FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

"Plowing the Bottom"...to help water quality

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6454
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: "Plowing the Bottom"...to help water quality
    Posted: 19 July 2021 at 2:43pm

How many times at a MFC meeting, AC meeting or in written pubic comment has the public heard or read that shrimp trawlers in the Pamlico Sound are doing a "public service" by "plowing the bottom" to make it "more fertile, just like a farmer plows his fields"?

Too many!

https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...heguardian.com

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...box=1616007592

Bottom trawling releases as much carbon as air travel, landmark study finds

Dragging heavy nets across seabed disturbs marine sediments, world’s largest carbon sink, scientists report


Fishing boats that trawl the ocean floor release as much carbon dioxide as the entire aviation industry, according to a groundbreaking study.

Bottom trawling, a widespread practice in which heavy nets are dragged along the seabed, pumps out 1 gigaton of carbon every year, says the study written by 26 marine biologists, climate experts and economists and published in Nature on Wednesday.

The carbon is released from the seabed sediment into the water, and can increase ocean acidification, as well as adversely affecting productivity and biodiversity, the study said. Marine sediments are the largest pool of carbon storage in the world.


The report – Protecting the global ocean for biodiversity, food and climate – is the first study to show the climate impacts of trawling globally. It also provides a blueprint outlining which areas of the ocean should be protected to safeguard marine life, boost seafood production and reduce climate emissions.

Only 7% of the ocean is under some kind of protection. The scientists argue that, by identifying strategic areas for stewardship – for example, regions with large-scale industrial fishing and major economic exclusion zones or marine territories – nations could reap “significant benefits” for climate, food and biodiversity. Protecting “strategic” ocean areas could produce 8m tonnes of seafood, they say.

“Ocean life has been declining worldwide because of overfishing, habitat destruction and climate change,” said Dr Enric Sala, explorer-in-residence at the National Geographic Society and lead author of the paper. “In this study, we’ve pioneered a new way to identify the places that – if strongly protected – will boost food production and safeguard marine life, all while reducing carbon emissions.

“It’s clear that humanity and the economy will benefit from a healthier ocean. And we can realise those benefits quickly if countries work together to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030.”

The scientists identified marine areas where species and ecosystems face the greatest threats from human activities. They developed an algorithm to identify regions where safeguarding would deliver the greatest benefits across three goals: biodiversity protection, seafood production and climate mitigation. They then mapped these to create a practical “blueprint” that governments can use, depending on their priorities.

The top 10 countries with the most carbon emissions from bottom trawling, and therefore the most to gain, were China, Russia, Italy, UK, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Croatia and Spain.

The analysis shows that the world must protect a minimum of 30% of the ocean in order to provide multiple benefits. The scientists say their results lend credence to the ambition of protecting at least 30% of the ocean by 2030, which is part of the target adopted by a coalition of 50 countries this year to slow the destruction of the natural world.

clink the links above to finish reading...


https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/bluecarbon.html

Something that has a significant effect on our daily lives and is stored within the largest system of water on our planet must be a household name, right? Not necessarily. Have you ever heard of blue carbon? Chances are the answer is no, but perhaps you know more than you realize.

Blue carbon is simply the term for carbon captured by the world's ocean and coastal ecosystems. You have probably heard that human activities emit (or give off) something called carbon dioxide, which contains atmospheric carbon. You have also heard that these gases are changing the world's climate, and not in a good way. What you may not have heard is that our ocean and coasts provide a natural way of reducing the impact of greenhouse gases on our atmosphere, through sequestration (or taking in) of this carbon.

Sea grasses, mangroves, and salt marshes along our coast "capture and hold" carbon, acting as something called a carbon sink. These coastal systems, though much smaller in size than the planet's forests, sequester this carbon at a much faster rate, and can continue to do so for millions of years. Most of the carbon taken up by these ecosystems is stored below ground where we can't see it, but it is still there. The carbon found in coastal soil is often thousands of years old!

