona wildfire site. The
model, however, was still in development, it was not yet operational,
so this information was not yet incorporated in weather forecasting
offices. Tragically, on June 30th, nineteen City of Prescott
firefighters, members of the Granite Mountain Hotshots, were trapped
and killed when the wind-shift left them with no escape. The
experimental new model had forecast that wind shift with great
accuracy. Three years later, when HRRR was operational, the National
Weather Service in San Francisco, CA was able to use the model to tell
the public where wildfire smoke was expected to spread, serving the
health and safety needs of the community. And in 2018, during the Carr
fire in California, detailed smoke forecasts allowed Amtrak to make
informed decisions about suspending some regional services until
visibility improved. The HRRR smoke model is used widely today,
including by TV broadcasters to tell viewers what to expect, when, and
where. An informed public facilitates the realization of these
benefits, which are health-related, safety-related, and economic in
nature.
These detailed benefits and capabilities go far beyond smoke and
the rain and temperatures that we typically associate with weather.
They are also tied to hail, for example. An experimental version of the
HRRR ensemble regional analysis and prediction system forecasted the
location and path of a severe hail storm eight hours in advance of
hitting Colorado Springs last August (2018). In addition, HRRR
accurately predicted the maximum amount of snowfall from a 2018
snowstorm in the Midwest with 36 hours of lead time. There are other
critical forecasting tasks the Nation relies on, which I will mention
briefly here: We at CIRES support NOAA and other agency efforts to
understand and forecast air quality, for example, both during high
impact events, like wildfires or a massive oil spill, and during normal
pollution seasons like summer in Denver or winter in Salt Lake City. We
conduct world-class atmospheric chemistry research essential to these
weather modeling efforts, and we focus on the world's frozen places,
too. Changes in Earth's ice cover impacts weather and climate, in ways
we don't entirely understand yet, and they have direct, immediate
implications for military and commercial work in the Arctic. Ship
captains and navigators need to know where the sea ice is, and where it
will be tomorrow. These kinds of information protect and save lives and
property, allowing individuals, businesses, governments and others to
make informed decisions that impact their well-being, livelihood, and
prosperity.
Despite these successes, there remain critical needs for more
accurate forecasts, better lead times, and information at more local
levels. To achieve these objectives, we need continued improvements in
high-performance-computing as well as sustained and improved
observations. In the area of computing, there is a significant need for
support of the development, maintenance, and operation of
supercomputers, as well as the effective use of cloud computing as a
high-performance computing resource. Beyond the hardware/computing,
however, there is a critical need for support for research on
techniques, such as improving weather model code, advancing machine
learning, and improving data analytics.
On the observational side, quality data really are foundational to
the ability to successfully understand and predict weather. Key
observation capabilities include surface weather stations, weather
balloons and aircraft observations, radars and satellite observations
of atmospheric, oceanic, and land-surface phenomena, targeted field
studies, and novel innovative methods such as web cams and citizen
science/crowd-sourced observations. These crowd-sourced observations
can be especially critical in remote or rural areas.
In the area of ground-based observations, the Mesonet network in
Oklahoma, with its 120 ground stations covering the state, serves as an
excellent example that could be emulated elsewhere. In the case of
citizen science, the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow
(CoCoRaHS) system, developed by Professor Nolan Doesken at Colorado
State University after the devastating 2013 floods in Colorado, allows
citizens to collect local rain, hail, and snow, data all over the
country, upload it to a central database, and facilitate improved
local-scale weather forecasting. This kind of citizen science, which
costs the government almost nothing, provides detailed local
information for improved precipitation forecasts that would otherwise
be nearly impossible to achieve.
In addition to computational, analytical, and observational
capabilities, continued cross-line office partnerships between the
National Weather Service (NWS) and the Office of Atmospheric Research
(OAR) are essential in order to coordinate the innovative weather
services needed to address future challenges, as well as to facilitate
the transition of scientific advances into operations and applications.
Fortunately, there are some significant developments underway or on
the horizon to advance our capabilities in the understanding and
prediction of weather. One is the Unified Forecast System (UFS). UFS is
NOAA's community-based, coupled comprehensive Earth system modeling
system, designed to support the Weather Enterprise and to be the source
system for NOAA's operational numerical weather prediction
applications, as well as to serve both the research and development and
operational communities engaged in the numerical prediction of the
Earth System. Using advanced high-performance computing architectures,
the system will incorporate the most recent advances in weather
prediction modeling from NOAA and the research community. UFS is
expected to:
Implement a weather-scale, fully-coupled Numerical Weather
Prediction System
Extend forecast skill beyond 8 to 10 days
Improve hurricane track and intensity forecast
Extend weather forecasting to 30 days.
Elsewhere on the modeling and physics front is the FV3, the Finite
Volume Cubed-Sphere Dynamical Core, under development at NOAA's
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, which incorporates state-of-the-
art physics in new ways, allowing for more accurate global forecasts.
FV3 is currently being implemented into NOAA's Global Forecast System
(GFS) at the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) and
is expected to be fully operational for global forecasts later this
year. NOAA's academic partners played key roles in evaluating this and
other core model packages under consideration and determining which
would best serve the Nation's growing forecasting needs. Other
applications, such as regional high-resolution forecasting and coupled
atmosphere-ocean modeling for seasonal prediction, are planned for
later implementation at NCEP. These new capabilities, coupled with more
robust ensemble model forecasts in which multiple models are run and
compared to reduce uncertainty, will continue to advance our
capabilities in weather prediction accuracy and reliability.
Another major effort that will accelerate knowledge and
capabilities is the Earth Prediction Innovation Center (EPIC), which
was authorized under the recent NIDIS and Weather Research and Forecast
Innovation Act Reauthorizations. This integration of efforts by NOAA
and the National Center for Atmospheric Research is expected to advance
numerical guidance skill, reclaim and maintain international leadership
in numerical weather prediction, and improve the research to operations
transition process. It expected that EPIC will:
Leverage the weather enterprise
Enable scientists and engineers to collaborate more
effectively
Strengthen NOAA's ability to undertake research projects
Leverage existing resources in NOAA
Create a community global weather research modeling system
accessible by the public
Be computationally flexible
Utilize cost-effective, innovative strategies and methods,
including cloud-based computing capabilities, for hosting and
management of part or all of the system.
In addition to modeling, there are likely to be new satellite
capabilities on the horizon, based on the recommendations of the
National Academy of Science's Earth Science and Applications from
Space--2017 decadal survey, which I had the privilege of co-chairing.
If the high-priority recommendations put forth in that report are
implemented, particularly those related to clouds, convection, and
precipitation, as well as aerosols and winds, the observational
information to inform the physics of meteorological and climate
modeling will be tremendous.
Another critical area of advancement that continues to be
recognized is in the area of social science. The successful use of the
information generated depends on it being delivered in a way that
people respond to and use, and also that risk is communicated
effectively. Risk communication was specifically called out in the
Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act of 2017 The true value
of our weather forecasting capabilities can only be realized when they
are used and understood broadly. For this reason, the social science
dimension of weather forecasting is critical to the broader enterprise.
And finally, these advances that I described above and future
capabilities could never be realized without Federal investments in
both the research and operational domains. This research is carried out
by Federal scientists, not just at NOAA, but at NASA, the Department of
Energy, and elsewhere; as well as by university scientists, including
those at CIRES, who are supported by Federal dollars. The return on
those investments in research our government makes nationally is
tremendous. Though somewhat dated, a 2009 study from the National
Center for Atmospheric Research, in Boulder, Colorado, showed Americans
used 300 billion weather forecasts annually at an estimated the value
of $31.5 billion. At the time, the funds spent on such forecasts
totaled roughly $5 billion annually, providing an enormous return on
investment. No doubt, in the ten years since, weather forecast usage
and economic benefit have increased considerably. Beyond the dollars,
however, a critical benefit realized by these Federal investments and
the broader weather enterprise has been the training of students, who
will serve as the next generation of forecasters, scientists,
entrepreneurs, and weather savvy citizens and professionals. Because
much of the investment flows through universities, where training and
education are fundamental to our mission, the investment of Federal
dollars today ensures the development of a capable workforce and
comprises a sound and important investment in the strength, health, and
safety of our Nation in the future.
National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS)
I would like to turn our attention now to the National integrated
Drought Information System, or NIDIS. NIDIS was authorized by Congress
in 2006 and reauthorized in 2014 and 2019 to coordinate and integrate
drought research, building upon existing federal, tribal, state, and
local partnerships in support of creating a national drought early
warning information system. NIDIS aims to improve the Nation's capacity
to manage drought-related risks by providing the best available
information and tools to assess the potential impacts of drought, and
to prepare for and mitigate the effects of drought. CIRES supports
NIDIS through the seven CIRES/CU Boulder staff members who comprise the
NIDIS Program Office, based at NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory
in Boulder, CO.
A major focus of NIDIS this year is development of a national
drought early warning system. In support of that development, NIDIS is:
Partnering with private sector, academic institutions,
agencies and citizen scientists
Hosting the National Drought Forum in Washington, DC, July
30-31, which seeks to educate the community on the status of
droughts in the US, examine needs, report progress on the early
warning system, etc.
Developing a national coordinated soil moisture monitoring
network (multi-agency, multi-institutional)
Developing a public health strategy to support research and
communications of the links between drought and public health
impacts (There will be a summit in Atlanta in mid June on this
topic.)
Studying the Mississippi River corridor and its sensitivity
to drought, including impacts to agriculture, navigation and
transportation, manufacturing, recreation and tourism
Conducting a Southwest regional drought economic impact
assessment to compare the scope and severity of the 2017-2018
drought to previous ones to understand how conditions
influenced economic, health and even crime outcomes
Implementing a drought and wildland fire strategic plan, to
improve the use of drought information in wildland fire
management for ecological health, public health, and
firefighter safety.
Government investment has been critical to NIDIS. Reauthorization
in 2019 recommended an increase in funding from $13.5 million in Fiscal
Year 2019 to $14.5 million in Fiscal Year 2023. NIDIS supports an
integrated, collaborative approach to managing drought events, building
on existing programs and partnerships. This approach includes improved
drought forecasting and monitoring that provides the kind of objective
and timely information that farmers, water managers, decision-makers,
and state and local governments need for effective drought risk
management and response. By drawing from existing capacity in states,
universities, and across Federal agencies, NIDIS serves as a model for
federal-state collaboration in shared information services, none of
which would be possible without the Federal investment and structure
provided through NIDIS.
Backdrop and Context
As the scientific community works to understand atmospheric and
oceanic processes that determine and influence weather, it is critical
to understand that these processes occur against an evolving backdrop,
which is climate change. As heat continues to be trapped in the
atmosphere and temperatures rise, there is an increase in the amount of
energy in the system that ultimately has implications for weather,
climate, drought, air quality, sea level, storm-surges, human health,
and many other aspects of our environment that affect the way we live.
It is that same type of understanding of basic physics that we use to
develop reliable weather forecasts that informs our understanding of
climate change and the implications for the Earth system. The effects
and manifestation of climate change are well documented and well
understood, not just by the scientific community, but by entities with
a vested interest in such knowledge. These include the U.S. military,
the insurance industry, the real-estate industry, coastal planners,
farmers, etc.
Unfortunately, the climate change discussion has been far too
politicized in recent years, in large part because the stakes are very
high on multiple fronts (strategic, economic, social, etc.).
Paradoxically, it is precisely because those stakes are so high that
the conversation needs to be depoliticized, and that the leaders of
this Nation and the leaders of the world accurately incorporate our
best understanding of climate change in policy-and decision-making. As
a scientist, I focus on the underlying physics of change and the
mechanisms, but I am also well aware that there are economic
implications of policies that go far beyond the physics of climate
change. It is for that reason, that I am not trying today to prescribe
solutions to the climate challenges. Rather I am here simply to ask
that as policies are made that intend to support economic prosperity
now and in the future, the role climate change plays in that future be
considered in a way that takes advantage of what we know today, and
ensures we continue to build on that understanding in the future, and
that a flow of that information can be used for strategic and informed
decision-making.
The Earth's climate is changing. It always has, and it always will.
Our success as a nation and society depends critically on:
The magnitude of those changes
The rate at which they occur
Our ability to anticipate them
How well equipped we are to deal with them.
The first two items are dependent on whatever mitigative measures
are taken, since mitigative measures can limit the magnitude of the
change and slow them down. The third bullet is why the research
community is working to understand the changes that are occurring, the
mechanisms that underlie those changes, and what those changes mean for
the future. The final bullet speaks to our resilience, which requires
awareness and the effective use of information, as well as a robust
flow between the knowledge producers and the knowledge users (decision
makers, planners, etc.).
So as we discuss weather and drought today, it is critical that we
keep in mind that the phenomena we seek to understand--for the purpose
of saving lives and property and securing economic prosperity--are
occurring against a backdrop that is changing. It is changing in ways
that follow similar physics and have major implications for those
shorter-term weather-and drought-related phenomena. Investments in
research are critical to our ability as a Nation and as a society to
manage the challenges associated with a changing climate, to capitalize
on the opportunities created, and ultimately, to ensure that we use our
knowledge and understanding of the physical, chemical, ecological, and
social dimensions of the Earth system to best position us for success
in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Baldwin, I appreciate your
invitation to testify before this important committee, and I look
forward to the committee's questions.
Senator Gardner. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Dr. Bronk, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF DEBORAH A. BRONK, Ph.D., PRESIDENT
AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, BIGELOW LABORATORY
FOR OCEAN SCIENCES
Dr. Bronk. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this
testimony in service to this country and the ocean, both of
which I love.
I am an oceanographer who has done research in over 50
research expeditions all around the world. I have been the
president and chair of two scientific societies that represent
over a million scientists in the U.S. I served as Director of
the Division of Ocean Sciences at the National Science
Foundation, and I currently serve as President and CEO of one
of the world's most innovative oceanographic institutions, the
Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences.
I am about as middle of the road politically as one can
get, which means I am constantly defending one side or the
other. I have what I would love to see more of in this country.
On this panel, I represent the ocean science community and
their need to provide the data necessary for accurate climate
predictions. My take-home message is this. With the large
increase in greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, we are
conducting a massive experiment on the only planet we have. To
know how best to protect ourselves from and respond to the
changes in our climate, the United States should commit to
sustained increased investment in four things: climate
modeling; collecting the global ocean observations of key
physical variables, including atmospheric aerosols above the
ocean; developing the tools needed to generate global
observations of key chemical and biological parameters; and
training and attracting the workforce needed to do all three of
these things successfully.
I emphasize the word ``sustained'' because programs that
can lay out work plans over the course of a decade will be
better able to leverage resources and save the taxpayers money.
Finally, the priorities should be generated by leaders in
their respective scientific disciplines and should be done in
the context of a robust international collaboration.
Now to the science. Every year humanity releases billions
of tons of carbon into the atmosphere and as a result, our
oceans are warmer. Ocean warming leads to the melting of sea
ice, a reality I have seen in my own work in the Arctic. Ocean
warming leads to sea level rise and coastal flooding, a reality
I saw firsthand living near Norfolk, Virginia, home of the U.S.
naval fleet. Ocean warming leads to changes in the migration
and distribution of marine organisms, changes that have
threatened disruption of the $200 billion fishing sector in the
U.S. Ocean warming also leads to the reduction in ocean oxygen,
which impacts more than 500 ecosystems all around the world,
including the tragic dead zone where the Mississippi River
enters the Gulf of Mexico.
Then there is ocean acidification. When carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere dissolves in seawater, it changes ocean
chemistry and threatens many organisms, including coral reefs,
the loss of which is estimated to cost this country $140
billion by the end of the century.
To prepare and mitigate these changes, we need to know what
we will be facing, and that requires accurate predictive
climate models. At a basic level within a climate model, the
surface of the earth is divided into squares and each square
includes a series of mathematical equations that represents the
important processes that occur. For a model to accurately
represent what is happening in the real world it must have data
and lots of it. Currently there is not nearly enough data from
the ocean.
From an ocean perspective, climate models--most need data
on three cycles: heat, fresh water, and carbon. A heat budget
measures the balance between the incoming solar radiation and
the outgoing heat that escapes. The fresh water budget is
important to understand in the salinity or salt in the ocean,
which along with temperature, determines the density of water
and so controls the deep global ocean circulation. The ocean
carbon cycle is made up of many pools of carbon such as carbon
dioxide or organisms and the processes that move this carbon
from the atmosphere to the ocean and the sediments below. This
cycle is by far the most complex and the one with the largest
uncertainty in climate models.
To collect the data we need requires a whole suite of
measurements, including unmanned instruments like buoys and
gliders, as well as shipboard measurements. Unmanned
approaches, cost effective, exist for many physical and
chemical variables such as temperature and salinity and pH, but
there are many chemical and biological measurements where
unmanned methods and instrumentations simply do not exist,
which is what severely limits our ability to collect the data
we need and strongly impedes our understanding of the earth's
climate system.
The ocean does not see national boundaries, so expanding a
truly global ocean observation system requires strong
international cooperation. And developing and conducting these
ocean observations will require a trained work force, which is
another reason the U.S. should increase its investment in STEM
education now. I also want the best and the brightest from
around the world to be on Team USA in this effort. We should
welcome students from every country around the world, train
them well, and then staple a green card to their Ph.D. diploma,
and hope that they stay with us.
Thank you for taking up this issue, and thank you for
giving me the opportunity to share my views.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bronk follows:]
Prepared Statement of Deborah A. Bronk, Ph.D., President and Chief
Executive Officer, Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences
My background
For the last thirty years I have devoted my life to the study of
the oceans. For twenty-six of those years I was a college professor who
ran my own laboratory focused on the study of nutrients and how they
control the growth of phytoplankton and bacteria at the base of the
ocean food web. I have participated in over 50 research expeditions
from the Arctic to the Antarctic. Over the last decade, I have also
taken what I learned in the ocean, and applied it to help water
reclamation facilities.
Throughout my career I have been committed to service--to science
and this country. I was a member of the Ocean Carbon and
Biogeochemistry Scientific Steering Committee and the U.S. Carbon Cycle
Science Plan Working Group, and have served on numerous review
committees for tenure and promotion, research funding, and programs,
including as chair of the institutional review of the Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution.
I was elected member-at-large and then president of the Association
for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography, the largest
international scientific society dedicated to the aquatic sciences. I
have also served as member-at-large, treasurer and chair of the Council
of Scientific Society Presidents, an organization that represents over
a million scientists in the U.S. across all scientific disciplines.
From 2012 to 2015, I served at the National Science Foundation as
section head and then director of the Division of Ocean Sciences where
I was responsible for programs across all ocean disciplines as well as
major oceanographic facilities including NSF use of the U.S. research
fleet, ocean observing, and the ocean drilling program. It is an honor
to continue that service by providing testimony to this committee. I
offer these thoughts as a citizen based on my experience as a
scientist, an educator, and a mother.
I also note that I am a middle child; we tend to be the
peacekeepers. I was raised by very conservative parents that I
respected and adored and I have spent my life working with many very
liberal individuals who are like a second family. This means I have
spent my entire life trying to look at both sides of what can be very
contentious issues. When it comes to the ocean there are many.
Introduction
In my comments, I will focus on climate, which is the average
weather conditions on the planet over decades. This is in contrast to
weather, which is the day to day state of the atmosphere and how it
changes over days to weeks. One way to think about this is that climate
is what you expect, but weather is what you get on any given day.
My take home message is that the United States should commit to a
sustained investment in four things--climate modeling, collecting the
global ocean observations of key physical variables, developing the
tools needed to generate global observations of key chemical and
biological parameters, and training the workforce needed to do all
three successfully.
There is an abundance of scientific literature on the ocean's
impact on climate and I will not do it justice here. In the time and
space allowed I have tried to provide a brief tutorial of the basics
that I would want all of our elected officials to know. I direct
interested readers to a number of summary reports including Sustaining
Ocean Observations to Understand Future Changes in Earth's Climate
(National Academies 2017), the National Climate Assessments (Jewett and
Ramanou 2017; Taylor et al., 2017; Hayhoe et al., 2018; Pershing et
al., 2018), the State of the Carbon Cycle Reports (USGCRP 2018), and
the many products developed through the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC).
A. Why the climate is changing
Life exists on Earth because the planet has a blanket of
atmospheric gases, including water vapor, carbon dioxide, and methane,
that acts like the glass of a greenhouse and retains some of the energy
from incoming solar radiation. Over the past 100 years, mankind has
taken carbon buried deep within the ground as fossil fuels, and burned
it to power the incredible technological advances started during the
Industrial Revolution. The result raised the standard of living for
billions of people around the globe. It also increased the
concentration of these greenhouse gases in our atmosphere resulting in
an average increase in global temperature from 1901 to 2016 of 1.0+C
(1.8+F; Hayhoe et al., 2018).
This massive alteration of Earth's atmosphere has had a profound
impact on our oceans, which have absorbed more than a quarter of the
carbon dioxide released. Here I highlight two direct effects this
increase in greenhouse gas concentrations have had on our oceans--they
are now warmer and the pH of the water has declined, making the ocean
more acidic. Both of these changes have had an effect on the ocean's
role in climate.
B. Ocean warming
Every year, humans release about 10 gigatons (36 billion tons) of
carbon into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels and other
activities (Le Quere et al., 2018). In 2016, atmospheric levels of
carbon dioxide passed 400 ppm, a striking milestone and a dramatic
increase from pre-Industrial levels of 280 ppm. This huge surge in the
levels of carbon and other greenhouse gases blanketing the atmosphere
traps excess heat in the Earth's climate system.
