OCEANS IN PERIL Climate Change Impacts on the New England Marine Environment

CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION Ivanna Bandura Draft, August 2004

OCEANS IN PERIL: Climate Change Impacts on the New England Marine Environment Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 The Gulf of Maine: No Place Quite Like It................................................................................ 3 So What is Climate Change?...................................................................................................... 3 Impacts of Climate Change on New England’s Marine Heritage .............................................. 5 Warmer Seawaters.................................................................................................................. 5 Ocean Productivity ............................................................................................................. 6 Oxygen in Water................................................................................................................. 6 Wind Patterns and Ocean Currents..................................................................................... 6 Biological Processes........................................................................................................... 7 Abundance and Distribution of Species ............................................................................. 8 Interaction Between Species............................................................................................... 9 Rising Sea Level................................................................................................................... 10 Changes in Precipitation....................................................................................................... 10 Global Ocean Circulation: A Look at the Bigger Picture..................................................... 12 Climate Variability: “El Niño of the Atlantic”..................................................................... 13 The Need to Act Now............................................................................................................... 14 Policy Options to Address Climate Change ............................................................................. 16 Promoting Energy Efficiency ............................................................................................... 16 Advancing Cleaner Power Generation ................................................................................. 17 Renewable Energy is a Significant Part of the Solution................................................... 18 Curbing Vehicle Impacts and Controlling Sprawl ............................................................... 20 Solutions to Restore the Health of New England’s Marine Environment................................ 21 Sustainable Fisheries ............................................................................................................ 21 Marine Protected Areas ........................................................................................................ 23 Habitat Protection................................................................................................................. 24 Land-Sea Connections.......................................................................................................... 25 Endnotes ................................................................................................................................... 28

1

INTRODUCTION The marine environment in New England, extending from the Gulf of Maine to the surrounding waters south of Cape Cod and Rhode Island, is one of the world’s richest and most biologically productive marine ecosystems. Its legendary fisheries, unique whalewatching sites, endless opportunities for sailing and cruising and its scenic coastline ranging from white sands to ragged cliffs, make this ecosystem the region’s largest and most valuable public resource. As such, it has supported New England’s coastal economies for centuries. But today, New England’s oceans are in peril. Decades of overfishing, intense coastal development, pollution, introduction of non-native species and sand and gravel mining have seriously damaged the ecosystem. Moreover, the demands on New England waters are growing and changing – from fishing, boating and commercial shipping to hosting fiber optic cables, natural gas pipelines, wind turbines and fish farms. And if stresses weren’t enough, the climate is changing. Just as a living organism’s defense systems are weakened by stress - we can expect this highly strained ecosystem to be more vulnerable and less capable of adapting to the impacts of a changing climate. It is also human activities that place the additional burden of climate change upon New England’s marine heritage. Through the combustion of oil, coal, and other fossil fuels to power our factories, cars, trucks and homes, we release carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, which cause our climate to change. With less than five percent of the world’s population, the United States is responsible for almost a quarter of the total global emissions of carbon dioxide, ranking first on the list of carbon dioxide polluting nations. 1 If the New England states comprised a country, it would rank 27th on this list – ahead of more than 175 countries. 2 A changing climate is expected to impact New England’s marine environment, through warmer water temperatures, sea level rise and changes to ocean circulation. Moreover, an increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has direct chemical and biological impacts on oceans, apart from global warming. Oceans play a key role in absorbing and storing much of the carbon dioxide emitted by humans. While this has prevented carbon dioxide concentrations from being approximately 15% higher than their current levels 3 , scientists are concerned over the price of this service. As the oceans absorb an unprecedented amount of carbon dioxide, their acidity increases possibly threatening many marine species and disrupting food chains in ways that are not yet understood or predictable. 4 Our activities are meddling with two highly complex systems: climate and oceans. All the processes and interconnections may not yet be fully understood, making it difficult to predict what the precise effects of all our actions will be. However, we can expect that the more we interfere with their natural processes, the greater the chances of disrupting the balance and forcing these systems into new states. In the past, seemingly small perturbations have led to rapid and abrupt climate changes – just like a flip of a switch. Scientists believe that an excessive increase in greenhouse gases could yet trigger another abrupt change. With possible far-reaching implications for humans and invaluable