The bigger picture of blue carbon is one of coastal habitat conservation. When these systems are damaged, an enormous amount of carbon is emitted back into the atmosphere, where it can then contribute to climate change. So protecting and restoring coastal habitats is a good way to reduce climate change. When we protect the carbon in coastal systems, we protect healthy coastal environments that provide many other benefits to people, such as recreational opportunities, storm protection, and nursery habitat for commercial and recreational fisheries.

One method of slowing climate change impacts is to incorporate coastal wetlands into the carbon market through the buying and selling of carbon offsets. This approach creates a financial incentive for restoration and conservation projects by helping to alleviate federal and state carbon taxes aimed at discouraging the use of fossil fuels. When fewer greenhouse gases are emitted, less pollution is created. When there is less pollution to tax, the process benefits not only the environment but also the financial well-being of the community doing the restoration.


Just talked with a friend today who has gone to work for this business...


ABOUT — Summit Carbon Solutions


Summit Carbon Solutions seeks to lower greenhouse gas emissions by connecting industrial facilities via strategic infrastructure to safely and permanently store carbon dioxide.

THE CHALLENGE

The world must reach net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050 in order to achieve the 1.5degree Celsius global average temperature increase limit.

A dramatic increase in carbon capture and storage “CCS” is crucial to achieving net-zero CO2 emissions.

“Currently, it is impossible to chart a 1.5-degree pathway that does not remove CO2 to offset ongoing emissions. The math simply does not work.”

McKinsey & Company, April 2020

PROJECTED EMISSIONS SCENARIOS

3.7 billion tons of CCS capacity will be needed by 2050, over 100x the capacity reported in 2019.

Source: McKinsey Quarterly, April 2020, “Climate math: What a 1.5 degree pathway would take”

OUR STRATEGY

Summit Carbon Solutions connects industrial facilities via strategic infrastructure to safely and permanently store carbon dioxide.
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6454
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 July 2021 at 2:46pm

Hey...NCCFRG, you need to read this.

Carbon made me think of this old thread.....



Here's a little research.  You biology and chemistry majors jump in.

  
12,000,000 pounds of bycatch x (1-MC=.2) = 2,400,000

2,400,000 X .09 (%N dry weight) = 216,000 lbs of nitrogen

Treating the shrimp boat like other nitrogen sources...


* Note: The $490 is a long term price average not just for one year

As I understand it, the shrimp industry would have to pay over a $100 million to permanently buy credits for the amount of nitrogen loading they are contributing to the lower Neuse River.

The above is based on a moisture content of 80% achieved by drying at 60 degrees C until weight remains stable - there may be a better moisture content reference for 60 degree C drying

so 20 % of wet weight = dry weight


Table 3 Elemental (carbon and nitrogen) compositions of micronekton and plankton reported in the literature. Water content is expressed as percent of wet weight. C and N compositions are expressed as percent of dry weight. nd: no data C:N was cal culated according to the formula C:N = (C/N) × (14/12).

http://water.rutgers.edu/Projects/trading/FurtherDetails.pdf
 




Edited by Rick - 19 July 2021 at 2:54pm
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2558
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 July 2021 at 8:56pm
All the evidence has said or identified the same problem for many years. MFC will not change anything and DMF is in bed with perps. That leaves gov/legs which we know won’t move. Only hope is a fair judge. Bizzell needs to man up and bring some of this to a vote. This and flounder have been studied to death with solutions that are obvious.
Back to Top
bakesta View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 24 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2706
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bakesta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 July 2021 at 2:20pm
So those trawlers aren't actually helping our water quality???

Go figure.


It's time for the DMF to get absorbed by WRC so that real management can happen - or at least has a chance to happen.   Otherwise they'll just continue to ignore their own data and allow the collapses to get worse.    Weakfish - flounder - stripers - spot -croaker - oysters - herring - etc -- all at a fraction of what they should be if real management happens.


"Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest." --- Mark Twain
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.11
Copyright ©2001-2012 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.219 seconds.