The oceans have absorbed 93 percent of this excess heat and store
it for two main reasons. First, water has the highest specific heat
capacity of any common material, meaning that it can absorb a great
deal of heat before its temperature actually increases. Second, the
global ocean is vast, covering 71 percent of the Earth's surface with
an average depth of 4 kilometers (12,123 feet). This incredible volume
makes it a huge reservoir for heat that is continuously distributed by
currents and other circulation processes.
The highest degree of warming has taken place in the upper 75
meters (246 feet), as this upper layer lies closest to the warming
atmosphere. Average global temperatures in the surface ocean have
increased by 0.7 0.08 +C (1.3+ 0.1+F) per
century between 1900 and 2016 (Jewett and Romanou 2017). The upper
ocean also mixes vigorously, distributing the heat it absorbs. As more
energy enters Earth's climate system, heat penetrates deeper into the
ocean. Warming at the poles is especially impactful because these are
the sites of deep ocean water formation. The combination of ice
formation and extreme cold makes the waters in the North Atlantic dense
relative to surrounding waters. These dense waters sink carrying heat
to the ocean's interior.
Most of the remaining 7 percent of this heat goes into melting sea
ice, glaciers, ice caps, and warming the continent's land mass. Only a
tiny fraction goes into warming the atmosphere, but even that is felt
in rising global temperatures. The six warmest years on record have all
occurred since 2010 (NOAA State of the Climate Report 2019). While
there is much debate over the record of increasing air temperatures,
the ocean does not have parking lots or heat island effects and yet
still we see significant increases in temperature.
The complex interactions between continued greenhouse gas
emissions, the resulting energy imbalance, and changes in ocean heat
storage and transport will largely control the impacts of anthropogenic
climate change. I focus on five critical impacts here--melting of sea
ice, sea level rise and coastal flooding, changes in the distribution
and migration of marine organisms, the decline of coral reefs and
deoxygenation of the ocean.
1. Melting of sea ice
The Arctic Ocean is important to the world's ecology, climate, and
economy. Due to the shape of the planet, more incoming solar radiation
concentrates at the equator than at the poles. The atmosphere and ocean
currents address this energy imbalance by transporting heat away from
the equator. This process has driven annual average temperatures in the
Arctic to increase more than twice as fast as the global average,
resulting in substantial loss of sea ice and glacial mass. Climate
models using the IPCC ``business as usual'' scenario predict average
Arctic temperatures will increase 7+C (45+F) by the year 2100.
Since 1979, the annual average extent of Arctic sea ice has
decreased 3.5 to 4.1 percent per decade, including an 80 percent loss
in summer sea ice volume (Comiso and Hall 2014; Vaughan et al., 2013).
The melting of sea ice now starts 15 days earlier than it did in the
past, and it is predicted that the Arctic will be nearly free of late-
summer sea ice by the middle of this century (Taylor et al., 2017).
The lack of summer Arctic sea ice is increasing seaside erosion,
undercutting villages, and washing away infrastructure. Alaskans are
being forced to change their hunting strategies and even the locations
of whole communities. From 2010 to 2017, I made seven trips to Barrow,
Alaska, the northern most village in the U.S. In that short time, the
changes to the region and community have been profound including the
impending destruction of the main road from Barrow to Point Barrow due
to erosion from the sea.
The effect of sea ice loss is profound because it is a key part of
polar ecosystems. Large blooms of algae occur at the ice edge and form
the base of the Arctic Ocean food web (Arrigo 2014). As ice coverage
declines, the timing and location of the ice edge blooms change, as
does critical habitat for more than a thousand species, including polar
bears, seabirds, and seals. Many organisms hunt, give birth, migrate
and shelter on ice, and the loss of ice is causing declines in a number
of species (Laidre et al., 2015). As one example, walruses are moving
farther from shore as the sea ice extent shrinks, and hunters from
native Arctic communities that rely on them must now travel further
across open water, threatening both people's safety and traditional
ways of life.
Shrinking ice cover is also making the Arctic more accessible to
shipping, with access by various countries and commercial entities.
This brings both new opportunities and risks. The challenges that
accompany greater access include protecting the border from new threats
to national security, a heightened threat of oil spills and illegal
fishing, and the need to update severely outdated nautical charts and
put search and rescue plans in place.
2. Sea level rise and coastal flooding
Sea level is rising as a result of warming ocean temperatures and
the melting of ice on land, such as glaciers and ice sheets. Warming
water temperatures contribute to sea level rise because of thermal
expansion--warm water takes up more volume than cooler water. Since
1900, average sea level has risen by about 16 to 21 cm (7 to 8 inches)
globally with about a third of the increase due to thermal expansion.
Even more alarming than the amount is that nearly half of this increase
has occurred since 1993. Sea level continues to rise at a rate of about
one-eighth of an inch per year (Hayhoe et al., 2018).
The ultimate magnitude of sea level rise will vary based on how
land ice responds to continued warming. Predictions for the century
between 2000 and 2100 vary from one to four feet of sea level increase,
with extreme increases of over eight feet if the Antarctic ice sheets
collapse. If the ice sheet on Greenland were to melt, sea level could
increase by an incredible 21 feet. These scenarios are unlikely, but I
note that past increases have been larger and occurred more rapidly
than expected. As a nation, we need to prepare for the worst.
There will be many consequences of higher sea levels. Destructive
and deadly storm surges will reach farther inland, bringing more
frequent flooding with high tides. These floods are disruptive and
expensive. Today, nuisance flooding is estimated to be from 300 percent
to 900 percent more frequent within U.S. coastal communities than 50
years ago (Sweet et al., 2014).
As ocean and atmospheric warming trends persist, sea level rise
over the next centuries will ramp up to rates significantly higher than
what we see today. Nearly 40 percent of people in the United States
live in high-population-density coastal areas, where they will be
subject to the flooding, shoreline erosion, and hazardous storms that
come with rising sea levels. These impacts will also be felt globally--
eight of the 10 largest cities in the world are near a coast as are
four of the 10 largest cities in the U.S.
Specific locations will experience sea level rise differently based
on local factors, such as subsidence and rebounding from natural
geological processes, changes in regional ocean currents, and
withdrawal of groundwater and fossil fuels. Sea level rise has already
increased the frequency of flooding at high tide by a factor of 5 to 10
since the 1960s for several U.S. coastal communities. The frequency and
extent of tidal flooding are expected to continue to increase in the
future and its anticipated that there will be more severe flooding
associated with coastal storms, hurricanes and nor'easters (Sweet et
al., 2014). The infrastructure essential for local and regional
industries in urban environments will be threatened, including roads,
bridges, oil and gas wells, and power plants.
3. Changes in the migration and distribution of marine organisms
Increases in water temperatures and its associated effects have
caused alterations to global patterns of ocean and atmospheric
circulation, precipitation, and nutrients. Collectively, these effects
are having a drastic impact on the abundance, diversity, and
distribution of marine organisms--from the smallest bacteria to the
largest fish.
Most of the life in the ocean is microscopic. While we cannot see
these microorganisms without a microscopic, they produce half of the
oxygen we breathe and form the base of ocean food webs. As most are
single-celled organisms that can only drift in the water column, these
vital plankton are highly vulnerable to ocean changes.
Broadly speaking, the ocean has two parts--a warmer, less dense
layer at the surface that receives sunlight but has low nutrients
(because the microorganisms have taken them all up) and a deep layer
that is denser and colder, with no light but lots of nutrients (because
decomposing organisms sink and release nutrients as they decompose).
Rapid warming of surface water is increasing the temperature difference
between these layers, increasing the stratification of the ocean and
preventing the surface and deep water from mixing efficiently. As a
result, most phytoplankton have a harder time staying near the sunlight
that they need to grow, and the greater stratification restricts the
delivery of nutrients phytoplankton need from the deep ocean.
These changes to the base of the ocean food web reverberate through
other marine species including the fishing sector, which contributes
over $200 billion in economic activity each year and supports 1.6
million jobs (NOAA Fisheries 2017). The species this industry relies
upon are changing as a result of warming waters. These shifts in
species distributions are complicating fishery management by changing
the nature of traditional fisheries and efforts to protect endangered
species.
These shifts are especially prominent off the U.S. east coast. For
example, surveys conducted by state and Federal agencies documented a
number of shifts in distribution in fish, shellfish and other species
along the mid-Atlantic with a trend toward poleward movement and/or
movement to deeper cooler water (Lucey and Nye 2010). Recent research
at Bigelow Laboratory shows that copepods (tiny crustacean that eat
phytoplankton and are then eaten by higher organisms) are less viable
if grown in warmer waters. Shrinking copepod populations will threaten
numerous marine species that rely on them for nutrition, including the
endangered North Atlantic right whale (Record et al., 2019).
I have provided a few examples of shifts in the distribution of
organisms but I note that detecting and quantifying these changes are a
challenge because each species within a community may response
differently due to differences in their life history, where they live,
and what they eat. Organisms also vary with respect to the outside
forces that affect them such as fishing, destruction of their habitat
or pollution. Due to this complexity, detecting and understanding
shifts in species and populations requires a commitment to long-term
monitoring programs, which have historically been very difficult to
maintain.
4. Coral reef decline
Coral reefs are the foundations of many tropical ecosystems.
Temperature is a powerful controlling variable for the health and
location of coral reefs, and many exist at or near their upper
temperature limit (Schoepf et al., 2015). As a result, ocean warming
has had a devastating effect on coral reefs around the world. When
corals are exposed to waters even slightly above their temperature
maximum, they can release the symbiotic algae, called zooxanthellae,
that live within their tissues. This process is known as bleaching
because of the stark white color it turns corals. The symbiotic algae
provide vital nutrients to the coral, and so bleaching often kills
them.
During the last 30 years, there have been several global-scale
coral bleaching events (in 1987, 1998, 2005, and 2015-2016) that have
resulted in a dramatic reduction of live coral. This puts the entire
community of plants and animals that rely on the reefs in jeopardy. In
the United States, mass bleaching events and outbreaks of coral
diseases have occurred in the waters off Florida, Hawaii, Puerto Rico,
the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the U.S.-Affiliated Pacific Islands
(Miller et al., 2009; Rogers and Muller 2012).
In addition to the direct physiological stress of elevated
temperatures, ocean warming also increases the incidence of coral
disease, and ocean acidification affects the ability of corals to
produce their calcium carbonate structures (discussed further in
section B below). When these effects compromise reef-building corals,
the entire reef ecosystem becomes threatened (Jones et al., 2004). This
includes a vast number of invertebrates and fish, organisms that many
coastal communities depend on for subsistence. Corals also provide
storm protection to coastal ecosystems and can form the basis of local
or regional tourism economies (Prachett et al., 2008).
5. Low oxygen
Oxygen makes up 21 percent of the air we breathe and supports life
on Earth, and half of this oxygen was produced by phytoplankton in the
ocean. In water, oxygen exists in a dissolved form and acts as a
limiting resource that controls the growth of many marine species. One
consequence of climate change is the loss of oxygen from the oceans,
known as ocean deoxygenation (Deutsch et al 2011).
Levels of oxygen in the ocean depend on a balance between oxygen
production through phytoplankton photosynthesis, depletion through
respiration by animals, and physical mixing processes. Climate change
is shifting this balance in several ways. At the most fundamental
level, warmer water holds less oxygen than cold. As the oceans warm,
they lose their ability to physically hold oxygen. The same holds true
for greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane.
In addition, the surface ocean is warming fastest due to its
proximity to the atmosphere. This makes the surface water less dense
and less able to mix with the colder, denser water below, limiting the
distribution of oxygen. At the same time, global ocean circulation
patterns are shifting with climate change. Slower circulation and more
upwelling of oxygen-poor deep water are further decreasing oxygen
levels in the ocean.
Long-term monitoring efforts reveal that oxygen concentrations have
declined during the 20th century, and the IPCC 5th Assessment Report
predicts that they will decrease 3-6 percent during the 21st century
due to ocean surface warming. In coastal regions, low oxygen is a
particularly devastating problem and dead zones where most organisms
cannot live because of insufficient oxygen have been reported for more
than 479 systems and their numbers have doubled every decade since the
1960s (Diaz and Rosenberg 2008).
Changes to biological processes are also contributing to this
issue. Warmer water temperatures increase oxygen demand from organisms,
leading to the faster depletion of available oxygen and threats to a
vast range of species, including those that comprise valuable
fisheries. For example, off the coast of California, waters between 200
and 300 meters have lost 20-30 percent of their oxygen in the last 25
years (Bograd et al., 2008), threatening important fisheries. In the
tropical Atlantic Ocean, the vertical habitat of tuna and blue marlin
reduced by 15 percent between 1960 and 2010 due to expanding oxygen
minimum zones (Stramma et al., 2012; Schmitko et al., 2017).
C. Ocean acidification
In addition to warming, excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has
a direct and independent effect on the chemistry of the ocean, which
can also impact future climate. Ocean acidification is the process of
carbon dioxide being absorbed by the oceans and causing significant
changes to seawater chemistry. Global chemical processes keep gasses in
the ocean and the atmosphere in equilibrium. While humans have
drastically increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,
the ocean has been working to keep up. About a quarter of the carbon
dioxide we generate through industrial activity ends up in the ocean,
and the resulting change in chemistry has caused the surface ocean to
become 30 percent more acidic. This has occurred at a rate at least 10
times faster than any natural acidification event in the past, and
affects everything from chemical processes to sea life.
When carbon dioxide in the atmosphere dissolves in seawater, it
changes three aspects of ocean chemistry. First, it increases levels of
dissolved carbon dioxide and bicarbonate ions, which are the fuel for
photosynthesis in phytoplankton and plants. Second, it increases the
concentration of free hydrogen ions, which makes the water more acidic.
Third, it reduces the concentration of carbonate ions. Carbonate is
critical to many marine organisms, which use the mineral calcium
carbonate to form their shells or skeletons. For some species, rising
temperatures and decreasing oxygen levels in the ocean may exacerbate
the effects of ocean acidification.
The cold temperature of high latitude ecosystems results in greater
carbon dioxide solubility making polar regions highly vulnerable to
ocean acidification. Sea ice loss is also causing Arctic waters to
acidify faster than expected. Further, acidification along the United
States coast is greater than the global average for a number of
reasons, including the natural upwelling of acidic waters off the
Pacific Northwest and California coasts, changes to freshwater inputs
in the Gulf of Maine, and anthropogenic nutrient input into urban
estuaries. Here I will focus on two major consequences of ocean
acidification--changes to the ocean carbon cycle and the impact on
organisms and the industries built around them including fisheries and
aquaculture.
1. Changes to the ocean carbon cycle
Carbon is recycled and reused through biological and physical ocean
processes including photosynthesis, respiration by animals, and mixing
within the ocean. The carbon cycle drives important biogeochemical
processes that shape the character of the global ocean and planet as a
whole. When organisms die, they sink, bringing the carbon that composes
their bodies into the deep ocean. This is referred to as the biological
pump because it pumps carbon from the surface to the deep ocean and can
sequester carbon away for hundreds of years. The oceans are by far the
largest carbon sink, or storage reservoir, on Earth.
The combined effect of ocean warming and acidification lowers the
ability of the ocean to take up additional carbon dioxide in three
general ways. First, as noted above, warmer water can simply hold less
gas than colder water. Second, the warmer water in the surface ocean
becomes, the more stratified the water column will be. Greater
stratification reduces mixing and so reduces the ability for carbon
dioxide dissolved in surface water to be mixed into deeper waters.
Third, it is generally harder for organisms to build shells out of
calcium carbonate in more acidic waters. This means that phytoplankton
that build shells (such as coccolithophores), and are therefore heavier
and so sink faster, are at a disadvantage. As the ocean continues to
acidify, any selection away from organisms that build shells and
towards organisms that do not, will likely weaken the biological pump
and decrease the transport of carbon into the deep ocean as
phytoplankton die. These effects are already being seen and the oceans
are becoming less able to absorb carbon dioxide (e.g., Khatiwala et
al., 2016).
2. Threats to organisms, including fisheries and aquaculture
The impacts of ocean acidification are diverse. Although certain
species are favored by more acidic waters, ocean acidification appears
to negatively impact more marine species than it helps. Organisms that
use carbonate minerals to build skeletons or shells struggle with this
basic function in more acidic waters. Organisms like clams, mussels,
and phytoplankton that use calcium carbonate to build shells and other
structures are important in environments and economies around the
globe. Under the IPCC low emissions scenario, seven to 12 percent of
calcifying species would be significantly affected by lowering pH, and
21 to 32 percent of calcifying species would be impacted under the high
emissions scenario (Azevedo et al., 2015).
Ocean acidification also appears to favor some toxic phytoplankton
species that form harmful algal blooms, allowing them to become more
abundant in changing ecosystems (Riebesell et al., 2018). Including
freshwater and marine ecosystems, harmful algal blooms are a
significant environmental problem in all 50 states (EPA 2013).
Entire coral reef ecosystems are also severely threatened by ocean
acidification. Corals depend on calcium carbonate to build their
exoskeletons, and acidification impedes this process. The acidic water
also literally dissolves coral structures, and the bulk of a coral reef
itself. Many reefs around the world are dissolving faster than they can
build themselves back up. In addition to forming the foundations of
ecosystems, corals also provide storm protection to coastal ecosystems
and can form the basis of local or regional tourism economies. By the
end of this century, the loss in recreation from coral reefs in U.S. is
expected to reach $140 billion (Pershing et al., 2018).
Some of the animals at risk from acidification also comprise
lucrative fisheries in the U.S., like lobsters in the Northeast and
squid in California. These animals are physically compromised by
acidification, and they may find it harder to get the food they need in
acidifying oceans. Acidification impairs the senses of some fish and
invertebrates, causing them to misinterpret cues from predators and
engage in risky behaviors, like swimming far from home. Damage to key
phytoplankton and zooplankton species can reverberate through entire
food webs, affecting the fisheries that they support.
The U.S. aquaculture industry is already shifting in response to
ocean acidification. Larval shellfish cannot build shells under high
acidity, and high mortality rates have afflicted the Pacific
Northwest's $270 million shellfish industry since 2005. The poor
conditions have prompted some shellfish aquaculture facilities to
relocate. In Maine, some shellfish farmers are growing kelp in an
effort to improve local water quality and the health of their stocks.
D. Feedback loops between the ocean and climate
Natural systems have feedback loops that allow them to adjust to
changes in the environment. In Earth's warming climate system, a
positive feedback loop would increase the warming, while a negative
feedback loop would reduce it. The changes in the ocean described above
will affect climate in a number of different ways. Unfortunately, the
feedbacks are largely positive and work to exacerbate warming.
For example, the decline in sea ice has a direct positive feedback
on warming. Light colored surfaces reflect more incoming solar
radiation back into space than darker surfaces. When light colored ice
melts, it exposes blue ocean water. This blue ocean water absorbs more
energy, thus creating a positive feedback loop. The warmer it gets, the
more blue water exposed, the more solar radiation absorbed to further
increase the temperature.
Ocean acidification contributes to another positive feedback loop
with a warming climate. As the ocean acidifies, phytoplankton that
produce calcium carbonate shells will be selected against and
phytoplankton that do not build shells will have a competitive
advantage. The fewer phytoplankton that build calcium carbonate that
sink into the deep ocean, the less carbon dioxide the ocean will be
able to adsorb, and the higher the concentration of carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere available to continue to warm the planet.
E. Taking action--The need for sustained ocean observations
Earth's climate is now changing more rapidly than at any time in
human history. The accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere
will continue and the impacts describe above will worsen. As a result,
this country will be increasingly called on to make complex decisions
about how to manage and mitigate the impacts of climate change. We will
be better able to make these decisions if we have the tools in hand to
model and predict changes in the climate system. This will require a
national commitment to increase investment to advance the field of
climate modeling, continued support for sustained, high quality, ocean
observations to power the models, and targeted experimental and field
work to address outstanding questions raised by model uncertainty
surrounding the biological and chemical processes that are key drivers
of the ocean carbon cycle.
1. Modeling
To study how the atmosphere and the different layers of the ocean
interact to predict changes in climate, scientists build computer
models. At a basic level, within the model the surface of the Earth is
divided into squares and each square includes a series of mathematical
equations that represent the processes being modeled. These equations
are based on physical and chemical laws. The more refined the model,
the smaller squares and the more information they contain.
Modelers have a saying--``garbage in, garbage out.'' For a model to
accurately represent that is happening in the real world, it must have
data and lots of it. To predict changes in climate, models need data on
the temperature, salinity, and carbon concentrations in the surface and
deep ocean, global sea ice distribution, surface stress and surface and
deep ocean currents, and heat flux. They also need data on the movement
of freshwater from the land via rivers, glaciers, and ice sheets. These
data need to be collected over decadal time scales and be global in
scope. To predict climate, we also need to understand ocean biology
because biology controls carbon uptake and regeneration at the base of
the ocean food web.
2. Types of observations needed--heat, freshwater, and carbon
A common tool used by scientists is the construction of budgets for
important variables in the model. As an oceanographer who studies
nitrogen, I would construct nitrogen budgets to show where nitrogen was
coming from, such as a river or a waste water treatment plant, and
where it was going, such as into phytoplankton or bacteria. A recent
National Academies (2017) report identified three global budgets that
were needed to understand climate--heat, freshwater, and carbon. They
were selected because they each are necessary to understand the climate
system and to predict how it will change in the future. To truly
quantify these three budgets requires a global ocean observing system
where continuous, calibrated measurements are made over decades.
Heat--A heat budget is the balance between the heat absorbed by
Earth from incoming solar radiation and outgoing heat escaping from
Earth in the form of radiation. Slight changes in the balance would
lead to Earth getting progressively warmer or cooler with each passing
year.
Over the past 100 years, there has been a net gain in heat on
Earth's surface. Ninety percent of this gain has been through ocean
warming. The adsorption of heat by the ocean is one the reason why
atmospheric temperatures at the Earth's surface have not increased more
(Fyfe et al., 2016). This heat is transported throughout the surface
and deep ocean currents. Currents in the deep ocean are controlled by
small variations in temperature and salinity and are known as
thermohaline currents. The greatest challenge for measuring global
ocean heat content has been to sample a large enough number of sites
around the globe and at enough depths throughout the ocean.
Freshwater--Less than 4 percent of the water on Earth is
freshwater. Sixty-eight percent of this freshwater is locked up in ice
and glaciers and another 30 percent is groundwater. Understanding the
freshwater budget is important to understanding the salinity of the
ocean. Salinity and temperature determine the density of water and so
is an important control on ocean stratification and ocean circulation.
Generally, temperature is more important and the basic structure of the
ocean water column as warm water at the surface and progressively
colder water as one moves deeper. Freshwater, and its effect on
salinity, however, can change this relationship drastically. Areas
where there is a lot of freshwater input, such as at a river outflow,
regions with high rates of precipitation, or where sea ice is melting
are areas where salinity is reduced making the water less dense. This
less dense water remains at the surface, creating a barrier to mixing
with the water below. This stratification reduces mixing of heat and
gases between the surface and deep ocean thus impacting the heat
balance in the region.
Carbon--The global carbon cycle is made up of pools of carbon and
the processes that move this carbon from the atmosphere, surface and
deep ocean and the sediment below. The cycle includes inorganic carbon,
which is non-living carbon such as carbon dioxide and organic carbon,
which is carbon that have been incorporated into organisms or the
dissolved organic carbon they produce. This cycle is important to
climate for a number of reasons, but primarily because of its control
on concentrations of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, and the huge
effect carbon dioxide has on the heat balance of the planet.
An understanding of the carbon budget is essential to predicting
future atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations under different
scenarios. Closing the carbon budget will require sustained
observations of how much carbon dioxide the ocean absorbs and what
happens to that carbon once it enters the ocean. This information is
needed to predict how much carbon dioxide will be absorbed by the ocean
in the future and the impact it will have on ocean acidification.
3. How do we collect the data we need?
We are not currently able to close the budgets described above,
meaning that there are unaccounted for sources or sinks of heat,
freshwater, and carbon in the ocean. To address this deficit, we need
to develop methods or improve existing methods for some parameters and
expand observations into areas of the ocean that are poorly sampled.
A successful global ocean observing system will use a suite of
measurement and instrument approaches to provide complete coverage at
the time scale of relevance to the measurement being taken. There are a
number of ways to collect ocean data including the use of unmanned
autonomous platforms such as satellites, buoys, floats, gliders and
moorings. All of these approaches require that methods and
instrumentation are available and able to withstand the incredibly
harsh, corrosive ocean environment.
Suitable approaches exist for many physical and a few chemical
variables such as temperature, salinity, the strength and direction of
currents, carbon dioxide concentrations and pH. In the case of most
chemical and biological measurements (such as trace metals, bacterial
abundance, phytoplankton pigments, grazing rates to name just a few)
autonomous methods and instrumentation do not exist or are cost
prohibitive. These data can only be collected by scientists on board
ships and so will remain severely limited in number and geographic
scope. This lack of data is a strong impediment to understanding
Earth's climate system.
4. International cooperation
The United States has been a leader in the development and
deployment of ocean observing systems. We cannot do it alone, however,
nor should we want to. Support for United States scientists to
participate and lead international programs in climate modeling and
ocean observations should be a priority. Coordinated international
programs provide the opportunities to share the financial cost of long-
term observing systems, improve the quality of the measurements taken
through a robust program of intercalibration, and serve as an important
route for science diplomacy. When nations collaborate to address common
problems, partnerships are forged that can extend well beyond the
original issue that brought the nations together.
An excellent example is the ARGO float program, which collects high
quality profiles of temperature and salinity in the upper 2000 m of the
ocean. There are currently 3875 ARGO floats in the ocean, purchased and
deployed by 34 countries with nearly another 20 countries contributing
to the program through field assistance or data analysis. The floats
move passively with the current, slowly moving up and down the water
column. When they reach the surface, they transmit their position and
the data they collected to a data repository. ARGO has transformed our
understanding of ocean currents. Additional sensors for oxygen and
nitrogen (nitrate) have been developed and deployed on a small subset
of the floats. Investment to increase the number of chemical and
biological parameters that can be measured with the floats would be
money well spent.
5. Workforce development
To address the issues outlined above, the United States will also
require a highly skilled workforce. Increasing investment now into STEM
education across the United States is necessary to support a sustained
system of climate observations into the future. We also do not need to
go it alone. For decades, the best and the brightest around the world
wanted to come and be trained at institutes of higher learning in the
United States and we welcomed them. We are fortunate that many of them
chose to stay, and our Nation benefitted immensely from the skill,
passion and innovation they brought. Those that chose to return home or
go elsewhere, took with them a better understanding of our republic and
lasting relationships with our citizens.
We now live in an era marred by terrorism and in our fear, we are
making it increasingly more difficult for students to come to the
United States and then to stay once they are trained. If I had to name
one thing that most frightens me about the future of this country--this
is it. The technological challenges in the future will be immense and
we will only solve them by bringing together a wide array of
viewpoints, perspectives, and experiences from across this great nation
and around the world. I want the best and the brightest to be on our
team. We should welcome them, train then well, and then staple a green
card to every PhD diploma to encourage them to stay.
F. Conclusion
With the large increase in greenhouse gases that mankind has
released into the atmosphere, we are conducting a massive experiment on
the only planet we have. To know how best to protect ourselves from and
respond to the changes in our climate, the United States should commit
to sustained investment in four things--climate modeling, collecting
the global ocean observations of key physical variables, developing the
tools needed to generate global observations of key chemical and
biological parameters, and training the workforce needed to do all
three successfully. I emphasize the word sustained, because programs
that can lay out workplans over the course of a decade or more will be
more productive and better able to leverage resources than shorter term
initiatives. Finally, the priorities for initiatives in modeling and
data collection should be generated by leaders in the respective
scientific disciplines and be done in the context of international
collaborations.
G. Citations
Arrigo KR. 2014. Sea ice ecosystems. Annual Review of Marine
Science. 6:13.1-13.29. doi 10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135103.
Azevedo, LB, AM DeSchryver, AJ Hendriks, MAJ Huijbregts. 2015.
Calcifying species sensitivity distributions for ocean acidification.
Environmental Science and Technology. 49(3): 1495-1500. doi:10.1021/
es505485m.
Bograd, SJ, CG Castro, E DiLorenzo, DM Palacios, H Bailey, W Gilly,
and FP Chavez. 2008. Oxygen declines and the shoaling of the hypoxic
boundary in the California Current. Geophysical Research Letters.
35(12): L12607. doi:10.1029/2008gl034185.
Comiso, JC and DK Hall. 2014. Climate Trends. In: The Arctic as
Observed from Space. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change.
5: 389-409. Doi:10.1002/wcc.277.
Deutsch, C, H Brix, T Ito, H Frenzel, and L Thompson. 2011.
Climate-forced variability of ocean hypoxia. Science. 33: 336-339.
Diaz, RJ and R Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones and
consequences for marine ecosystems. Science. 321(5891): 926-929.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2013. Impacts of climate change on
the occurrence of harmful algal blooms. EPA 820-S-13-001.
Fyfe, J. C., G. A. Meehl, M. H. England, M. E. Mann, B. D. Santer,
G. M. Flato, E. Hawkins, N. P. Gillett, S.-P. Xie, and Y. Kosaka. 2016.
Making sense of the early-2000s warming slowdown. Nature Climate Change
6(3):224-228.
Hayhoe, K, DJ Wuebbles, DR Easterling, DW Fahey, S Doherty, et al.,
2018: Our Changing Climate. In: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the
United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II.
Reidmiller, DR, CW Avery, D. Easterling, KE Kunkel, KLM Lewis, TK
Maycock, and BC Stewart, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program,
Washington, DC, USA, pp. 72-144. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH2.
Jewett, L and A Romanou. 2017: Ocean acidification and other ocean
changes. In: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate
Assessment, Volume I, Wuebbles, DJ, DW Fahey, KA Hibbard, DJ Dokken, BC
Stewart, and TK Maycock, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program,
Washington, DC, USA, 364-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.7930/J0QV3JQB.
Jones, GP, MI McCormick, M Srinivasan and JV Eagle. 2004. Coral
decline threatens fish biodiversity in marine reserves. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
101(21): 8251-8253.
Khatiwala, S, F Primeau, and T Hall. 2016. Reconstruction of the
history of anthropogenic CO2 concentrations in the ocean.
Nature. 462: 346-349.
Laidre, K, H. Stern, M. Kovacs, L Lowry, SE Moore, et al., 2015:
Arctic marine mammal population status, sea ice habitat loss, and
conservation recommendations for the 21st century. Conservation
Biology. 29 (3): 724-737. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12474.
Le Quere, C, RM Andrew, P Friedlingstein, S Sitch, J Hauck, et al.,
2018. Earth System Science Data. 10: 1-54. doi: 10.5194/essd-10-2141-
2018.
Lucey, SM and JA Nye. 2010. Shifting species assemblages in the
Northeast U.S. continental shelf large marine ecosystem. Marine Ecology
Progress Series. 415: 23-33.
Miller, J, E Muller, C Rogers, R Waara, A Atkinson, KRT Whelan, M
Patterson, and B Witcher. 2009. Coral disease following massive
bleaching in 2005 causes 60 percent decline in coral cover on reefs in
the U.S. Virgin Islands. Coral Reefs. 28 (4): 925-937. doi.org/10.1007/
s00338-009-0531-7
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017.
Sustaining Ocean Observations to Understand Future Changes in Earth's
Climate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/
10.17226/24919.
NOAA State of the Climate: Global Climate Report for Annual 2017.
National Centers for Environmental Information, published online
January 2018, retrieved on February 4, 2019 from https://
www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201713.
NOAA Fisheries, 2017: Fisheries Economics of the United States,
2015. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-170. NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service, Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, MD,
pp 245.
Paulmier, A and D Ruiz-Pino. 2009. Oxygen minimum zones (OMZs) in
the modern ocean. Progress in Oceanography. 80(3): 13-128.
Pershing, AJ, RB Griffis, EB Jewett, CT Armstrong, JF Bruno, et
al., 2018: Oceans and Marine Resources. In Impacts, Risks, and
Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment,
Volume II, Reidmiller, DR, CW Avery, D. Easterling, KE Kunkel, KLM
Lewis, TK Maycock, and BC Stewart, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research
Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 353-390. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH9.
Pratchett, MS, PL Munday, SK Wilson, MAJ Graham, JE Cinner, DR
Bellwood, GP Jones, NVC Polunin, and TR McClanahan. 2008. Effects of
climate-induced coral bleaching in coral-reef fishes: Ecological and
economic consequences. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual
Review. 46: 251-296.
Record, NR, JA Runge, DE Pendleton, WM Balch, KTA Davies, AJ
Pershing, CL Johnson, K. Stamieszkin, R. Ji, Z Fend, SD Kraus, RD
Kennedy, CA Hudak, CA Mayo, C Chen, J Salisbury, CRS Thompson. 2019.
Rapid climate-driven circulations changes threaten conservation of
endangered North Atlantic Right Whales. Oceanography. https://doi.org/
10.5670/oceanogr.2019.201.
Riebelsell, U, N Alberle-Alzahn, EP Achterberg, M Alguero-Muniz, S
Alvarez-Fernandez, J Aristegui, LT Bach, M Boersma, T Boxhammer, W
Guan, M Haunost, HG Horn, CR Loscher, A Ludwig, C Spisla, M Sswat, P
Strange, and J Taucher. 2018. Toxic algal bloom induced by ocean
acidification disrupts the pelagic food web. Nature Climate Change. 8:
1082-1086.
Rogers, CS and EM Muller. 2012. Bleaching, disease and recovery in
the threatened scleractinian coral Acropora palmata in St. John, U.S.
Virgin Islands: 2003-2010. Coral Reefs. 31(3): 807-819. https:/doi.
org/10.1007/s00338-012-0898-8
Schmidtko, S, L Stramma, and M. Visbeck. 2017. Decline in global
oxygen content during the past five decades. Nature. 542: 355-339.
Schoepf, V, M Stat, JL Falter, MT McCulloch. 2015. Limits to the
thermal tolerance of corals adapted to a highly fluctuating, naturally
extreme temperature environment. Scientific Reports. 5: 17639. doi:
10.1038/srep17639
Sweet, W, J Park, J Marra, C Zervas, and S Gill. 2014. Sea level
rise and nuisance flood frequency changes around the United States.
NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 073. 58 pg.
Stramma, L, ED Prince, S Schmidtko, J Luo, JP Hoolihan, M Visbeck,
DWR Wallace, P Brandt, and A Kortzinger. 2012. Expansion of oxygen
minimum zones may reduce available habitat for tropical pelagic fishes.
Nature Climate Change. 2: 33-37.
Taylor, PC, W Maslowski, J Perlwitz, and DJ Wuebbles. 2017. Arctic
changes and their effects on Alaska and the rest of the United States.
In: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment,
Volume I. Wuebbles, DJ, DW Fahey, KA Hibbard, DJ Dokken, BC Stewart,
and K Maycock, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington,
DC, USA, 303-332. http://dx.doi. org/10.7930/J00863GK
USGCRP. 2018. Second State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR2): A
Sustained Assessment Report. Cavallaro, N, G Shrestha, R Birdsey, MA
Mayes, RG Najjar, SC Reed, P Romero-Lankao, and Z Zhu (eds). U.S.
Global Change Research Program, Washington, D.C., USA, 878 pp. https://
doi.org/10.7930/SOCCR2.2018.
Vaughan, DG, JC Comiso, I Allison, J Carrasco, G Kaser, et al.,
2013. Observations: Cryosphere. TF Stocker, D Qin, G-K Plattner, M
Tignor, SK Allen, J Boschung, M Nauels, Y Xia, C Bes, PM Midley, Eds.
Cambridge University Press. Pg 317-382.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Dr. Bronk.
Dr. Horton.
STATEMENT OF RADLEY HORTON, LAMONT ASSOCIATE RESEARCH
PROFESSOR, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
Dr. Horton. Thank you, Chairman Gardner, Ranking Member
Baldwin, and the other distinguished members of the Committee.
My name is Radley Horton and I am Associate Research Professor
at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.
Extreme weather events, such as tropical storms, heat
waves, heavy rain events, and drought threaten the economic
livelihood of our Nation and the health and safety of our
communities. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey inflicted an estimated
$125 billion in damages, with 200,000 homes affected. In 2012,
a drought caused $33 billion in losses, affecting multiple
states. In light of the growing Federal, State, and local costs
of extreme weather events, continuing forecasting advances and
enhanced communication of scientific information with
decisionmakers are necessary preconditions for the increased
preparedness, improved disaster response, and long-term
resilience we are discussing.
And continued forecasting improvements of extreme events
will require new data from the atmosphere, the ocean, the land,
and the cryosphere, as well as improved models that can better
reproduce the key physical processes and the ways that they
interact and also interact with the complex human system
components.
So to give one example of those complex system interactions
in the western U.S., including Colorado, the observed increase
in extreme wildfires since the early 1980s. These large fires
are, indeed, putting human safety and assets at risk with
potential cascading impacts across insurance markets and public
utilities. Weather and climate are clearly a big part of the
story, as today when an individual weather system passes
through; it is facing a new baseline of higher temperatures and
reduced snow pack that have essentially stacked the deck toward
an easier ignition of those fire systems.
But forecasting fire risk also requires integration of
other environmental data, such as historical forest management
decisions and changes in the risk of new ignitions as people
are moving to previously wild areas.
As another quick example of system interactions, the
surface of the ocean has warmed more than 1 degree Fahrenheit
since 1900, which again loads the dice, this time toward
heavier rain events that penetrate far inland, also toward
combinations of high heat and high humidity that put our
vulnerable populations at risk and threaten overall outdoor
labor productivity as well.
But as the weather bill of 2017 notes, advances in our
scientific understanding of extreme events alone do not ensure
societal risk reduction. Working with communities and
businesses to help ensure that the most useful information is
being generated and that it is being communicated as
effectively as possible for diverse audiences, thereby adding
value to existing Federal investments in scientific research,
is critical.
One quick example is NOAA's regional integrated sciences
and assessments program, or RISA. A team in the south central
United States worked with the strategic petroleum reserve to
identify strategies to secure the nation's 32-day, roughly $33
billion value, supply of oil in the face of hurricane-related
storm surge along the Gulf of Mexico.
In the remainder of my time, I want to further emphasize
how small shifts in long-term average conditions, what we call
climate, can have a large affect on the frequency and magnitude
of extreme weather events. It follows that if we hope to reduce
economic and safety risks to the nation, climate must play a
central role in research on extreme weather and its impacts.
Since 1900, global temperatures have increased by about 2
degrees Fahrenheit. So far this century, just with that small
change, the U.S. has seen twice as many record-breaking high
temperatures as low temperatures.
It is a similar story with sea level rise. We have only had
an average change of 7 or 8 inches globally in sea level. It
may sound like nothing, but as shown in figure 1, for some
locations the past two generations have witnessed a 5 to 10fold
increase in the number of days with nuisance flooding, flooding
that disrupts business, transportation, and critical public
services.
Now let us look at the future of coastal flooding, the next
slide. And instead of looking at nuisance flooding, let us look
at the big coastal floods, the 1 in 100 year events, the
heights that flood insurance and zoning decisions are based
upon. Even under the most optimistic sea level rise scenario
imaginable of 1 to 2 feet of sea level rise by late this
century, we see here that across the entire U.S., events, high
water levels that used to happen once every 100 years, are
going to be happening within the lifetime of the typical 30-
year mortgage. And in some places, those high water levels
could happen once every couple of years.
Along the coast, our homes and critical infrastructure are
all vulnerable, but it is all Americans who suffer the economic
costs of sea level rises. It is, after all, U.S. taxpayers who
bear much of the bill for coastal damages. If ports are
damaged, and we can expect broader supply chain implications
and economic disruption well inland.
Fortunately, through investments in science and science
communication geared toward decisionmakers, there is great
potential for risk reduction and new opportunities across the
U.S. economy. Moody's Investors Service, a major credit rating
agency, has put cities on notice that if they do not plan both
for historical extreme weather events but also for emerging
weather and climate risks, their credit ratings, and thus
ability to finance future expenditures, may be at risk. Growing
numbers of investors and companies are now making similar
demands, while recognizing the opportunities for first movers
in this space.
Thank you for inviting me to testify, and I look forward to
our discussion.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Horton follows:]
Prepared Statement of Radley Horton, Lamont Associate Research
Professor, Columbia University
Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Radley
Horton. I am an Associate Research Professor at Columbia University's
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. Thank you very much for the
opportunity to participate in this hearing. I have served as an author
on the 3rd and 4th U.S. National Climate Assessments, and as a Lead
Principal Investigator within NOAA's Regional Integrated Sciences and
Assessments (RISA) Program. I speak to you today though in my personal
capacity as a private citizen.
Extreme weather events, such as tropical storms, heat waves, inland
flooding, and droughts, threaten the economic livelihood of our Nation
and the health and safety of our communities. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey
caused an estimated $125 billion in losses, with an estimated 200,000
homes experiencing damage. Ongoing flooding in the Upper Midwest is
sure to produce agricultural losses alone in the billions of dollars,
and extreme drought across much of the U.S. in 2012 caused $33 billion
in losses (NCEI, 2019). In light of growing federal, state, and local
costs of extreme weather events, preparedness and early warning to
reduce vulnerabilities is critical. Better forecasts, and enhanced
communication of scientific information with decision-makers, are
necessary preconditions for increased preparedness, improved disaster
response, and long-term resilience.
As my colleagues have described, we are seeing rapid advances in
scientific understanding and forecasting of extreme weather events, but
continued success will hinge on continued investment in the science,
and in insuring that information is communicated in ways that can
benefit decision-making.
Extremes events operate across a range of time and space scales,
from for example: a tornado less than one mile in diameter that may
touch down for only minutes; to: a drought that may span half the U.S.
and persist for several years. Our forecasting and prediction of these
events must similarly range from the traditional multi-day weather
forecast, through the subseasonal (two weeks to 3 months), and out to
the seasonal and multi-decadal scales. Continued forecast improvements
across these scales will require new data--from the atmosphere, ocean,
land, and cryosphere--as well as improved models that can better
reproduce the key physical processes and interactions among these
complex systems, including our human systems.
As one example, the surface of the ocean has warmed more than one
degree Fahrenheit since 1900, which loads the dice towards (1) heavier
rain events extending far inland, and (2) combinations of high heat and
humidity that put the health of our vulnerable populations, as well as
outdoor labor productivity, at risk. But more research, with the best
models and the latest data, is needed to understand just how much these
extreme events will be affected by ocean temperature extremes.
Similarly to ocean temperatures, changes in Arctic sea ice--volume had
declined by more than 50 percent in the past 40 years--are impacting
extreme weather events in the U.S., but our understanding of exactly
how remains in its infancy. More data and modeling are urgently needed
given the rapid changes we are observing in the Arctic, and the
potential implications for National Security.
As another example, in the western United States, including
Colorado, an observed increase in the number of large wildfires since
the 1980s is putting human health and assets at risk, with potential
cascading impacts ranging from insurance markets to the financial
health of utilities (Wuebbles et al., 2017). Weather and climate are
clearly a large part of the story, with the `noise' of individual
weather systems encountering a `signal', or new baseline, of warmer
average temperatures and long-term decline in mountain snow pack. But
forecasting fire risk also requires integration of environmental data
such as historical forest management decisions, risk of new ignitions,
and how dry the fuel source is.
As a final example of the need to integrate diverse types of
information to produce the best forecasts, marine heat waves, which now
occur against a backdrop of warmer baseline ocean temperatures, are
interacting with emerging ocean acidification and in some regions de-
oxygenation, to threaten our fisheries and coastal ecosystems in
complex ways.
But as NOAA's Weather Bill of 2017 acknowledges, advances in our
scientific understanding of extreme events alone do not ensure societal
risk reduction. Working with communities and businesses helps ensure
that the most useful information is being generated, and that it is
being communicated as effectively as possible for diverse audiences.
I'd like to briefly describe one model for how scientists can work
hand-in-hand with stakeholders and decision makers to make scientific
research and information responsive to their needs, adding value to
existing Federal investments in scientific research.
NOAA's RISA team in the south-central U.S. worked with the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve to identify strategies to secure the
Nation's 32-day, $33 billion, supply of oil in the face of hurricane-
related storm surge along the Gulf of Mexico. After Hurricane Sandy
inflicted $20 billion in damages in the greater New York Metropolitan
Region, our RISA team partnered with local, state, and Federal
entities, including the USACE and FEMA, to provide the science
foundation and tools to support for example NYC's $20 billion
resilience plan (Horton et al., 2016).
In the remainder of my time, I want to emphasize a little
appreciated point: that small shifts in long-term average conditions--
what we call climate--can have a large effect on the frequency of
extreme weather events. Higher average temperatures have already loaded
the dice towards more heat extremes and fewer cold extremes, just as
sea level rise is already causing coastal flooding to happen more often
than it used to, with trillion-dollar implications that extend to every
state. It follows that if we hope to reduce economic and safety risks
to the nation, climate changes must play a central role in research on
extreme weather and its impacts.
Since 1900, global temperatures have increased by about 2 degrees
Fahrenheit (Wuebbles et al., 2017). One could be forgiven for initially
thinking, `so what'? or `how could 2 degrees matter?' given the much
larger temperature variations we experience from one day to the next.
But with 2 degrees of warming, record high temperatures become much
more common, and record low temperatures much less common. In fact, so
far this century the U.S. has experienced roughly twice as many daily
record high temperatures as low temperatures.
It is a very similar story with sea level rise. Globally the oceans
have `only' risen about 7-8 inches since 1900 (Wuebbles et al., 2017).
How could that matter, when for many places the elevation change over
the course of six hours between high tide and low tide is a few feet?
Sea level rise means more frequent coastal flooding and more
intense/higher magnitude coastal flooding (Wuebbles et al., 2017).
Already we are seeing nuisance (also known as `sunny-day') flooding
happen far more often than it used to across the U.S. coastline, as
shown in Figure 1. For some locations, the past two generations have
seen a 5 to 10-fold increase in the number of days with nuisance
flooding. (It should be noted that some of these places, including the
Mid-Atlantic states, have had more sea level rise than the global
average, but even for those states that have not, the trend towards
more nuisance flooding is clear.) From Miami to Norfolk, this means for
example: (1) more stores unable to open for normal business, with
associated ripple effects on the economy; (2) people not able to drive
home along their normal routes, leading to delays, and 3) more water in
people's basements. These events perhaps deserve to be called a mere
`nuisance' when they only happen a few times per year--but at what
point does it become something more than a nuisance?
Now lets look to the future of coastal flooding. And instead of
looking at nuisance flooding, lets look at the big coastal floods--what
are colloquially known as the `1 in 100 year' events--heights that
flood insurance, and zoning decisions are made based upon (Figure 2).
Lets take the most optimistic scenario sea level rise scenario
imaginable for late this century. With just one to two feet of sea
level rise, and even if coastal storms do not change at all, the 1 in
100 year high water levels of the past become events that for most of
the U.S. coast will be experienced within the 30-year lifetime of the
typical home mortgage. In some areas, these high water levels could
happen every couple of years in the future. Rather than focusing on the
exact numbers in any one location, I would encourage you to note how
the statistics shift strongly across the entire U.S. And once again,
this is a low-end sea level rise scenario, and one that includes no
assumptions about coastal storms changing in the future. For
hurricanes, this assumption is probably somewhat optimistic, since the
balance of evidence suggests that major hurricanes will become more
frequent and intense, in large part due to the warming of the upper
oceans (Weubbles et al., 2017).
But sea level rise does more than just cause more frequent
flooding. It means that when a coastal storm makes landfall, additional
areas are flooded that would not have flooded before. And deeper
floodwaters, which allow for greater wave penetration, cause more
economic damage and loss of life. If the foot of sea level rise in the
Greater New York/New Jersey Metropolitan Region since 1900 had somehow
not occurred, 2012's Superstorm Sandy would have flooded the residences
of 80,000 fewer people (Climate Central 2013; Miller et al., 2013).
The more frequent and intense coastal flooding brought on by sea
level rise will impact all Americans. Along our coasts are assets worth
trillions of dollars. From our homes, to critical service providers, to
critical infrastructure including interstates like I-95, rail lines
including Amtrak, airports, and municipal water treatment plants.
And sea level rise is also a public health and safety issue. It
means less time to evacuate from low lying areas in advance of a
coastal storm, and greater risk of injury and death for those
vulnerable members of our communities who are unable to evacuate.
And just as all Americans suffer when the health and safety of any
American is imperiled, so too will all Americans suffer the economic
costs of sea level rise. It is after all U.S. taxpayers who bear much
of the bill for coastal flood damages. And coasts are economic hubs for
the entire nation. Our ports, which almost by definition are vulnerable
to sea level rise, serve inland interstates and rail systems, as well
as regional distribution centers. If ports are damaged or operating at
reduced capacity, we therefore see supply chain implications, and
economic disruption.
And then there are the national security implications. From NASA's
Kennedy Space Center on Florida's Space Coast and Johnson Space Center
outside Houston, to Norfolk's Naval Base and shipyards, what happens
along U.S. coasts can have global implications. Recent coastal storm
damages made worse by climate change have led to billions in damages at
an Air Force base and a Marine Corps camp.
And of course, extreme events interact. For example, for a low
lying coastal city, even a small increase in rainfall intensity,
combined with a small increase in a hurricane's storm surge could lead
to a large increase in flooding if accompanied by even modest sea level
rise.
To conclude, extreme events sit at the interface between great
potential for advances in scientific understanding on the one hand, and
great societal need on the other. Through investment in science and
science communication geared towards the specific questions decision-
makers are asking, there is thus great potential for risk reduction and
new opportunities across the U.S. economy. It is becoming clear that
groups such as large investors and infrastructure stewards realize that
they must plan for rapidly evolving risks of extreme weather events. As
one of many examples, Moody's Investors Service, a major credit ratings
agency, has put cities on notice that if they do not plan for both
historical and emerging weather and climate risks, their credit
ratings, and thus ability to finance future expenditures, may be at
risk. Growing numbers of investors and companies are now making similar
demands, while recognizing the opportunities for first movers.
Thank you for inviting me to testify, and I look forward to our
discussion.
References
Climate Central, 2003. Surging Seas Sea level rise analysis by
Climate Central. Retrieved February 25, 2019, from http://
sealevel.climatecentral.org./
Horton, R., Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W., Bader, D., & Sohl, L.
(2016). Climate science for decision-making in the New York
metropolitan region. Climate in Context: Science and Society Partnering
for Adaptation, 51-72.
Miller, K. G., Kopp, R. E., Horton, B. P., Browning, J. V., & Kemp,
A. C., 2013. A geological perspective on sea-level rise and its impacts
along the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast. Earths Future, 1(1), 3-18.
doi:10.1002/2013ef000135
Moser, S. C., M. A. Davidson, P. Kirshen, P. Mulvaney, J. F.
Murley, J. E. Neumann, L. Petes, and D. Reed, 2014: Ch. 25: Coastal
Zone Development and Ecosystems. Climate Change Impacts in the United
States: The Third National Climate As-sessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese
(T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 579-618. doi:10.7930/J0MS3QNW.
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) U.S.
Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters (2019). https://
www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/
Sweet, W.V., R. Horton, R.E. Kopp, A.N. LeGrande, and A. Romanou,
2017: Sea level rise. In: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth
National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A.
Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S.
Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 333-363, doi:
10.7930/J0VM49F2.
Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, B. DeAngelo, S. Doherty,
K. Hayhoe, R. Horton, J.P. Kossin, P.C. Taylor, A.M. Waple, and C.P.
Weaver, 2017: Executive Summary of the Climate Science Special Report:
Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W.
Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock
(eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 26
pp.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Dr. Horton.
Dr. Washburn.
STATEMENT OF ERIKA WASHBURN, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, LAKE SUPERIOR
NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE
Dr. Washburn. Thank you, Chairman Gardner, Ranking Member
Baldwin, and members of the Subcommittee.
I direct the Lake Superior Reserve administered by the
University of Wisconsin-Madison's Division of Extension. I am
also here representing the National Estuarine Research Reserve
Association nonprofit, which represents all 29 designated
reserves around the Nation.
For 46 years, the reserves have served, as a national
network of coastal and estuarine places in a Federal-State
partnership that works directly in response to community needs
to deliver science, education, and stewardship to track the
health of our coastal systems and understand how they are
changing.
We leverage the expertise and resources of our Federal
partner, NOAA, and collaborate with many more partners all over
the Nation. We work in a non-regulatory, non-advocacy framework
on issues that communities care about through such things as a
system-wide monitoring program which collects data every 15
minutes, adding up to over 40 million publicly available data
points every year for communities to use for planning purposes.
I work on the shores of Lake Superior, the world's largest
body of freshwater. Every day I drive between Wisconsin and
Minnesota over the St. Louis River, home to the largest
freshwater port in the world. The resilience of our community
is connected to our coast. Yet, those are changing rapidly.
Today I will focus on three aspects of change: water levels,
habitats, and changing water temperatures and chemistry.
Right now, Lake Superior is 15 inches higher than the
average over the last century. Region-wide, we are projected to
reach or exceed record high water levels, coupled with more
frequent and intense storms. This increases our risk for severe
coastal flooding. Last month, the City of Ashland suffered
heavy rains forcing 5 million gallons of untreated sewage into
Lake Superior. In 2012, as my first image shows, a 500-year
storm destroyed much infrastructure in the twin ports and
surpassed over $100 million in damage. In the past 7 years, our
region has had nine Federal disaster declarations related to
storms and flooding. There is another image here that shows a
close-up.
The ability to predict and plan for changing water levels
is critical and complicated. Yet, our many partners and we are
helping coastal communities adapt. Duluth residents are
piloting natural infrastructure as a strategy to reduce storm
damage. Lake Michigan communities have access to tools to
manage bluff erosion so they can protect their property from
landslides.
Like water levels, our coastal habitats are changing,
threatening native species while allowing invasive species to
take hold. Changing water levels and habitat threaten the
future of wild rice, or manoomin, which is very important for
our partners of the Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa.
This threatens Ojibwe heritage and identity. Children cannot be
named without wild rice as part of the ceremony.
Reserves work on habitat conservation and restoration for
wild rice and other things by advancing such topics as natural
shorelines to mitigate flooding and increase resilience. With
the Lake Superior and Ohio reserves, we have permanent
monitoring stations that provide data decisionmakers need to
protect water quality and habitat. Our reserve is also
partnering on enhancing restoration and tourism opportunities,
as well as improving visitor experiences, on Wisconsin Point, a
beloved local beach.
But warming waters changes everything. When I came to Lake
Superior 7 years ago, everyone referred to algal blooms as
something for the lower lakes, like Lake Erie. They could not
happen in Superior. It was too cold, too big, too oligotrophic
or nutrient poor. But we have had three documented algal blooms
in the last 2 years. Research tells us that storms and sediment
plumes play a role. Research also shows that Lake Superior is
warming faster than almost any lake on Earth, and this is
clearly climate-driven.
The complicated research, however, focuses on the human
dimensions, how to communicate risk from warming waters, how to
connect decisions made up watershed with degraded water quality
on the coast. At Lake Superior Reserve, we are working with the
public health community to reduce blooms by improving
monitoring, and Milwaukee decisionmakers will have access for
real-time early warning detections of blooms.
These accelerating patterns of change are affecting
everything about how we live, work, and play on all of our
coasts. In the Great Lakes, we expect public health will
suffer, but at-risk communities are more vulnerable to climate
change and tribal nations especially so.
At the Lake Superior Reserve, we are at the forefront of
work examining the mental health impacts of solastalgia, or the
grief and anxiety that comes from the loss of landscapes,
place, and identity due to environmental change. We are joined
by our colleagues and travel communities to bring the strength
of traditional ecological knowledge and an understanding of the
impacts of lost heritage identity and place. Sadly, their work
is helping us see parallels with what Lake Superior residents
are all beginning to experience in front of our eyes.
The 29 reserves and all of our many partners will continue
to support the monitoring and interdisciplinary research that
coastal communities need. Thank you again to Congress for your
investments in all of our programs. We could not have
accomplished what we have so far without it. Yet it is critical
that these investments continue to ensure that future science
is focused on issues of importance to our coastal communities,
neighbors, families, and friends.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Washburn follows:]
Prepared Statement of Erika Washburn, Ph.D., Director, Lake Superior
National Estuarine Research Reserve
Chairman Gardner, Ranking Member Baldwin, and Members of the
Subcommittee, my name is Erika Washburn. I am the director of the Lake
Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve, which is administered by
the University of Wisconsin-Madison's Division of Extension. I submit
this testimony in my capacity as director of one of two reserves in the
Great Lakes and as a member of the National Estuarine Research Reserve
Association, which represents 29 designated reserves around the Nation.
I appreciate this opportunity to speak about the science associated
with climate change from the perspective of a national network of
coastal and estuarine places and a federal/state partnership that works
directly with coastal communities. For 46 years, the Reserves have
delivered science, education, and stewardship to track the health of
estuarine and coastal systems and understand how they are changing. I
would like to thank Congress for its vision and funding for this
important work.
Together, reserves encompass more than 1.4 million acres of
locally-owned, special places in 22 states and territories. Since 2011,
we've engaged more than 4,000,000 scientists, educators, students, and
visitors in research, monitoring, and education. We work in a non-
regulatory, non-advocacy framework on issues that coastal communities
care about: clean water, safety, informed citizens, abundant fisheries
and healthy habitats. Climate change affects all of these.
Of relevance is our unique System-wide Monitoring Program, designed
to track environmental change and inform coastal resource management
and science. Together, we manage 280 monitoring stations that--every 15
minutes--take readings on water quality, pollution, habitat change, sea
level rise and weather. We produce more than 40 million, publically
available data points every year. Communities rely on this to plan for
extreme weather, manage fisheries, assess storm damage, and more.
Reserves leverage the expertise and resources of our partner, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which provides
the most current and advanced coastal and climate science and data. We
collaborate with Federal and state agencies, Tribal entities, local
governments, school districts, businesses and academic institutions. We
address the multi-faceted needs of coastal communities, informing
critical decisions that impact the economy, public health, and safety.
I work on the shores of Lake Superior--the world's largest body of
freshwater by surface area. Every day, I drive back and forth between
Wisconsin and Minnesota over the St. Louis River, home to the largest
freshwater port in the world. More than 35 million short tons of cargo
pass through here annually, to cities throughout the Great Lakes and
beyond. 23 million Americans live within the Great Lakes basin and we
contribute more than $3 trillion in GDP with our maritime economy. Our
economic health and the resilience of our communities is firmly
connected to our coasts. As a social scientist, and anthropologist, I
have worked to understand the connections between people and these
places.
Today I will focus on three aspects of climate science that are of
particular importance to people in coastal communities: changing water
levels; changing habitats, and changing water temperatures and
chemistry.
Changing Water Levels
My office sits 10 feet from the St Louis River Estuary and a short
boat ride to the open waters of Lake Superior. Right now, water levels
are 15 inches higher on average than they were between 1918 and 2017.
April precipitation topped historic averages by at least 24 percent.
Region-wide, we are projected to reach or exceed record high water
levels. NOAA and others warn that, coupled with more frequent and
intense storms, this increases our risk for severe coastal flooding
like what is happening today in northwest Ohio and southeast Michigan.
Understanding the relationship between lake levels and climate
change is complicated, involving regional models, ground and surface
water, and ice cover change. Lake levels and flooding have increased
because we are experiencing more frequent and intense precipitation
events and more rain than snow in winter. Last month the City of
Ashland suffered heavy rains which forced five million gallons of
untreated sewage into Lake Superior. Last year, Wisconsin's coastal
counties experienced multiple severe storms, one of which resulted in
more than $3.5 million in damages. In 2012, a 500-year storm destroyed
infrastructure, roads and businesses in the Twin Ports. Flood damage at
our local university approached $24 million, while the Duluth area
suffered $100 million in damage. In the past seven years, our region
has had 9 Federal disaster declarations related to severe storms and
flooding.
The ability to predict and plan for changing water levels is
critical for all Great Lakes communities. It affects infrastructure,
property values, shipping, dredging, public health, and quality of
life. Analysis and modeling from NOAA's Great Lakes Environmental
Research Lab is already focused on understanding the connection between
global warming and lake levels to project future trends. However,
scientists agree that further research is required to prepare
communities as they plan for the future.
While we are grateful for past congressional support, continued
Federal investment in reserves and other monitoring programs is needed.
It makes good sense to forecast future changes accurately so that local
governments have the information they need to invest in grey and
natural infrastructure, reduce flooding, and minimize damage to roads,
stormwater systems and businesses. The Lake Superior Reserve and our
partners are already hard at work on these critical issues. I am happy
to share some examples:
Duluth residents are piloting natural infrastructure as a
strategy to reduce storm damage, thanks to a collaboration
between Minnesota Sea Grant and NOAA that developed tools to
visualize potential flood impacts and gauge the use of natural
infrastructure to mitigate flooding.
Lake Michigan communities have access to better tools to
manage bluff erosion, including a new device that measures
bluff movement so residents can protect their property from
landslides. Partners include the University of Wisconsin-
Madison, Wisconsin Sea Grant, and the University of Michigan.
Many challenges brought about by changing water levels in the Great
Lakes are shared by marine communities, and reserves are working with
them to meet these head on.
Florida's Flagler County now has access to improved modeling
tools to support adaptation planning and flood management,
thanks to our Guana Tolomato Matanzas reserve.
Communities across the Gulf of Mexico have access to
enhanced sea level rise data and storm surge models that they
are using to assess the vulnerability of built and natural
infrastructure. These tools were supported by our Florida,
Mississippi, and Alabama reserves.
In Texas, the City of Rockport is using a vulnerability
assessment conducted by the Mission-Aransas reserve to reduce
economic and property losses related to changing water levels.
Changing Habitats
Coastal habitats are rich, vibrant systems that serve as shelter
and nursery for valuable fisheries and thousands of species of birds
and wildlife. But they are changing. As water levels increase,
temperatures warm, water chemistry changes, and storms intensify,
habitats are lost or dramatically altered, native species struggle to
survive and invasive species take hold. This impacts the survival of
the very species that drew people to settle in coastal areas in the
first place. In the Ojibwe origin story, their ancestors traveled
around Lake Superior until they found a place where wild rice, or
manoomin, grew on the water. Today, changing water levels and other
factors threaten the future of wild rice--not just in our region where
we partner with the Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa--but
across the upper Great Lakes. This threatens Ojibwe heritage and
identity; children cannot be properly named without a wild rice
ceremony.
Essential to coastal habitat conservation and restoration are
advances in our understanding of natural shorelines as a way to
mitigate flooding and increase ecological resilience. Reserves work
with many partners to understand the biophysical science behind
replacing hardened shorelines with natural features and the social and
economic impacts of these investments. This requires a social science
lens and the ability to pull together builders, contractors, engineers,
scientists, managers and local decision makers to translate the science
and explore potential solutions. Reserves do this well. Here are two
examples.
Permanent monitoring stations at the Lake Superior and Ohio
reserves are providing data decision makers need to protect
water quality, species, and habitat, while reducing community
flooding. These stations track changes resulting from more
intense storms, increased sediment, and nutrient runoff.
Enhanced recreation and tourism opportunities are improving
visitor experiences on Wisconsin Point, a beloved local beach,
thanks to an ongoing restoration project supported by NOAA, the
City of Superior, and the Lake Superior Reserve.
As a networked system of 29 reserves, we know salt marshes are
struggling to keep pace with sea level rise, and communities are
contemplating whether to support marsh migration in already crowded
coastal watersheds. What will they lose? What will they gain? What are
the costs? They must balance questions like these with ones about how
best to protect or migrate infrastructure, property, and roads. All 29
reserves are helping communities address these questions with the best
science, data, and information.
Alaska's Kachemak Bay reserve supported a model of regional
groundwater flows that is informing decisions to protect
habitats for salmon, the state's most important fishery. This
is of value to Alaskans because Coho and Chinook salmon depend
on freshwater habitats that are changing due to reduced
snowpack, altered rain patterns, and wetland drying.
Florida's Apalachicola reserve provides science to address
critical local issues, including the impact of salinity on the
bay's oysters, which have suffered a 90 percent decline in
recent years. Reserve monitoring tracks the influence of
upstream water diversions, land use change, climate change,
hurricanes, and other natural events on local water quality.
Endangered native birds and fish have returned to the He'eia
Estuary as a result of restoration, supported by monitoring and
outreach from Hawaii's He'eia reserve. Their work removes
invasive mangroves, encourages natural freshwater flows,
restores habitat, provides food for communities, and supports
management as a traditional Hawaiian ahupua`a.
The invasive marsh grass Spartina--which was threatening the
local oyster industry--was eradicated from Washington's Padilla
Bay, as a result of a combined monitoring and restoration
initiative. Today, regional resource managers look to the
reserve for information and guidance for invasive species
removal and control.
Changing water chemistry and temperature
When I came to Lake Superior almost seven years ago, everyone
referred to algal blooms as something for the lower Great Lakes,
especially Lake Erie. They couldn't happen in Superior; it's the
biggest, deepest, coldest, most oligotrophic (nutrient poor) Great
Lake! Fast forward to today: there have been three documented algal
blooms in the last two years. Why? Research tells us that storms and
sediment plumes play a role. These events are expected to intensify.
Even more concerning is scientific monitoring and modeling from the
University of Minnesota Duluth's Large Lakes Observatory, which shows
that Lake Superior is warming faster than almost any lake on Earth.
And, the research shows, this is clearly climate driven.
Warming waters complicate everything. They compromise water
quality, which impacts tourism and fisheries, accelerate habitat
change, increasing the likelihood that native species will be overcome
by invasives and--when combined with damaging storms and floods--put
public health at risk. Along our marine coasts, warmer temperatures are
contributing to ocean acidification, which threatens hard shelled
creatures, like lobsters and oysters, around which many local economies
have been built.
Some impacts of changing water temperatures are well understood.
The really complicated science, however, focuses on the human
dimensions of these problems. How to communicate risk? How to connect
decisions made up watershed with degraded water quality on the coast?
Social scientists such as anthropologists, economists, and
communication experts are exploring questions like these in the context
of climate projections.
It is critical that Congress continue to invest in science to
understand trends in acidification, marsh migration, sea level rise,
saltwater intrusion, and harmful algal blooms. By doing this, our
partners in coastal communities will be better prepared to make
decisions that mitigate economic loss and reduce risk to public health.
Programs across the region are responding to the need to predict and
manage harmful algal blooms:
The Lake Superior reserve is working with the public health
community to reduce algal blooms by improving monitoring
efforts. This summer we will collect water samples immediately
following storm events to better understand bloom formation.
Milwaukee decision makers will soon have access to enhanced
technology for real-time, early-warning detection of blooms,
with support from Sea Grant. With support from NOAA and
partners, this technology will provide forecasts to inform
local governments and public health experts about risks to
residents and tourists.
Through our national network, we know that coastal water
temperatures, chemistry, and quality are in flux around the country.
Communities are dealing with harmful algal blooms and dead zones,
pollution from legacy industries and current events, amid the more
basic biogeochemistry of wetlands. Here again, reserves are supporting
their communities.
Continuous monitoring from Florida's Rookery Bay reserve
demonstrated that estuaries protected by conservation land are
more resilient to large storms. During Hurricane Irma, reserve
instruments captured the storm surge, extraordinary rainfall,
and the subsequent dissolved oxygen crash. Fisheries monitoring
showed that fish left the estuary when the oxygen crashed and
returned as the oxygen levels return to normal.
In Alaska, the Kachemak Bay reserve's potentially lifesaving
shellfish toxin alerts are provided to state officials,
commercial oyster farms, and thousands of recreational and
subsistence shellfish harvesters.
Emerging Trends
As a social scientist, I would like to conclude with some
observations on what all of this change will mean for people. In recent
years, we have seen the warmest temperatures recorded, powerful storms,
increased flooding from sea level rise and storm surge, devastating
wildfires, and the melting of glaciers and polar sea ice. These
accelerating patterns of change are affecting how everyone lives,
works, and plays on all U.S. coasts. They affect businesses and
industries, public health, and everyone's psychological well-being.
In the Great Lakes, we expect public health will suffer due to more
extreme heat, increased water temperatures, degraded water quality,
reduced air quality in urban areas, changes to agricultural systems,
and the spread of vector borne diseases like Lyme. Not all populations
or communities will suffer these impacts equally. At-risk communities
are more vulnerable to climate change, and tribal nations are
especially so because of their reliance on threatened natural resources
for their cultural, subsistence, and economic needs.
Research to address these challenges is becoming a larger part of
the coastal science portfolio because communities demand it. They are
calling for us to assess the vulnerabilities of people, alongside
environmental concerns so they can better manage risks and increase
overall resilience particularly as they relate to vulnerable
populations.
At the Lake Superior Reserve, we coordinate a diverse network of
experts to explore the human side of climate change. We are at the
forefront of work examining the mental health impacts of solastalgia,
or the grief and anxiety that comes from the loss of ecosystems,
species, landscapes, and identity due to environmental change. This
work involves natural and social scientists, public health and medical
experts, social workers, and those serving on the front lines of
tragedy. We are joined by our colleagues in Tribal communities who
bring the strength of Traditional Ecological Knowledge and an
understanding of the impacts of lost heritage, identity, and place.
Sadly, their difficult work is helping us see parallels with what Lake
Superior residents are all beginning to experience as the region
changes in front of our eyes.
The Lake Superior reserve, the 28 sister reserves that make up our
national system, and all of our many partners will continue to support
the baseline monitoring and interdisciplinary research that coastal
communities need to understand how climate change is influencing their
lives and the places in which they live. We could not have accomplished
what we have so far without strong Federal and state investments in
coastal science programs embedded in local communities, or without the
Research Reserve's System-wide Monitoring Program that continually
assesses changing water levels, water quality and habitats. Thank you,
again, to Congress for your investments in all our programs. It is
critical that these continue if we are to ensure that future science is
focused on issues of vital importance to our coastal communities,
neighbors, families and friends.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Dr. Washburn.
We will begin with questions, and I will start here with
just a few and then turn it over to Senator Baldwin.
I understand the importance of investing in improved
climate models--clearly the importance of investing in improved
climate models. Today's models can give us pinpoint weather
forecasts in the near term and help identify longer-term
trends, including those caused by carbon pollution.
I would like to see future investments that move us beyond
studying the climate and toward solving climate-related
problems. We need models that produce sufficiently high
confidence forecasts farther out into the future and drive
significant public and private investment. Those investments
will generally fall into two buckets: mitigation and
adaptation. We will need adaptation in the near term,
obviously, while we ultimately solve the problem with
mitigation efforts in the longer term.
To aid our mitigation efforts, we need these models to be
able to evaluate various carbon reduction and carbon capture
technologies. We need to run various scenarios that evaluate
the timing and magnitude of mitigation required.
And so, Dr. Washburn, beginning with you, in your testimony
you talked about how the magnitude and rate of climate change
will be dependent on whatever mitigation measures are taken.
Have you considered how these models might be able to evaluate
the efficacy of mitigation measures?
Dr. Washburn. So that is something where I wish I had some
of my partners at the table to assist since I am an
anthropologist. So I rely heavily on a lot of the atmospheric
scientists, lake-level modelers, and others.
I can say that the researchers will take those models. We
provide data that ground truth some of those models and improve
them. But we also take those models, package them up into
information, make sure they are translated so that local
decisionmakers and governments can actually use them and
understand what they mean. And we do that through our programs
and education and in coastal training with local
decisionmakers.
And I guess I would say that we can add both ground
truthing local data to enhance those models and improve them.
We can also fine-tune the resolution of the data that is
presented in those models by adding in our own data from the
system-wide monitoring program. So we can bring a lot of really
local fine resolution and information that the local
communities can use.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
And then I would open that question up to anybody else on
the panel who wanted to take a crack at that, if anybody does.
Dr. Horton?
Dr. Horton. Sure. Thanks.
I mean, I think you just articulated sort of a classic,
sort of risk management problem, how to make long-term
decisions in the face of key uncertainties.
One thing that is completely clear, though, is that the
further we push the climate system by increasing greenhouse gas
concentrations, temperatures causing changes in the ice sheets,
for example, the greater potential for surprises, feedbacks
that could include changes in the greenhouse gas emissions and
carbon cycle of the planet itself.
I think you also raised some interesting ideas about ways
that we could test possible future scenarios. For example,
enhancing models so that you could in a local coastal scale see
what happens if you put in, before actually buying one, a sea
barrier, for a major sea wall. Can we model what effects that
might have on sedimentation rates, for example, and start to
get at some of these tradeoffs of different adaptation
strategies?
I think there is also interesting work in the space of co-
benefits between greenhouse gas mitigation efforts and
adaptation efforts. Where can we find examples of benefits for
both and avoid situations where they appear to be going against
each other, which obviously we do not want?
Senator Gardner. And I think that kind of gets to my next
question, which was the sort of reverse engineering. Can we
reverse engineer the model, so to speak, to identify new
mitigation technologies or strategies? And I think you just
kind of talked about how we could approach it in that
direction. Did I hear you correctly?
Dr. Horton. One thing certainly to highlight is that
climate models are not just a tool for future predictions. We
can use those models under past configurations, different
amounts of CO2 concentrations, for example, in the
past to test things like how sensitive sea levels might be. The
ice sheets might be to a given amount of warming. That gives us
some ability to constrain the projections, but it is not
complete because conditions are unique today.
Senator Gardner. Dr. Abdalati, did you want to add to that?
Dr. Abdalati. To your point, the physics are the physics.
They behave by certain physical principles. We test the
physics, the quality of our models against past conditions
events against present and emerging conditions.
So, yes, we can use models to test the efficacy of various
mitigation strategies. We have used models to test the
effectiveness of things like carbon capture to reduce the
impact of carbon dioxide or the amount of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. So the same physics that apply to weather
forecasting, but tweaked for longer time scales, do apply to
model forecasting and can be used to assess the efficacy.
There is still, though, a ways to go in the quality of
these models to really nail things down. And this is why it has
become politicized is because there are costs to mitigation.
And so the fundamental question is, is the mitigation worth the
cost? There are costs to not mitigating. And again, the
question is, is the not mitigating worth the cost, if I said
that correctly?
So all of this hinges on a robust understanding of the
physical principles and the evolution of our climate system,
which is why research in these areas is so important. I cannot
stress enough the importance of de-politicizing this aspect. We
have a challenge before us that will have consequences and that
our approach can realize tremendous benefits, and to
successfully meet those challenges requires understanding and
that is what we are all pursuing.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
I will turn to Senator Baldwin now and then we will come
back.
Senator Baldwin. So, Dr. Washburn, you talked about some of
the extreme events that have been experienced in northern
Wisconsin on the shores of Lake Superior. I remember traveling
to Ashland and Iron Counties in the first few months of my time
as a United States Senator. In response to an extreme weather
event that I was told was either 1,000- or a 500-year event. I
was meeting with community leaders, often town chairmen and
other town employees, who were, first of all, dealing with the
immediate aftermath of rescuing people who might be cutoff from
the community. But then also, beginning to assess damage and
prepare for emergency declarations and a process whereby they
may become eligible for Federal assistance.
I remember just 2 years later going to the same community
and seeing some of the same infrastructure severely damaged;
being told that it was either a 500-year or 1,000-year event.
And as you note in your testimony, in the last 7 years, we have
seen three events that might be called 500-year events.
So just for context, these events are basically defined as
500-year events because the old rainfall models suggest that
they would happen only once in 500 years. But we have seen
three in 7 years. The weather patterns clearly seem to be
changing rapidly, and I am very concerned about our lack of
preparation.
So as we work to address this issue, I think the first
thing we need to know is what is coming. Right? Dr. Washburn,
does the scientific data tell us about how extreme weather
events and other weather patterns are changing in the Great
Lakes region now and into the future? And are changes happening
faster in some areas of the Great Lakes than others?
Dr. Washburn. Thank you.
Yes. So the data and the models and forecasts are all
showing across the Great Lakes more frequent and more intense
storms, also changes in the precipitation patterns, as you
alluded to, with more rain coming in the winter because what is
happening is the winter temperatures are not as cold as they
used to be. I think that in Wisconsin the projections are 5 to
11 degrees warmer in the winters in northern Wisconsin in the
next 15 to 20 years. That is a really short time period. That
is a substantial shift. So the forecasts and models are showing
regionally the upper latitudes of the Great Lakes warming
faster, but these precipitation and intense events happening
off the normal seasonal cycle. That has implications for
flooding. If your soil is frozen and you have snow melting or
rain coming at a certain time and it cannot penetrate the soil,
then you are going to have flooding in those areas potentially
during part of the winter as well. So, yes, there are certainly
issues around the Great Lakes on that topic.
I think the other thing that strikes me when I look at some
of the data is the heat extremes projected for the region,
something on the order of 2 to 5 weeks above 90 degrees in the
same period in the next 20 years. That is substantial. That
leads to all kinds of questions about vulnerable populations,
about urban communities, and challenges to public health.
Senator Baldwin. In dealing with these disasters, our
communities are having trouble recovering and rebuilding to be
safer and stronger in part due to limited resources, lack of
resources, as well as the Federal assistance does not arrive
immediately, as we know, in this process.
As a community leader--and I know you are a local resource
to our coastal communities--I want to see if you can share what
you are seeing in the aftermath of these events. What
challenges are you hearing from the local leaders who are on
the front lines of responding to these extreme weather events?
And are recovery efforts providing lasting resiliency? Or if
not, what are you hearing is needed?
Dr. Washburn. So on your last question, one of the
challenges of Federal funding coming in response to these
events, besides the length of time that it takes, is that FEMA
will cover rebuilding up to the same design of a culvert, say,
that was there in the first place. And what the communities
need is to make their culverts and water infrastructure bigger
to handle these events. So that is a challenge right there.
Community leaders are also struggling with communicating
risk. One of the things we have not talked about yet as a
community is how we are going to talk about warmer temperatures
and algal blooms. We are starting to get questions, people
walking in the door literally and asking what is going on out
there.
But communicating risk related to these water levels and
habitat and changing temperatures that is something that I
think the local leaders and government needs to be supported by
more. And we can do that. The reserves have a wonderful system
of risk management trainings, really fine-tuned after Super
Storm Sandy with the Jacques Cousteau Reserve in New Jersey.
But that can be rolled out across the entire system, which can
benefit Superior and Duluth and the north shore of Wisconsin.
I think another challenge that we have learned is--and this
is actually not related to a natural disaster flooding, but the
Husky refinery fire. One of the things we learned is that the
emergency management structure in western Lake Superior--it is
not the same with necessarily the rest of the country, but in
our region--does not include a standing body of scientists to
respond with on-the-ground monitoring.
So one of the things that we talked about with our partners
up in that area, and that we are starting to have conversations
with the emergency management world, is can we coordinate the
science experts in that region and be that point of connection
to emergency management to try to get more of the on-the-ground
science done post events, whether they are flooding or
something else.
So there are a number of different things. There is risk
communication. There is coordinating science and then working
with communities on new kinds of communication about new
threats.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Baldwin.
I will give Senator Blumenthal a little chance to settle in
because he is up to bat if you want to take the turn here.
I agree with the interaction you had on the issue of FEMA
and some of the challenges we have in the western states as it
relates to the forest fires and the flooding, a little bit
different than other areas of the country might have. And so
some unique challenges in how FEMA does their work and creates
those aid opportunities. But a very good discussion I think we
need to continue.
Senator Blumenthal, you are up next if you would like to
spend a few minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT
Senator Blumenthal. I am happy to proceed, Mr. Chairman.
In Connecticut, we face the kind of weather that has become
the new normal, the super storms that demand resilience of our
planning and our construction. I am going to hold up just one
photo of the Connecticut shore that is the most visible sign of
what happens. People think of super storms as happening in the
Gulf, in Florida. But here is Connecticut, and that is what all
of Connecticut's shoreline looked like after Super Storm Sandy.
It was reduced to a super storm from a hurricane even though it
hit with hurricane force along our coasts in many areas.
So my question is, do you think that Congress has to make
the American public and also itself act to assure that there
are sustainable investments as a result of this infrastructure
program that now seems on the verge of happening? There is a
lot of bipartisan support for infrastructure and, in fact, the
Seventh Annual Infrastructure Week began on Monday.
Negotiations are ongoing between President Trump and Democratic
leaders. But how important is sustainability as a feature of
this infrastructure initiative?
Dr. Abdalati. So if I may. It is critically important. You
know, you have scientists here. We understand the physical
processes. We understand the manifestation. Policy is certainly
your domain where you have to bring in a lot of information to
make decisions. You have to consider the economic implications
again of action versus inaction, and both have implications.
I had said in my opening remarks that our success as a
society in the face of a changing climate, no matter the
causes, depends on how big the changes are, how fast they
occur, how well we can anticipate them, and how prepared we are
to adapt to them. And the items you had touched on, you know,
how big they are and how fast they come, those are mitigative
measures and those require certain kinds of policy decisions or
actions. I am not qualified to make recommendations in that
area as I can only tell you what happens if we do not mitigate.
But to your point, adapting, resilience must be built into
the thinking, otherwise that picture is going to occur over and
over and over again. And that comes with cost in dollars. That
comes with cost in lives. That comes with cost in health and
safety. So I think it is absolutely critical that we as a
nation and you as legislators build that into your thinking. I
cannot tell you the degree to which you do what thing. But I
can tell you that it requires being informed by sound science,
of which there is plenty, and taking that in consideration of
all the other variables and parameters that come into play and
making decisions or making policy based on that. But absolutely
the incorporation of resilience, because you are going to face
those situations again and again, is critical I think to the
success of coastal communities and the same is true in the
interior of the country in response to other threats.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
Dr. Bronk. I wanted to add two points.
One, as we move into the future, one reality that I think
the Nation needs to face is we are not going to be able to
build all the places we used to build before and probably
should not have built in many of those places to begin with.
And the second is when we rebuild areas that we rebuild in
terms of the infrastructure, to look at not just what we will
need now, not in 10 years, but in 50 or 100 years, and to
invest in the development of new building techniques, new
materials that are much more resistant and easier to
manufacture, require less energy. And right now, one of the big
gaps to getting those types of materials to market is going
from the development phase all the way to getting it to market,
which is kind of the trough of death, that if the Federal
Government could look at that space, I think we could have a
lot more solutions than we have right now to some of these
types of problems.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
Yes, sir.
Dr. Horton. Thank you.
You know, clearly the statistics of many types of extreme
weather events have already shifted, whether we are talking
about heat waves, heavy rain events, or the frequency and
intensity of coastal flooding. I think I am on less firm ground
talking about the age of some of our infrastructure, but to the
extent that an infrastructure anyway would need repair just to
sort of maintain a baseline, that is an additional argument
beyond this argument of the shifting statistics of extreme
weather for new infrastructure that is more resilient. Of
course, there are co-benefits probably--many co-benefits for
sure--of these types of infrastructure investments.
I like the way you frame this around the sustainability
issues, though, because I think we do need to think about the
combined greenhouse gas mitigation components and greater
resilience aspects that we can get through infrastructure
investment.
And to give one example of this, we are starting to hear in
the context of this notion of managed retreat, that there are
some parts of the country where we hear more and more it may
not be possible to continue to invest on resilience in place.
There may be health risks in terms of greater challenges of
evacuation in the future. So that dialogue is beginning I think
to well up. And infrastructure is a critical part of that.
Right? You are starting to hear a little bit in some cases
about sort of moral hazard maybe of infrastructure investments
in some of those most vulnerable areas. In another context is
some of the ability to fund some of that infrastructure
potentially going to change in the future if we see some
changes in asset values, as some of these risk perceptions are
appreciated?
So it is a complex space, and I think the kind of forward-
looking perspective on infrastructure that considers those
climate hazards and considers the interaction between
greenhouse gas mitigation and adaptation could be really
productive.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
Senator Gardner. Thank you very much.
Dr. Washburn, quickly if you would. Did you want to respond
to that?
Senator Blumenthal. My time is expired I know, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Gardner. Yes, but if she would like to respond,
please feel free, quickly.
Dr. Washburn. Just very quickly. I would frame things
through resilience more than sustainability. I think that is
community, that is economics, that is social resilience as
well. And I think that framing gives you more latitude to
explore some of these challenges about moving things and
migrating communities, coastal wetlands, et cetera.
Senator Blumenthal. Well said. Thank you all for this very
articulate and important hearing. And I want to thank the
Chairman and Ranking Member as well for focusing on it. Thank
you.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
Dr. Abdalati, we are going to go another round here. I
apologize if you thought you were going to get out early.
Dr. Abdalati, you mentioned improvements to drought
forecasts and forecasting smoke plumes in your comments. Will
those models some day be able to forecast drought accurately
enough to adjust agriculture, fire fighting plans, those kinds
of things?
Dr. Abdalati. I believe they will. I guess kind of not to
parse here, but it depends by what you mean by address because
I think they are already being taken into consideration in the
context of farming practices. The ability to grow things is
changing. In fact, interestingly when you, again, remove the
political discourse or the political element out of the
discourse and you talk to rural farmers from your former
district when you were a Congressman, they get it. You know,
they understand climate is changing and that they cannot grow
things in the way they used to. And I think there is a critical
need, and I think we are progressing toward that need to be
able to tell the farming community what they are looking at in
the seasonal/sub-seasonal domain and perhaps even years down
the road. You know, as the climate has warmed, sort of the
isotherms, the temperature lines have moved northward, you
know, the average temperature. The same is true with moisture.
It has changed in a changing climate.
So certainly the models are doing a pretty good job of
characterizing and predicting drought. There is a ways to go.
One of the nice things about NIDIS, which interestingly was
reauthorized during the shutdown, which was nice to see, is
that it seeks to pull together all the information that we have
from State sources, from universities, from Federal sources,
provide that in an integrated way. That is the second ``I'' in
NIDIS I think. So it already draws from what we have in ways
that are useful.
And it does come back too, though, to the social science
domain. It needs to be communicated in a way that people will
use and understand. But it is certainly within our capability.
Substantial progress has been made, and I would expect, with
continued investment, it would continue to move forward.
Senator Gardner. Very Good. I remember the roundtable we
had at the University of Colorado talking about social science
and the impact that it had.
In terms of forecasting capabilities, are you getting the
cooperation you need from Federal research partners? What more
can we do to bolster those Federal partnership efforts?
Dr. Abdalati. So we are. The nice thing is everybody is
working toward the same goal, the same outcome. I do think in
the case of NOAA, there are efforts to integrate the activities
of the National Weather Service and the Office of Atmospheric
Research, NWS and OAR. And I think more of that would be
helpful. There are efforts underway at NASA for data
assimilation of the satellite data to improve forecast
capabilities. It is how do we integrate the data into the
models. I think all of the entities are working toward that
outcome.
I would say sort of like through the Weather Act, setting a
clear goal of where we need to be and telling agencies this is
the direction you are working toward has been and will continue
to be productive.
So I do not have specific recommendations, you know, if
only you could get NASA to do this. I used to be Chief
Scientist at NASA. So I had my chance. But I will say just in a
general sense, every entity, Energy, NSF, NASA, NOAA plays a
role in the research to operations and operations to research
domain, and I think they are well structured to interact.
One thing I do want to comment on--and I am sorry for the
time, but there is something called EPIC, and I am forgetting
now what it stands for. But it is the integration of activities
at NOAA and NCAR, the National Center for Atmospheric Research,
which is NSF-funded, really bringing together the best of both
in the research and operational domains. And I think that is
really something--that is a big step forward that is in
process--that is going to move the ball down the field in
reasserting our leadership in weather forecast and weather
prediction.
So efforts are underway. Everybody wants the same thing. I
think the best way the government and legislation can
facilitate that is by setting the clear goals and requiring
that everybody play nicely in the sandbox together, which I
think they do.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Dr. Abdalati.
A quick question. When you look around the globe and you
see other countries that are investing, you know, are other
people leading our investments or beating our investments in
space research, space applied research, those kinds of things
that you need to do this job?
Dr. Abdalati. I would say they are not beating our
investments. There have been investments in forecasting in
Europe that have been quite substantial and have really moved
the ball down the field for them. In space observations, I
think the United States continues to lead the way, but we used
to be the big thing, and JAXA, the Japanese space agency, the
European Space Agency, India, others have really stepped up and
have been contributing. And what is nice about that is all
nations benefit through the sharing and open access of data. So
I would not say we are being surpassed in these areas. I will
say we are being approached in these areas. But ultimately I
think it is for the benefit of society as a whole.
But continued investments in these observations--and as I
said, I co-chair the decadal survey--are absolutely critical
for the success of our Nation with regard to climate, weather,
earthquakes, drought, you name it. We have got to watch the
story unfold to test our models and understand what is
happening and why and where it will lead us.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Dr. Abdalati.
Senator Sullivan.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good to see you
in the chair on this important committee.
I want to thank the witnesses.
I am going to ask a couple questions that relate--and I
know I am going to be a little bit off topic, but we got so
many smart people in terms of our witnesses that I am just
going to throw these two questions out that deal with the
sustainability of our oceans.
So my state, Alaska, in terms of commercial fisheries and
recreational fisheries, we constitute--almost 60 percent of all
the seafood harvested in America comes from Alaska's waters. I
like to use the term ``super power seafood.''
But anyway, making sure that we have sustainable fisheries
whether in the Great Lakes or in Alaska or all over the world
is I think something that this committee takes very seriously.
It needs to be focused on data. I think a lot of people view
the Alaska North Pacific Fisheries Council model as part of
Magnuson-Stevens is probably one of the best managed fisheries
in the world. And so we take it very seriously.
So two questions that I wanted to ask related to this. One
is the issue of ocean pollution, in particular the issue of
plastics. And Senator Whitehouse and I had a bill last year
called the Save Our Seas Act that was signed into law by the
President, and it is an area where there is good bipartisan
cooperation. Democrats, Republicans, the Trump Administration,
environmental groups, industry starting to focus on this, which
is important.
We are going to introduce a bill here in the Commerce
Committee soon called the Save Our Seas Act 2.0. But I am
wondering if any of you have any thoughts on addressing the
challenges that we see in terms of ocean debris, plastics,
ocean pollution. If it is not in your area of expertise, I
apologize. But there are a lot of smart witnesses here, and I
thought I would put that on the table because it is a very
important issue. And there is a lot of bipartisan momentum to
address it, and I think that is important and we need to keep
that going.
Dr. Bronk. So I am an oceanographer, so thank you very much
for that question.
Senator Sullivan. Yes. I was going to ask you directly,
but----
Dr. Bronk. So ocean plastics--I do not have a good answer
for you on how----
Senator Sullivan. The estimates, just by the way, are five
countries, 10 rivers in Asia constitute almost 80 percent of
all the plastic pollution in the world. So it is a solvable
issue, very solvable. We know who the source is.
Dr. Bronk. I know one thing we could do is we could not
have one of these sitting next to each one of us. I know I
opened mine. I am sorry. And I am drinking it.
So ocean plastics--I mean, it is a real issue. Investing in
research on how to deal with it--and yet, what most people do
not understand is that the plastics that we see, the bottles on
the beach, the fishing rope, that is probably 1 to 10 percent
of the plastic in the ocean. The real problem of plastic in the
ocean are micro or nanoplastics that we have very little
information on.
Senator Sullivan. They are starting to show up in the food
chain. Correct?
Dr. Abdalati. They are showing up everywhere. Right.
We had a researcher, Patty Matrai, at Bigelow who studied
microplastics, fibers in mollusks and mussels. And it turns out
how these organisms deal with the plastic is they create
pseudo-feces. So they package this up kind of in mucus and then
put them out of their body. The good thing is it gets the
plastics out of the body before you eat them. The bad thing is
that is a very energetically expensive thing for a mussel to
do, and that is going to cost you money if you are raising
mussels. And so we are doing research--and it needs to be
expanded in a number of other places--on how to deal with this
in our seafood, how to get as much of the plastic out of the
seafood as we can before people eat it.
But the micro and nanoplastics--I mean, we really do not
even have good techniques on how to count them. Right now, you
use a hot poker in a microscope and pick them up one piece at a
time. So finding automated techniques on how to accurately
monitor them so we know where the concentrations are highest,
where are they lowest, where do we need to focus our efforts.
And then I have no good answer, and I have never heard of any
good answers on what we do about them once they are in the
ocean.
So stopping the flow into the ocean and investing in--I
think we need real innovation, real out-of-the-box thinking on
managing plastics going into the future.
Senator Sullivan. Well, that is going to be in large part
in our bill.
So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you and
the Ranking Member on this issue, and hopefully we will be able
to get some momentum on that.
And, Dr. Bronk, thank you, and if you have any other
thoughts on this--you or your colleagues who focus on the ocean
sciences--please let us know.
Dr. Washburn.
Dr. Washburn. Yes. I just wanted to add to that.
So microplastics are a huge topic in the Great Lakes. And
one thing I would urge you to consider is some way of
structured funding for wastewater treatment research and
development to be able to find microplastics in wastewater
treatment plants and pull them out.
We are in a matter of days taking researchers from the
University of Wisconsin-Superior out onto Lake Superior and in
the estuary to sample for microplastics. It is something we
have been doing for years. Sadly, it is showing up in most if
not all of the beer produced in the Great Lakes, which is
tragic for a lot of reasons. But it is in everything now. And
so I would just reiterate the microplastics are huge.
NOAA has a marine debris plan that is regionally based, and
I know a lot of the other reserves are plugged into that. We
help support the research and education about plastics, both
large and microplastics. So that is something we are doing up
in your state too, I believe.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Oh, anyone else on this?
Dr. Horton. Thank you. Yes, just to maybe extend this a
little bit but hopefully still relevant. I think another of
these complex problems in the context of fisheries, the
interaction of increasing ocean acidification, changes in
oxygen rates, which vary a lot but are changing around the
ocean, and then especially the increase in the ocean
temperatures. I am thinking specifically, for example, about
Arctic sea ice where in that sort of late summer/September
volume, we have seen a 50 to 75 percent decrease in the past 40
or 50 years in the volume of that Arctic sea ice. It takes an
enormous amount of energy to happen. And I think there is a lot
we really do not know yet about what that is going to mean for
fisheries, about how that is going to impact and relate to
changes in ocean circulation. So it is one of these sort of
unknowns but another example I think of where the further we
push the system, the bigger the potential for surprises that we
need to think about as we are considering some of these related
hazards.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Gardner. Dr. Abdalati.
Dr. Abdalati. Yes, just very quickly. The plastics is an
example of the kinds of greater problems we face. We have the
plastics problem for reasons of convenience and short-term
economics. That is why we use plastic. It is economic. It is
convenient. People like it. People make money when they can
access bottles of water quickly.
It really comes down to--and this is the same as the
broader climate question--how do we value tomorrow versus
today. We are creating problems for the future so that we can
benefit today. And again, I do not know the answer there, but
there is a common thread through this, through climate change,
through ozone, all of these kinds of things. We have these
challenges because they are economic and convenience offerings
in these today but come at a price tomorrow. And that is just
the balance. And tomorrow is today.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Gardner. Senator Baldwin.
Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
I want to try to put out some recap questions and hopefully
also draw this hearing to a close on an uplifting note. But let
me start with the recap.
A number of you in your testimony talked about the data
gaps that exist that hold us back. And I do not want you to
repeat your testimony now, but it would be really great perhaps
as a follow up to this hearing if you can just sort of identify
the biggest data gaps in your expertise and help us think about
how the Federal Government plays a role in helping you close
those gaps.
I want to dovetail on the issues we have been talking about
relating to communication to the people who need this
information and outreach and educational opportunities and not
so much from the standpoint of what we have not done, but what
has been working. I am going to, as usual, pick on Dr. Washburn
first because the reserve is a place of outreach and education.
A lot has been done. Tell me what you think is working in terms
of public education about our changing climate and changing
circumstances on Lake Superior and the estuary.
Dr. Washburn. Sure. Thank you.
So in terms of outreach and education to the public to help
people understand what is going on, one of the highlights from
our area is the annual St. Louis River summit. We have been
hosting that at UW-Superior for 9 years now. It draws--actually
we are at fire code limit now--300 people for 2 days and it is
all of the research monitoring going on across all kinds of
different fields in western Lake Superior and beyond. It is
getting so big, as a matter of fact, that we are thinking we
might have to expand to an actual conference center elsewhere.
So that is a good thing. There is a lot of interest in it. So
the St. Louis River summit is one of our highlights.
I will also say that we do a lot as one of the eight
university lab reserves. We do a lot with students with
actually some high school students but a lot with undergraduate
students and grad students. With the new reserve Margaret
Davidson Fellowship, we will have additional workforce capacity
and training that we will be able to bring to bear across the
system. So I am excited about that.
And one example I think--there are two examples really
quick. One I mentioned in my testimony about algal blooms. We
are really concerned about that, and our coastal training
program coordinator is working with partners across the south
shore of Lake Superior to figure out how can we develop a
monitoring strategy starting this summer every 2 weeks to go
out and sample for algal populations in the near shore. That is
going to draw I know a lot of media and attention, and we are
going to be getting the word out about that.
And then kind of bringing it home to habitat and to some of
our core work, one of the areas that we have--our sentinel
site, climate change station is Pokegama Bay. And some of the
work that we are doing there involves this invasive species
called emerald ash borer, which is decimating ash forests in
the upper Midwest. And we have long-term research plots there
to see what kinds of species of trees can communities plant
that can stabilize the sediment in these riparian areas and
help the forest recover from the loss of ash trees. That kind
of long-term research tied with our system-wide monitoring
program is something that we are positioned to do really well,
and the benefits from that will be shared with public and
private landowners who want to manage their forests for the
future.
So those are some examples.
Senator Baldwin. Great. Thank you.
Anyone else? Please.
Dr. Abdalati. With regard to data gaps, I would say
satellites--you know, my own expertise--have played a critical
role in our success in understanding our changing environment.
There is a road map that has been provided by the National
Academy's decadal survey for NASA, NOAA, and the U.S.
Geological Survey, and we were very respectful of budget
limitations. So I think the implementation of that would go a
long way.
With regard to what works, I think what works is the way we
talk to people. I actually have a TED Talk on communicating
controversial topics, and my main principles are, one, your
adversaries are not as dumb as you want them to be.
[Laughter.]
Dr. Abdalati. They are sort of like if you just understood
things, you would see it my way.
Another is framing ideas in ways that resonate. When I talk
about climate change with rural farmers, I talk about the
implications for farming.
Recognizing values that people do not come to what they
believe because they are not smart. They have certain values.
They may value some things in different ways than I do and vice
versa.
And the last is not telling people what to think. That is
just the worst thing you can do.
And so I think dialogue that is really open-minded--what
can I learn from you, not I am the scientist, I have something
to tell you--goes a long way. People feel when you are sincere
about moving forward. So I would say what works is constructive
engagement that respects different values and ethical
principles.
Dr. Bronk. So in terms of data gaps, when it comes to the
ocean, they are huge. And part of the problem is up until maybe
20 years ago we really were sampling the ocean from ships, or
satellites were a huge boon for ocean science. You still had
the ground truth those satellite measurements with ships.
So now we have a variety of different platforms, including
floats, which are basically tubes that slowly move up and down
the ocean. They have got basically a cell phone in them, and
when they hit the surface again, they beam the data that they
have collected and their location. It is an Argo float program
is the program that is just wonderful. It is an international
program. There are 3,800 floats out purchased by 34 different
countries. And it is an example of how ocean science is
starting to fill some of the data gaps.
But the problem is most of those floats only collect
temperature and salinity, and that is not enough. We need all
the biological variables, chemical, you know, what are the
different chemical constituents, nutrients, all the things that
control how fast the phytoplankton grow at the base of the food
web, what types of phytoplankton are out there. That is going
to tell you how far up you have to go till you get to a fish
that you could commercially harvest.
So what we have right now is fantastic compared to what it
was 20 years ago, but it is still a very rudimentary system. So
investment in developing the sensors to put onto these floats
would be fantastic.
And the other thing I wanted to call out--and this is from
my time at the National Science Foundation when I was always
fighting for funding for ocean sciences, and yet what I was
consistently seeing was my social science colleagues just kind
of getting hammered. And yet, the number of times social
science has been brought up in these discussions--it is at the
root of so much of how we will respond to climate change that
this country really needs to invest in really some fundamental
basic research on how we can help people adapt and understand
how they will behave and their behavior will change because--my
oceanography colleagues are going to be like what are you
doing. But I think as a country, we really need to invest in
social science research because that is going to drive how we
respond as a nation to a lot of these challenges.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Dr. Bronk.
Dr. Horton, if you do not mind, we will get to Senator
Udall real quick and then maybe you can follow up with him.
Senator Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Abdalati, your research focuses on the Earth's polar
ice cover, and obviously, I am from New Mexico, a landlocked
state. You are from Colorado, the Chairman's state, which is
the same situation. Why should people from New Mexico and
Colorado be concerned about the impacts to polar ice cover and
why is the Arctic so important to the planet? Just a brief
answer there because I have a couple of follow-ups.
Dr. Abdalati. Sure. Well, first of all, as citizens of this
nation, I would hope we would care about what is happening to
our fellow citizens in coastal regions not only from a
humanitarian perspective but also economic. That has
implications for the economic wellbeing of our country.
From the standpoint of what directly hits home in New
Mexico and Colorado, it is a little bit more removed, but in
the simplest sense, human civilization has not known a
seasonally ice-free Arctic Ocean ever. And so we are taking a
sledge hammer to the climate system. When we peel back that
ice, which traps heat in the ocean, that heat is released to
the atmosphere, changes atmospheric circulation, and ultimately
impacts weather and precipitation patterns all over the world.
So the disappearing Arctic sea ice cover ultimately I believe
and many of my colleagues do has implications for the weather
in Colorado and New Mexico, the potential for extreme. We are
putting more water vapor in the atmosphere. We are releasing
more heat from the ocean into the atmosphere. That perturbs the
global climate system. So it is the opposite of Vegas. What
happens there does not stay there. It actually propagates
worldwide.
Senator Udall. Very well put.
Since you study the Arctic, you probably saw what happened
at the recent meeting of the Arctic Council. The first sentence
of the ``New York Times'' story about it reads--and I am
quoting here--under pressure from the United States, the Arctic
Council issued a short joint statement on Tuesday that excluded
any mention of climate change.
But that was not all. Our Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
said, quoting here, steady reductions in sea ice are opening
new naval passageways and new opportunities for trade. And he
added, Arctic sea lanes could become the 21st century Suez and
Panama Canals.
Do you or any other panelists here think that melting
Arctic ice is opening up new opportunities that are a net
benefit to people of this country or of the world?
Dr. Abdalati. Oh, I believe melting Arctic ice is opening
up new opportunities. We cannot deny the opportunities that are
presented. The question is, is it worth the costs that come
with it?
The military is concerned about the implications of
activity in the Arctic and what that means for our national
security. The climate implications and weather implications can
come at tremendous economic costs. As the sea ice melts and
exposes the shipping routes, which will save lots of money and
create opportunities, so too is the land ice melting, which is
causing oceans to rise, which is having tremendous impacts in
coastal regions.
So I sometimes challenge my community that we tend to not
think about opportunities. There are opportunities with the
change in climate, but there are costs. And it is the opinion
of most in my community that these costs and these
perturbations--and I strongly share this--far outweigh the
opportunities associated.
But it is incumbent upon us to understand these changes, I
often say, so we can meet the challenges and capitalize on the
opportunities that they do present.
Senator Udall. Do any of the other panelists want to weigh
in on that?
Dr. Horton. Just to add a couple more additional examples.
So we heard there about how loss of Arctic sea ice can have
impacts on regional climate that extend to many different
areas. We heard also how it can interact with the land-based
ice, leading to interactions that could potentially increase
both the melting of that ocean ice and the land ice, maybe even
impact broader ocean circulation.
Another point to highlight is that the basic climate
sensitivity of the planet, which is essentially for a given
amount of greenhouse gas that we add to the atmosphere, how
much will the planet as a whole warm. Changes in Arctic sea ice
have some potential certainly to partially accelerate that
sensitivity. So you remove that very reflective ice surface and
now have ocean underneath, a dark surface that can absorb more
sunlight, it sets off a powerful feedback that then can melt
additional ice. You add more moisture to the atmosphere. That
is a water vapor feedback that, to some extent, is going to
give you some more warming. So there are uncertainties there.
But even beyond the sort of regional implications, sort of
the basic sort of physics of how much the planet could warm for
a given amount of increasing greenhouse gases and potentially
longer term even a feedback where the very amount of greenhouse
gases could potentially go up a little more as you warm some of
that land surface, melting permafrost. That is probably not a
rapid feedback, but it is an additional thing to think about
that could make us a little less the arbiters of future
greenhouse gas concentrations if we are not careful.
Senator Udall. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, can the
additional panelists just finish answering the question? Thank
you.
Dr. Bronk. So I have done nine trips up to Barrow, Alaska,
Utqiagvik, Alaska, where I went out onto the sea ice to drill
through to sample the ocean. I think my first trip up was in
2012, and since that time, the loss of sea ice, which is very
protective of the coast--if you have got sea ice in the winter
and farther into the spring, later into the spring, it protects
the coasts from these storms that come in. Well, now that the
sea ice is gone earlier in the year, it is just devastating the
community in terms of erosion. I am sure the road that we used
is probably gone now. I have not been up there for 2 years, and
I am sure it is gone. The rate of the erosion and what the town
will do, I do not know.
So, yes, there will be positive things with an ice-free
Arctic, but there is also going to be just devastation to a lot
of the communities up there.
Senator Udall. Did you want to say anything?
Dr. Washburn. Yes.
So in the Great Lakes we, of course, are not talking about
sea ice but lake ice. We have seen a four-decade decline in the
extent of coverage of all five Great Lakes in the winter.
Likewise with the marine system, we are having
conversations with people in the shipping industry who see that
as an opportunity for a longer shipping season, getting out
earlier in the year and coming back later.
But it is also contributing to complexities in
understanding lake level change in the Great Lakes. The open
water--there is more evapotranspiration year round. That is
leading to a more difficult situation to understand the
interaction between lakes, precipitation, groundwater, surface
water. And that is going back to my original testimony of how
hard it is for coastal communities to plan for the kinds of
precipitation events and flooding that might occur under a
really complex lake level change scenario.
So we are not dealing with sea ice, but similar
conversations.
Senator Udall. Thank you for the courtesies, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Senator Udall.
And thank you to all the witnesses for being here today. I
want to thank our colleagues for participating in the hearing.
The hearing record will remain open for two weeks. If
members have questions for the record, I would kindly ask the
witnesses to do your homework, if you could, quickly and get it
back. Questions and answers will be included as part of the
record. So thanks to all of you.
And with the thanks of this committee, this hearing is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to
Deborah A. Bronk, Ph.D.
Issue No. 1: Need for Immediate Legislative Action on Climate
Change. The consequences of global climate change are devastating and
far-reaching, and both immediate and long-term. Climate change
threatens our economy, our national security, our beautiful natural
places, and even our lives. Still, Congress delays meaningful action on
combating the worst effects of climate change. For residents of my home
state of Connecticut, facing climate change is not a choice. Superstorm
Sandy claimed 147 lives and cost billions of dollars in damage.
Scientists predict an almost two-foot increase in the sea level of Long
Island Sound by 2050, meaning that smaller storms could result in
greater flooding. My constituents simply can't wait any longer for the
United States to take action.
Question 1. Do you agree that it is critical that the United States
Senate consider and pass legislation to address climate change this
Congress? [Yes or No]
Answer. Yes. We have delayed for far too long already.
Question 2. Given the expansiveness of climate change and its
effects, what mechanism or strategy do you believe Congress should
prioritize when considering effective climate change solutions?
Answer. We need an integrated approach. To successfully address
climate change, we must consider societal, behavioral, economic and
environmental issues together. One problem is that experts in these
fields seldom talk and collaborate--they too often exist in their own
silos. The National Academies runs the most rigorous, unbiased
scientific review and planning process I know. Support them to develop
a national strategy and underpin it with substantial funding to
implement through the Federal and state agencies. There are already a
number of National Academies reports, a few noted in my written
testimony, that can be turned to for guidance on how to move forward on
many issues today.
Underpinning all of this is the need for a true valuation of the
cost of U.S. activities. For example, it would be cheaper for a given
industry to send pollutants into the air, but if you include the
increase in health care needed to treat the many health problems those
pollutants caused, it makes economic sense that our government not
allow them to do so. Likewise, industry and individuals need to make
decisions based on the true cost of their activities with respect to
greenhouse gases. Taxing carbon will provide an economic incentive for
looking critically at how we live and the energy needed and the waste
generated. This economic incentive will power innovation and new
approaches will be found. A critical component to this approach is the
monitoring needed to assure compliance.
Last but not least, we desperately need political reform to limit
the power of special interest groups. How different our world would be
today if powerful, well-funded lobbyists hadn't been able to squash
innovation in fuel efficiency, for example.
Question 3. Connecticut residents are already facing the
consequences of climate change. How can the United States Northeast
ready itself for a warmer world?
Answer. People need resources to transition to a more sustainable
lifestyle. Options include low interest or no interest loans or
subsidies to transition to green energy. There are homes on the coast
in the Northeast that are on land that should not, and in many cases,
should never have been, built on. As storms worsen and sea level rises,
we need a robust plan to transition to more sustainable coastal
properties that don't leave the tax payers holding the bill for
rebuilding these properties after repeated floods or water damage.
Issue No. 2: Fostering the Necessary Paradigm Shift to Mitigate
Climate Change. This year, two landmark studies were published that
document the extent of climate change's impacts on humans and the
planet--the Fourth National Climate Assessment and the Global
Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Both
reiterate in great detail what we have known for decades: climate
change is real, humans are causing it, and we must act boldly now.
These reports note that our options to mitigate the worst effects of
climate change--through domestic policies and international
agreements--are insufficient to meet the scale and rate of our changing
climate. We need ``fundamental, system-wide reorganization across
technological, economic, and social factors, including paradigms,
goals, and values.''
Question 4. How can Congress foster the fundamental,
transformational changes needed to save human lives and biodiversity in
the face of powerful opposition and inertia?
Answer. We have to level the playing field. I support comprehensive
campaign finance reform. Let decisions be based on science and the will
of the people, not a small number of wealthy individuals or industries.
Also, support citizen science programs. The financial investment is
nominal but could allow this country to collect many types of data that
would be cost prohibitive if it had to be done by professionals. The
added benefit is that involving citizens in the collection of
environmental information will educate them on the issues and empower
them to support wise stewardship of our resources.
Issue No. 3: The Need to Invest in Sustainable Infrastructure. As
Congress considers a major infrastructure package, we cannot ignore the
risks of climate change. Fundamentally new approaches to infrastructure
investment are needed, including a focus on clean energy
transportation, efficient travel, grid upgrades, and sustainable
materials and design. In addition to ensuring that the built
environment helps instead of harms humans and the planet, Congress
should invest in green infrastructure, including healthy natural
spaces. Connecticut's state economy is reliant on the myriad ecosystem
services provided by coastal ecosystems, including estuaries, marshes,
and open water. I would like to make Connecticut home to the thirtieth
National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR), and I have led efforts to
encourage the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to move
quickly to approve the proposed Connecticut Reserve. Mitigating climate
change's effects on green, blue, grey, and other types of
infrastructure is essential for our health and wealth, and deserves
Congressional attention.
Question 5. What are some of the most important investments that we
can make to ensure our Nation's infrastructure is more resilient or
adaptive to the variety of hazards posed by future climate conditions?
Answer. Support robust climate modeling and forecasting at the
national and regional level. Models are our most powerful tool in
understanding how our environment is likely to change but they have
never been financially supported at the level needed to answer the
questions we face. Then we need programs that support two-way
communication between the modelers and scientists creating these
programs and the local and regional managers that will use them to make
decisions. A closer relationship across this spectrum will inform
modelers of the most pressing issues and the type of information needed
to address them and educate local and regional managers on model
limitations and data needs.
Question 6. How does the preservation of coastal habitat--such as
those in the NERR system--help mitigate the effects of climate change
on infrastructure?
Answer. Marsh, mangroves, coral reefs and barrier islands all
protect the land that lies behind them by dissipating energy from wind,
waves, and water during storms. For example, filling in marshes and
building on them has created vulnerable low-lying land and removed
valuable protection for the inland communities adjacent to it. It has
also eliminated space for water to go during storm surges without
damaging infrastructure because homes are now built where the marsh
used to be. Preservation and restoration of these natural protective
barriers should be part of any plan to protect our coastal communities
going forward.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to
Deborah A. Bronk, Ph.D.
Question 1. What Federal investments and/or initiatives are
necessary to support the sustained ocean and climate observations and
modeling needed to fill our gaps in climate understanding?
a. Are there existing programs that should be supported or
expanded?
b. Are there new programs or partnerships that should be created?
Answer. The answer is yes to both. To assure that investments are
impactful and cost effective, a critical first step is establishing a
long-term plan for ocean observations.
To address both of the questions, I direct the senator's staff to
the following report noted in my written testimony and have copied an
excerpt of the Summary that directly addresses this issue:
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017.
Sustaining Ocean Observations to Understand Future Changes in Earth's
Climate. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/
10.17226/24919.
NATIONAL COORDINATION, PLANNING, AND FUNDING CHALLENGE
Although the interagency bodies described above have
responsibilities to coordinate activities associated with ocean climate
observing, the committee has not been able to identify a clear national
leadership position for this intersection of ocean, climate, and
observing. Neither has the committee been able to identify a national
plan to sustain and expand this critical ocean observing system for
climate change. Although Congress recognized the need for sustained
ocean observations in the ICOOS Act, the annual budgets have not
matched the costs of sustaining the current system in terms of
workforce, infrastructure, and data management. The absence of an
overarching long-term (e.g., 10-year) national plan with associated
resource commitments and lack of strong leadership presents a challenge
for sustaining U.S. contributions to ocean observing, by inhibiting
effective coordination and multiyear investments in the many components
of the observing system.
Finding: The continuity of ocean observations is essential for
gaining an accurate understanding of the climate. Funding mechanisms
that rely on annual budget approval or short-term grants may result in
discontinuity of ocean climate measurements, reducing the value of the
observations made to date and in the future.
Conclusion on Planning: Because of the extended time frame required
for climate observations, a decadal plan for the U.S. ocean observing
system would be the most effective approach for ensuring that critical
ocean information is available to understand future climate.
Consistency of the decadal plan with the Framework for Ocean Observing
would optimize U.S. investments relative to contributions of the
international community, with plan updates likely required to align
with international activities during the 10-year period. Elements of a
decadal plan include identification of requirements, assessment of the
adequacy of the current system, components to be deployed over the 10-
year period, potential for technological advancements, and an estimate
of resources necessary to implement the plan. The National Ocean
Research Leadership Council (NORLC) has the mandate under the ICOOS Act
to oversee development and adoption of a long-term plan and NORLC could
be responsible for its periodic assessment and update, possibly
utilizing the IOOC and the Ocean Research Advisory Panel. Progress in
implementing the plan would depend on the engagement of the broader
stakeholder community and coordination with international partners in
the global ocean observing system.
Conclusion on Partnership: An Ocean-Climate Partnership (OCP)
organization described further in Chapter 5 would be an effective
mechanism to increase engagement and coordination of the ocean
observation science community with nonprofits, philanthropic
organizations, academia, U.S. Federal agencies, and the commercial
sector. Through their shared interests in the observational data and
associated products, the OCP members could work together toward the
goal of sustaining the ocean climate observing system.
Question 2. How can Congress help ensure that climate science is
fully funded, especially to forecast local impacts that allow
communities to prepare and respond to disasters?
Answer. As I noted above, we need to support robust climate
modeling and forecasting at the national and regional level. Models are
our most powerful tool in understanding how our environment is likely
to change but they have never been financially supported at the level
needed to answer the questions we face. Then we need programs that
support two-way communication between the modelers and scientists
creating these programs and the local and regional managers that will
use them to make decisions. A closer relationship across this spectrum
will inform modelers of the most pressing issues and the type of
information needed to address them and educate local and regional
managers on model limitations and data needs.
Question 3. How has the Trump administration's attitudes and
directives regarding climate science affected your work and the
scientific community?
Answer. For the leader of the country with the largest per capita
greenhouse gas emissions to be a climate change denier is terrifying to
anyone who knows what's at stake. It is also demoralizing that the
leader of this great country is so ignorant and misinformed on the
great challenge of our time.
Science is also an international activity that was largely led by
the United States. The Trump administration has been devasting to our
global reputation and leadership in science. In terms of long-term
impact of Trump on how we will address the climate challenge, my most
immediate concern is immigration. The United States was a science and
innovation leader because we welcomed the best and the brightest from
around the world. We brought people from different backgrounds and
cultures and perspectives, who think differently and so expanded what
we could have ever done alone. Now we are making it harder and harder
for students to come here and to stay once they are trained. This is
all happening at the very time that China is opening its arms to the
world. I want the best and the brightest here. I want their brainpower
and passion serving our republic as we tackle climate change. We need
them.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Richard Blumenthal to
Erika Washburn, Ph.D.
Issue No. 1: Need for Immediate Legislative Action on Climate
Change. The consequences of global climate change are devastating and
far-reaching, and both immediate and long-term. Climate change
threatens our economy, our national security, our beautiful natural
places, and even our lives. Still, Congress delays meaningful action on
combating the worst effects of climate change. For residents of my home
state of Connecticut, facing climate change is not a choice. Superstorm
Sandy claimed 147 lives and cost billions of dollars in damage.
Scientists predict an almost two-foot increase in sea levels around
Long Island Sound by 2050, meaning that smaller storms could result in
greater flooding. My constituents simply can't wait any longer for the
United States to take action.
Question 1. Do you agree that it is critical that the United States
Senate consider and pass legislation to address climate change this
Congress? [Yes or No]
Answer.
Yes.
Question 2. Given the expansiveness of climate change and its
effects, what mechanism or strategy do you believe Congress should
prioritize when considering effective climate change solutions?
Answer.
Congress should consider convening a broadly representative
Commission on Climate Change Adaptation tasked with drafting
and proposing the funding priorities and national policy
framework required to support mitigation and adaptation efforts
across the Nation. Much of the needed work concerning the
development of a vision, stakeholders and leaders involved,
adaptation practitioners, and public and private sector roles
and engagement are outlined in detail elsewhere, for example,
in the comprehensively written Kresge Foundation Report,
``Rising to the Challenge, Together.'' This is attached as an
appendix to this statement.
In sum:
Adaptation work should include the development of an
adaptation vision and practice, the identification of shared
values, and clearly articulated priorities that are regional,
sectoral and cross-cutting in nature.
Reaching this vision and implementing this practice will
require funding for knowledge generation and transfer, skill
development and tools that the Nation as a whole can deploy to
meet adaptation goals.
The mechanisms to be developed include but are not limited
to best practices for information sharing, learning,
collaboration, advocacy and communication. These mechanisms and
practices must be deployed at all scales and in all
communities.
A national policy and funding framework should be directed
from national to regional scaled efforts, be based on the best
available science while continuing to make critical research
investments, and provide Federal agency directives to engage.
A funding framework should be institutionalized so that
resources and investments are coordinated and sustained.
Critically, any strategy should involve innovation in
technology, private investments and extensive cost sharing
among all the stakeholders benefiting from risk reduction.
Identifying zones of shared risk is critical to both the
evaluation of the effectiveness of strategies, and identifying
beneficiaries. Negotiation of the best strategy and getting
agreement on cost sharing is a difficult process and Federal
funds should be used to incentivize stakeholder participation.
The Commission must specifically include plans to address
non-urban areas and socially vulnerable populations including
the poor, elderly, communities of color and indigenous
communities, focusing efforts on building social cohesion and
equity. This is in recognition of the fact that communities of
color, the socioeconomically challenged, and the rural areas or
small towns will continue to bear the brunt of climate change
impacts and the challenges of effectively engaging in an
adaptation strategy.
Additional and specific mechanisms and actions:
Reinvigorate successful efforts like the State, Local and
Tribal Leaders Task Force
Improve access to and use of important Federal data and tool
portals to help communities understand, prepare for and adapt
Continue investments in research to management on the
ecological and economic impacts of green infrastructure as
strategic solutions
Strengthen support for the practice of ecosystem service
assessments as decision support tools for the tradeoffs
communities will be faced with making in a resource-constrained
future
Strengthen and support interagency research and monitoring
efforts on climate change and impacts on public health and
wellbeing
Invest in programs that can strategically acquire and
conserve coastal land, for example, the Coastal and Estuarine
Land Conservation Program or the National Estuarine Research
Reserve Purchase, Acquisition and Construction program.
Perspectives: NERRS
Leverage the existence of, and strengthen investments in,
federal-state partnership networks like the National Estuarine
Research Reserve System which can develop, test and deploy
solutions to coastal community and ecosystem challenges in a
way that strengthens economic, ecological and social
resiliency. The reserves are test-beds can be used to rapidly
develop, deploy and replicate solutions to adaptation
challenges at the local and regional level while collecting
baseline information about status and monitoring trends over
time. For example, the NERR System piloted a first-in-the-
nation assessment (report attached) of marsh resilience
comparing the Atlantic and Pacific coasts finding that the
tidal marshes in New England were among the most vulnerable to
sea level rise and without mitigation and adaptation measures,
would lose their ability to provide protection to coastal
communities for flooding.
The Reserves are also at the forefront of innovative and
impactful training programs supporting local and regional
decision makers charged with developing and implementing
adaptation and mitigation strategies in their communities. The
trainings are driven by community needs and requests and the
science provided is geared towards addressing questions that
respond to the community needs. These training programs can be
used to fast-track information sharing, technical data and best
practice for adaptation solutions. These strategies include
deployment of green infrastructure and acquisition of areas
sensitive to climate change through the NERRS Purchase,
Acquisition and Construction grants.
Question 3. Connecticut residents are already facing the
consequences of climate change. How can the United States Northeast
ready itself for a warmer world?
Answer.
Knowledge is power. Universities often provide an extensive
source of capacity for relevant knowledge (Climate and Ocean
Science, Law, Engineering, Planning, Communications, Geology,
Natural Resources) and connections to local stakeholders.
Considerable and strategic thought about the role of
universities in building a resilient society can be reviewed
through Old Dominion University's Resilience Collaborative
Archive, a summary of which is attached in the appendix.
The National Estuarine Research Reserves are sources for
information about climate change impacts, adaptation strategies
and mitigation measures. They are also a trusted community
voice with proven capacity for localized training and community
engagement. Fostering collaborations within and among these
groups can represent a powerful tool to address changes that
can be difficult yet necessary
Issue No. 2: Fostering the Necessary Paradigm Shift to Mitigate
Climate Change. This year, two landmark studies were published that
document the extent of climate change's impacts on humans and the
planet--the Fourth National Climate Assessment and the Global
Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Both
reiterate in great detail what we have known for decades: climate
change is real, humans are causing it, and we must act boldly now.
These reports note that our options to mitigate the worst effects of
climate change--through domestic policies and international
agreements--are insufficient to meet the scale and rate of our changing
climate. We need ``fundamental, system-wide reorganization across
technological, economic, and social factors, including paradigms,
goals, and values.''
Question 4. How can Congress foster the fundamental,
transformational changes needed to save human lives and biodiversity in
the face of powerful opposition and inertia?
Answer.
Federal Commitment to Funding Innovations in Partnership with the
States
Congress should provide clear signals about what Federal
support for adaptation funding will look like for projects that
are critical in states and towns. Many leaders are hoping that
Federal funds will reduce the need for local spending. Any
programs that are administered by states that provide funds for
forward looking adaptation through competitive grants that cost
share in the 30-60 percent range would motivate near term
action. These programs should push innovative solutions and
multiple benefits. These programs should be run through State
agencies since there are local political and environmental
policies and traditions that must be respected if effective
consultation and negotiation is to occur.
Congress should provide leadership and leverage good, existing work
Make use of the foundations laid over the decade through
such things as interagency and White House Office of Science
Technology and Policy (OSTP) led efforts on ecosystem services
as a framework to use for all Federal science investments.
Leverage trusted place-based programs like the National
Estuarine Research Reserves and their Coastal Training Programs
to facilitate town halls, listening sessions, and hearings in
the states and regions to seek out leaders, ideas and
innovations. The Reserves help to educate and train local
officials on developing adaptation strategies and train and
educate all members of society in environmental literacy.
Invite all sectors of society to participate in this effort,
with specific outreach and engagement to Tribal nations,
indigenous communities, communities of color, the poor, the
elderly and youth.
Engage with the artistic community and storytellers in the
creative economy who can help us to build common and positive
narratives of living with a changing planet, intentionally,
with equity and respect, and within our limits. Challenge this
community to help Americans dream big, re-envision and innovate
in a future that will look very different than what humanity
has known.
Engage the networks and professions of first responders and
healers and find leaders in those communities. Rapid climate
change will continue to lead to loss of human life, of the
planet's species, habitats, special places and whole
ecosystems. These losses will, and already are, causing real
grief and anger which have consequences for the mental health
of individuals and the public health and wellbeing in
communities. This loss needs to be explored, grieved and
remembered in a way that promotes healing and hopefully, a
better future. At the Lake Superior Reserve, for example, we
are launching climate change healing circles with the
leadership of clinical social workers and Tribal leaders.
Engage and empower youth in place-based education
Every year, programs offered at the Lake Superior Reserve and the
28 other Reserves attract more than a half a million students,
educators, and visitors. Reserves educate approximately 85,000
students and 3,200 teachers nationwide each year. Since 2011 in
Wisconsin and Minnesota, the Lake Superior Reserve's
educational programming has reached 52,898 learners.
Promote and support training for decision makers
Reserve programs help sustain more than 10,000 jobs, provide
training to more than 13,400 people. Decision makers from more
than 2,500 cities and towns and 570 businesses benefit by
Reserve-based science and technical expertise nationwide each
year. At the Lake Superior Reserve, we provided training to
hundreds of staff from cities, counties, the state, for profit
companies and Non-Governmental Organizations each year on
topics such as variable Great Lakes water levels, green
infrastructure, and nuisance algal blooms. In New Jersey, the
Jacques Cousteau Reserve-led Getting to Resilience community
planning tool was cited in the Northeast Chapter of the
National Climate Assessment as a powerful tool to help
communities prepare for extreme storms and flooding.
Issue No. 3: The Need to Invest in Sustainable Infrastructure. As
Congress considers a major infrastructure package, we cannot ignore the
risks of climate change. Fundamentally new approaches to infrastructure
investment are needed, including a focus on clean energy
transportation, efficient travel, grid upgrades, and sustainable
materials and design. In addition to ensuring that the built
environment helps instead of harms humans and the planet, Congress
should invest in green infrastructure, including healthy natural
spaces. Connecticut's state economy is reliant on the myriad ecosystem
services provided by coastal ecosystems, including estuaries, marshes,
and open water. I would like to make Connecticut home to the thirtieth
National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR), and I have led efforts to
encourage the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to move
quickly to approve the proposed Connecticut Reserve. Mitigating climate
change's effects on green, blue, grey, and other types of
infrastructure is essential for our health and wealth, and deserves
Congressional attention.
Question 5. What are some of the most important investments that we
can make to ensure our Nation's infrastructure is more resilient or
adaptive to the variety of hazards posed by future climate conditions?
Answer.
Consider the points and recommendations from the September
2019 report from the Global Commission on Adaptation (Adapt
Now: A Global Call for Leadership on Climate Resilience)--
particularly the cases made for the economic return on
investments for early warning systems, infrastructure, water
and crop resources, and protection for key habitats such as
mangroves, wetlands, etc. This report is attached in the
appendix.
As the Kresge report ``Rising to the Challenge, Together''
details, investments must be made to support proactive and
preventative, mitigation measures in communities. This will
entail eliminating barriers to such work and increasing
opportunities for regional collaborative action.
Adaptation efforts should also be focused on policy, the
role of professional societies and the establishment of
standards affecting climate-sensitive structures and
activities. An example of this is eliminating the barriers on
FEMA funding to reconstruct stormwater infrastructure to the
previous state, rather than right-sizing infrastructure
proactively to handle heavier precipitation loads.
Investments that promote green infrastructure or living
shorelines and those targeting water infrastructure overall
will be critical. For example, resources will be critical for
mapping and supporting wetland migration corridors, and for
facilitating planning processes that focus on citing and
relocating infrastructure to safer locations. The public-
private partnership, Living Shorelines Academy provides a great
example of training and resources on this topic. Many of the
National Estuarine Research Reserves lead on this as well. For
example, Florida's Guana Tolomato Matanzas Reserve leads the
regional Ecological Engineering of Living Shorelines team
focused on solving complex coastal issues through engineering.
Support the Digital Coast Act. This platform has the
potential for use by all local planners and can save
communities tremendous resources while educating the general
public. This user driven resource is supported by a partnership
fop eight NGOs and NOAA, so the information is designed to
reflect user needs.
Develop policy that recognizes and respects the biophysical
and ecological functioning of watershed systems--regardless of
political boundary crossings, and start to expand the
definition of what constitutes a `coastal community.' Congress
can rely on and re-authorize the Nation's only land use
planning document, the Coastal Zone Management Act, as a first
step.
Funding frameworks for infrastructure investments should
coordinate between the public and private sector in close
collaboration with the philanthropic resources so that
complicated gaps can be tackled.
Perspectives: National Estuarine Research Reserves and Integrated
Ocean Observing Systems
A fundamental benefit the NERR system provides is the built-
in capacity for monitoring key environmental parameters that
can be used in many capacities in adaptation and mitigation
strategies. The Reserve System maintains more than 280 water
quality and weather monitoring stations. Every 15 minutes,
these platforms collect data to manage hazardous spills,
shellfish industry operations, and emergency response to storm
surge and flooding. That's 42 million data points each year
tracking the changing health of our critical coastal systems.
The measurements taken and data products provided span a
national scope but detail impacts at local scales--which is
necessary for discriminating the sensitivities of impacts. This
network capacity should be expanded and could easily be done
given the tools and technology already in place.
Similarly, increased investments towards the US Integrated
Ocean Observing System and regional associations are needed to
provide increased capacity of warnings and long term monitoring
of environmental indicators.
Question 6. How does the preservation of coastal habitat--such as
those in the NERR system--help mitigate the effects of climate change
on infrastructure?
Answer.
It is well documented that coastal habitats provide critical
buffering capacity from the landward effects of storms and the
expected impacts of things sea level rise. The continued
efforts to both preserve and restore these habitats are
essential components in any strategy to mitigate effects of
climate change.
The wetlands in the NERR System make their coastal areas
more resilient in the face of increased and intensifying storms
and flooding. Nationally, wetlands, like those Reserves
protect, provide $26.25 billion in storm protection each year.
Salt marshes can reduce a community's storm damage by 20
percent annually. Marshes reduce risk of flood exposure by 50
percent for those living within two thirds of a mile--they also
reduce property loss in upstream communities. Reserves overall
protect more than 1.3 million acres of coastal and estuarine
lands around the country. States, communities, and people
depend on these estuaries to protect them from flooding, keep
water clean, sustain and create jobs, support fish and
wildlife, and offer outdoor recreation. By increasing Federal
funds in the NERRS Purchase, Acquisition and Construction
grants, communities can be strategic in their purchase and
conservation of high quality coastal habitat.
Coastal wetlands are nature's most effective carbon trapping
machines--inch for inch they capture more carbon than any other
habitat on earth. They also protect water quality, stabilize
shorelines, reduce storm surge, and provide habitat for
fisheries. Unfortunately, since 2005 alone, the U.S. has lost
80,000 acres of wetlands, and the cost of restoration is often
beyond community reach. Restoring degraded wetlands has the
potential to be an effective climate mitigation strategy with
rapid rewards. Voluntary blue carbon markets can help pay for
wetland restoration and conservation. Communities, businesses,
and individuals can sell carbon offsets and invest the proceeds
in projects that capture carbon and provide other important
ecological and economic benefits. Through the National
Estuarine Research Reserve (NERRS) network, knowledge gained
through the Bringing Wetlands to Market project in New England
is catalyzing blue carbon initiatives around the country.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to
Erika Washburn, Ph.D.
Question 1. Low income neighborhoods and communities of color
disproportionately bear the brunt of climate impacts. How can Congress
support and incorporate social science to ensure that adaptation
planning is equitable and protects frontline communities?
Answer. Congress needs to provide an equitable and collaborative
adaptation planning process. This process includes:
Ensure Federal funding programs require engagement and
demonstrated support beyond state and municipal partners (e.g.,
neighborhood-scale/community-based organizations) to advance
equitable (and often more integrated, systemic) adaptation
planning initiatives.
Provide funding opportunities for organizations advancing
holistic regional adaptation planning processes in communities
of color around the Nation (e.g., The Climigration Network) and
increase Federal support for collaborative planning efforts
that are supported by staff with professional facilitation
experience who can equitably balance the needs of competing
interests. Cognizant of the capacity requirements and
additional burden grant writing often places on already
disadvantaged communities, these Federal funding opportunities
should be simplified to the minimum necessary, be coordinated
as much as possible with other funding streams or be funneled
through and coordinated with other funding opportunities
through streamlined regional grant-making organizations, and
involve technical assistance for those writing funding
proposals and administering Federal funds.
Restructure Army Corps of Engineers efforts to generate,
evaluate and implement coastal and inland risk management
strategies (e.g., shoreline protection, surge gates) to provide
real and meaningful stakeholder engagement and dialogue with
all stakeholder groups, but especially with low income
neighborhoods, communities of color and Indigenous communities.
Create provisions, including adequate staff, funding, technical
support, and training opportunities and support strategic
partnerships with organizations that have relevant outreach and
engagement expertise (e.g., NERRs, Regional Integrated Sciences
and Assessments Program, the National Sea Grant College
Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture climate hubs, and other
existing professional networks such as Urban Sustainability
Directors Network,, American Society of Adaptation
Professionals, etc.) to ensure two-way dialogue and a complete
community understanding of the short-term and long-term
implications of implemented strategies including visual,
access, residual risk and cost factors.
Congress needs to ensure that adaptation planning is equitable and
protects frontline communities, which are already experiencing the
impacts of climate change and include such places as coastal and low-
lying river and tributary communities, communities subject to intense
heat waves and droughts, communities with persistent water scarcity,
and communities on the leading edge of new vector borne diseases.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Congress could assist with ensuring that frontline communities are
protected by:
1. Ensuring that Federal grant program and other federally supported
efforts aimed at advancing adaptation planning for climate
change explicitly integrate consideration for disparity in
vulnerability to impacts from climate change for different
socioeconomic groups as part of all adaptation planning
projects and programs. Further, increase support for projects/
programs that aim to directly study and integrate social
science considerations for adaptation planning.
2. Continue supporting programs that seriously consider long-
standing, systemic and persistent environmental justice issues.
3. In recognition of the fact that there can be a concentration of
low income neighborhoods in urban settings and that often low
income earners are renters of property in urban settings,
ensure that realtors and landlords are educated about potential
impacts from climate change. Work with the real estate sector
and landlords to educate renters about potential climate change
threats. For example, heat health impacts can be huge in urban
settings and heat-related threats will be a main impact of
climate change. Ensuring that cooling centers, tree planting
programs etc. are supported in these urban settings could be
very important and help to save lives.
4. Support programs that enable homeowners and owners of rental
properties to retrofit their homes to address structural
vulnerabilities to storms and other risks that could be
exacerbated by climate change. Incentives should be staggered,
i.e., larger for those with low and lower incomes than for
wealthier home owners, and they should be accompanied with
simplified application procedures and technical assistance so
as not to perpetuate the commonly observed pattern whereby
wealthier, higher-capacity property owners have greater
capacity to apply for and ultimately receive financial
assistance for retrofits.
Perspectives: National Estuarine Research Reserves Related Studies/
Projects
The Research Reserves are increasingly tackling this
challenge. For example, a capacity building study led by
Waquoit Bay Reserve in Massachusetts focused on working towards
coastal resilience for underserved/hard to reach community
members on Cape Cod. This Reserve also recently developed an
innovative program meeting the needs of vulnerable audiences
focused on the deaf and hearing impaired. More information
about this NERRS Science Collaborative funded Watershed Action
for Deaf Education (WADE) is attached in the appendix. While
this project did not explicitly address climate change it shows
a successful process used to engage and serve an underserved
audience. Additional information is available on page 11 of
this NOAA Education Accomplishments Report.
Other relevant work by active adaptation players
The Movement Strategy Center has developed a guide for
adaptation/resilience planning that is sensitive to community-
concerns and illustrates a fully community-engaged adaptation
process. We attach it and consider it a model for others to
follow.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People, Asian Pacific Environmental Network, Urban
Sustainability Directors Network and US Water Alliance have
also developed a series of relevant guides that illustrate how
equity-centered resilience building, preparedness planning,
rebuilding after disaster and so on should be done to address
historic patterns of injustice and inequity. Many examples from
these groups are attached in the appendix.
Look to great examples in the Nation such as the work being
done by the Community Resilience Initiative in Oakland,
California, which has successfully demonstrated a process to
improve equity actions by state and local agencies. Likewise,
explore the Rockefeller Foundation's 100 Resilient Cities
initiative for more examples.
Engage a full range of social scientists and associated
human dimensions data and information into the debates,
structures and proposals for a national adaptation policy and
associated funding mechanisms. Do this leveraging agencies,
Federal agencies, programs (some with regional arms) such as
all US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) agencies,
especially the Department of Commerce/NOAA funding programs
(e.g., Regional Integrates Science And Assessments Program,
Sectoral Applications Research Program, National Sea Grant
College Program, etc.), USDA (e.g., Cooperative Extension,
Forest Service), the National Science Foundation, Environmental
Protection Agency, and Department of Interior (with the U.S.
Geological Survey, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park
Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, etc.), National Institutes
of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Housing
and Urban Development, the Census, Bureau of Labor, and place-
based interdisciplinary programs like the NERRS and others.
Professional societies such as the American Society of
Adaptation Professionals, the American Planning Association,
American Society of Civil Engineers, American Psychological
Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Medical
Association, and other professional societies representing
relevant areas of research and academic expertise, such as the
American Association of Geographers, the American
Anthropological Association, Society for Applied Anthropology,
American Sociological Association and many others can all
support this.
Question 2. What Federal investments, programs, or partnerships are
needed to meet our Nation's social science needs for understanding the
human dimensions of the climate crisis?
Answer.
Federal investments, programs and partnerships that engage and
leverage social science towards understanding the human dimensions of
the climate crisis and providing guidance on best practice for
adaptation, will be critical in the following: ensuring climate
justice, tracking progress towards successful adaptation, facilitating
cross-jurisdictional coordination, and supporting the relocation of
communities/domestic climate refugees. Applied social science will be
critical in tracking and sharing lessons learned in adaptation across
our Nation at all scales, and this will further require enhanced
investment in the social science workforce.
Climate justice as a cross-cutting guiding principle: Given that
low income communities and communities of color have contributed the
least to the climate change problem, are expected to suffer the most
absent concerted effort, and have--left to their own devices--the least
resources to prepare for and protect themselves from the impacts of
climate change, climate justice should be a cross-cutting concern or
principle in all federally-funded adaptation efforts.
A. Establish a Climate Justice Advisory Board. Create an
environmental justice advisory committee at the highest level
to provide input into the planning and implementation of
adaptation initiatives. Consider the model of the NYS Climate
Leadership and Community Protection Act which creates a Climate
Justice Working Group responsible for setting the criteria for
identifying disadvantaged communities and advising on the
implementation of the Act.
B. Add climate justice requirements to Federal funding. Develop
language for and require attention to climate justice in all
Federal funding programs.
Adaptation success/progress: Set up a standing cross-agency working
group or task force (including at least all USGCRP agencies, but also
relevant others, see Question 1 above) to scan the horizon on how to
measure and track national-level indicators and metrics of adaptation
progress and success. Considerable work was done beginning with 3rd
National Climate Assessment, and has continued somewhat but mostly
outside of Federal agencies within universities and programs such as
the NERRS with development of adaptation indicators and metrics.
A. Continue and strengthen work on adaptation indicators and
progress. Building on the work done to date within and outside
Federal agencies, the USGCRP should develop a set of
scientifically credible and decision-relevant, actionable
adaptation progress indicators. These indicators are to be
considered in the quadrennial National Climate Assessments, be
included in the Federal government's Resilience Toolkit, and
help inform and guide future climate preparedness investments.
These indicators should pay particular attention to what extent
progress is being made addressing climate justice and in so
doing, reducing social vulnerability of these historically most
disadvantaged groups. Indicators should be crafted that can
track the success of adaptation initiatives with this in mind.
B. Invest in the development and deployment of regional networks and
tools to collect baseline information about frontline coastal
communities concerning social, cultural, economic and health
data. This would result in real-time tackling of community
social vulnerability. Tracked over time and at a granular
enough scale, this data would describe a community's
resiliency, health and wellbeing and would be useful to
decision makers weighing investments, policies and adaptation
strategies to deploy. Limited examples that could be built upon
include NOAA's Digital Coast social vulnerability index, and
New York Sea Grant's Coastal Resilience Index, which engaged
social science to develop a post-flood recovery visioning
initiative to identify gaps and barriers to adaptation, which
included a flood inundation mapping package and online mapping
tool.
Cross-jurisdictional coordination: Adaptation will require much
greater communication and collaboration across jurisdictions and scales
than is currently done. Funds should be made available through such
things as the Department of Commerce's Economic Development
Administration, in support of these cross-jurisdictional communication
and collaboration mechanisms. One critical way this could be
institutionalized is to expand funding for Sustained Assessment
specialists.
A. Cross-jurisdictional communication. Host regular regional
facilitated dialogues with participants across scales (e.g.,
neighborhood, municipal, regional, state, federal) and within
scales (e.g., regional convening of state and Federal program
staff to share challenges, needs, opportunities) to understand
the real and perceived barriers to climate adaptation with an
emphasis on meeting targets for disadvantaged communities.
NERRS would be logical hosts for conversations of this nature.
B. Cross-jurisdictional partnerships. Supporting new and innovative
partnerships such as partnerships between state and local
programs working to better understand human dimensions of
climate change and support communities with adaptation planning
efforts, with local groups that serve the needs of the most
vulnerable in the community. (E.g. Partnerships with Service
Centers, Faith Communities, Business Community, Realtors and
Chambers of Commerce)
Getting out of harm's way: getting out of harms' way involves,
avoiding getting into it and--once in it--helping people relocate out
of it. This speaks to various Federal efforts, policies and programs:
A. Review Federal insurance programs. This would ensure they reflect
the actual risk; moving toward the place where insurance rates
and premiums reflect current and future risks.
B. Require forward-looking climate science in infrastructure
planning. Require that all Federal infrastructure funds
consider scenarios of future risk over 30-, 50- and 100-year
time frames and that infrastructure is planned and built to be
adaptive, given uncertainties about the exact extent of future
climate change; the process used by Federal programs and
agencies should be consistent with procedures practiced at the
General Services Administration.
C. Discontinue investment and development in at-risk location.
Review any other Federal investment and incentive programs that
encourage people to move into high-risk areas and phase out
those programs or ensure that they redirect development and
people's movement toward safer locations.
D. Improve buyout programs. Invest heavily in the restructuring of
Federal buyout programs, support the development and growth of
state buyout programs and improve the overall buyout process--
which is not meeting national needs at many levels. Adjust
administration and create flexible funding structures to
dramatically decrease wait times for real estate transfers,
support high quality temporary housing in safe locations and
create robust support services that make this transition rapid
and comfortable. Offer meaningful financial support and other
assistance to renters interested in relocating. Offer financial
and other incentives to communities safe from flooding to
encourage reception of homeowners in transition. Provide
necessary outreach and engagement with homeowners in transition
to ensure they do not repurchase a new property in an area of
high flood risk.
Continue and expand place-based research and facilitate lesson
sharing nationally
Continue to support investments in federally funded place-
based, solutions-oriented, stakeholder-engaged programs such as
the NOAA funded National Estuarine Research Reserves, the NERRS
Science Collaborative competitive grant program, the National
Sea Grant College Program and Coastal Zone Management Program,
EPA funded National Estuaries Program, and USDA funded
Cooperative Extension. One NOAA funded program attached to the
NERRS, the Science Collaborative, specifically funds research
that is aimed at addressing community needs and use a
collaborative model that increasingly incorporates social
science approaches in engaging different audiences. Using this
collaborative research approach has been shown to be very
successful and benefits communities. It is important, however,
to extract generalizable lessons to foster accelerated learning
and spread effective solutions to other locations. The
quadrennial National Climate Assessments and the sustained
assessment process should be used to extract generalizable
lessons so that adaptation practice and solutions are more
readily implemented elsewhere.
Perspectives: National Estuarine Research Reserves
The reserves support research on partnering with faith
communities to address climate change. Waquoit Bay Reserve in
Massachusetts supported an effort called `NERRS as common
grounds: towards a holistic science approach to research,
education, and outreach with religious communities to enhance
climate and environmental literacy' the findings of which are
attached in the appendix.
Workforce development: In recognition of the needs to be further
training of the next generation of adaptation professionals--in
whatever fields they find themselves--it is essential to invest in
education, trainings and accelerated professional development. A number
of tracks must be pursued:
A. Develop professional standards. Given that adaptation is a high-
risk endeavor with millions of people's lives and well-being
and trillions of dollars at risk in coastal areas alone,
adaptation, preparedness, and resilience-building should be
conducted in appropriate ethical, technically skilled and
economically sound manner, informed by the best climate and
social science. Currently there are no professional standards,
but various professional development efforts underway. The
Federal government should consider initiating a process whereby
relevant standard-setting institutions are brought together to
consider ongoing professional development and set minimum
standards in professional skills and conduct.
B. Build the pipeline. While many think of adaptation as a technical
matter, the range of skills for effective adaptation is much
broader. Training in the relevant social and applied sciences
and topics (e.g., planning and policy-making processes,
communication, vulnerability assessments, economic assessments,
finance, law, physical and mental health) is required across
the board. There is also a need to increase awareness of social
science fields as important career options required to meet the
climate change crisis. Partnerships with colleges and
universities as well as professional societies are essential,
but efforts must be made to reach deeper into the K-16 school
system to help educate young people about the role of social
science in helping to address societal issues like climate
change that will be with us for a long time. This is a very
long term view but recognizes the need for further training of
career professionals working on climate change issues. This
topic is further expanded in `Rising to the Challenge,
Together' attached in the appendix.
______
Appendices and Links to Resources
Climate Resilience
Adapt Now: A global Call for Leadership on Climate
Resilience. Global Commission on Adaptation
Rising to the Challenge, Together: A Review and Critical
Assessment of the State of the U.S. Climate Adaptation Field.
Moser et al., Kresge Foundation.
Change Adaptation: An Action Toolkit. National Association
of Climate Resilience Planners.
Institutionalizing Resilience in U.S. Universities:
Prospects, Opportunities, and Models. Foster et al.
Mapping Now: A Blueprint for Thriving in the Face of Climate
Disasters. Apen.
Pathways to Resilience: Transforming Cities in a Changing
Climate: Kresge Foundation, Movement Strategy Center, Movement
Generation, The Praxis Project, Reimagine!, RP&E
Community-driven Climate Resilience Planning: A Framework.
National Association of Climate Resilience Planners.
Our Communities, Our Power: Advancing Resistance and
Resilience in Climate
Bounce Forward: Urban Resilience in the Era of Climate
Change. Kresge Foundation & Island Press.
Social Equity & Justice
Watershed Stewardship in Action: Deaf Students on the
Estuary. NERRS Science Collaborative.
Working Towards Coastal Resilience for Underserved/Hard to
Reach Community Members on Cape Cod. Waquoit Bay National
Estuarine Research Reserve.
An Equitable Water Future: A National Briefing Paper. US Water
Alliance.
A Guide to Equitable, Community-Driven, Climate Preparedness
Planning. Urban Sustainability Directors Network.
Climate Change Through an Intersectional Lens: Gendered
Vulnerability and Resilience in Indigenous Communities in the
United States. Vinyeta et al., USDA
Unleashing the Power of the People: Lessons on Public
Engagement for Environmental and Climate Justice. National
Association of Climate Resilience Planners.
Equity in Building Resilience in Adaptation Planning.
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
In the Eye of the Storm: A People's Guide to Transforming
Crisis & Advancing Equity in the Disaster Continuum. National
Association of Climate Resilience Planners.
Wetlands & Climate Resilience
NERRS Blue Carbon: Putting Wetland Restoration &
Conservation in Reach. NERRS
Rising to the Challenge: Will Tidal Marshes Survive Rising
Seas? Wasson, Raposa, et al., NERRS
National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs) as common
grounds: towards a holistic science approach to research,
education, and outreach with religious communities to enhance
climate and environmental literacy at Waquoit Bay, Cape Cod,
Massachusetts, USA. Greber et al.
Web Resources for Senator Blumenthal's Office
Connecticut institute for Resilience & Climate Adaptation. An
excellent resource for a range climate-related science, policy, and
initiatives, including:
Green Infrastructure:
MetroCOG--Designing Resilience: Living Shorelines for
Bridgeport
Milford--Developing and Implementing a Restoration and
Management Plan to Combat Threats and Challenges to Coastal
Dune Resiliency in Urban Landscapes
Critical Infrastructure:
Municipal Resilience Planning Assistance for Sea Level
Rise, Coastal Flooding, Wastewater Treatment
Infrastructure, & Policy
Inland Flooding:
RiverCOG Lower Connecticut River Valley Regional
Council of Governments--Regional Long Term Recovery-Land
Use Resiliency Plan
Coastal Flooding:
Jarvis Creek Sea Level & Flooding Variability
Policy/Planning:
Connecticut Physical Climate Science Assessment Report
Developing Location-Based Communication and Public
Engagement Strategies to Build Resilient Coastal
Communities
Sea-Level Rise:
Advancing High Resolution Coastal Forecasting and
Living Shorelines Approaches in the Northeast
Connecticut Sea Grant Resilient Communities
Beaches & Dunes:
Hazard Guide for Property Owners
Resilient Communities
Climate Adaptation Academy
Sea Level Rise Effects on Roads & Marshes: University of
Connecticut Center for Land use Education & Research
CT Dept of Energy & Environmental Protection (DEEP):
Public Act 12-101, An Act Concerning the Coastal Management
Act and Shoreline Flood and Erosion Control Structures
Sea Level Rise Scenarios
CT Climate Change
Office of the Governor:
Executive Order on Climate Change Mitigation
[all]