1

ecosystems, it is best not to take a chance. Uncertainty may actually a stronger reason to act sooner than later. While climate change is a global issue, we must act regionally to save one of New England’s most valuable asset – especially with the federal level foot-dragging on making the necessary commitments. Fortunately, the New England States have already taken an important step to address climate change by creating a regional model for policy action. In 2001, the Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers (NEG/ECP) agreed upon a Climate Action Plan, recognizing that “anthropogenic GHG emissions must be reduced to levels that no longer pose a dangerous threat to the climate”. 5 The plan commits the region to reducing greenhouse gas emissions: to 1990 levels by the year 2010, at least 10% below 1990 levels by the year 2020 and ultimately 75% to 85% below 2001 levels. These are the levels the scientific community believes are necessary to avoid any harmful impact on the climate. Significant measures in the right direction have already been adopted by the New England states. Massachusetts enacted the “Filthy Five” regulations to clean New England’s dirtiest coal-fired power plants, and like Connecticut, released a state “Climate Protection Plan” in 2004. Rhode Island also finalized a non-binding plan in 2002. Several states have adopted the Renewable Portfolio Standards, which ensure a minimum amount of renewable energy is included among the types of electricity sources, and all the states have become members of the Northeastern states initiative to form a cap-and -trade system for greenhouse gas emissions. Nevertheless, these actions are not enough. An assessment conducted by a coalition of organizations 6 in June 2004, graded the region’s progress in relation to the 2001 Climate Action Plan and the scores are not very encouraging: Massachusetts and Connecticut obtained a B minus - the highest overall score awarded in New England and Eastern Canada. Maine received a C, Rhode Island a C minus, while Vermont and New Hampshire fell short with a D plus. There is a clear need for additional leadership and strengthened action throughout New England, to address the threat of climate change. More aggressive policies and regulations are needed to promote cleaner power generation, renewable energy and electricity efficiency and achieve the goals and commitments set forth by our leaders. Considering one of New England’s most valued resources is in peril, an A plus is the only acceptable score for the region. In addition, policies and practices are needed to restore the health of New England’s oceans, currently undermined by our multiple demands. Even if we take the necessary actions to address climate change today, because of the inertia in the climate system it will be long before the climate stabilizes. While it does, a healthier marine environment will be in better shape to respond and adapt to the expected changes.

2

THE GULF OF MAINE: NO PLACE QUITE LIKE IT The Gulf of Maine is a semi-enclosed shallow sea in the northwest Atlantic, whose location, topography and circulation patterns make it a unique and dynamic environment. Ranging from bays and estuaries, deep-sea ledges to outer banks, the Gulf provides a variety of habitats for a diverse and abundant marine life. Its coastal habitats, including estuarine channels, mud and sand flats, tidal marshes, eelgrass beds and shellfish reefs act as nursery and reproduction areas for many fish and shellfish. Thirty two percent of the fisheries from Cape Cod to the north depend on estuaries at some point of their life. 7 Coastal habitats also provide a nesting and feeding habitat for many birds and other wildlife. Up to two million migrating shorebirds stopover each year to feed on the immense tidal flats surrounding the Bay of Fundy, including 50% of the world's semipalmated sandpipers. Great blue herons, osprey and bald eagles nest and hunt for food in the bays and marshes of the Gulf of Maine. 8 Salt marshes are one of the most important coastal habitats in the Gulf. They filter sediments and chemicals reducing the amount of pollution that washes into bays and ocean, they serve as natural flood and storm barriers and act as sediment traps. Furthermore, the productivity per acre is considered among the highest in any place on earth. Unfortunately today, few complete marsh systems in New England remain intact. 9 Swimming into deeper habitats of the Gulf, we find one of the world’s most important and richest fishing resources. The different banks from Newfoundland, Canada to southern New England represent prime breeding and feeding grounds for fish and shellfish, in particular cod, haddock, herring, flounder, lobster, scallops, and clam. New England waters are also a primary feeding habitat for the North Atlantic right whale, considered the most endangered large whale in the eastern US coast. Georges Bank in particular, is a highly productive area due to its ideal characteristics: shallow waters that allow enough sunlight to penetrate and the mixing of two currents - a cold, fresher and nutrient-rich current from the North and a warm, saltier current from the Southeast. Its high productivity makes it home to more than 100 species of fish, as well as many species of marine birds, dolphins, porpoises and whales. According to legends, the first European sailors found cod so abundant in the region that they could be scooped out of the water in baskets. 10 Today, overfishing has brought cod among many other species, to the verge of commercial extinction. If overfishing continues, especially with the use of disruptive fishing methods, coupled with pollution, habitat destruction and a looming scenario of climate change, the existence of many of New England’s signature marine species could someday become a legend too.

SO WHAT IS CLIMATE CHANGE? “Climate change” has to be distinguished from “climate, and “climate” from “weather”. Weather is what is occurring in the atmosphere in terms of temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation and cloud cover at some specific location and at some specific time. Thus,

3

the weather is constantly changing – especially in New England. Who isn’t familiar with Mark Twain’s famous quip “If you don’t like the weather in New England, just wait a few minutes”? Climate refers to the average conditions over a longer period of time and/or over larger areas. Climate also varies over time and from place to place, creating the different climatic regions around the world. But, when a significant variation in the average state of the climate (e.g., increasing average temperatures, decreasing yearly average precipitation) persists for an extended period – usually decades or longer – this is referred to as climate change. Climate influences many important aspects of life on earth as it influences all other environmental conditions and processes that take place. Climate defines the diversity in New England’s plants and animals, the productivity of farmlands, forests, and fisheries as well as the availability of our water supplies. Thus, as the climate changes, so will many aspects of life in New England. Although changes in climate can occur as a result of natural variability within the climate system and due to natural processes (e.g., volcanic eruptions, solar outputs), there is stronger evidence that climate change is essentially a pollution problem. The burning of fossil fuels – to produce electricity, heat our homes or drive our cars releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, altering the natural composition of the atmosphere. While carbon dioxide is the culprit of climate change, other man-made gases that also contribute to climate change include methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. These gases trap heat much like the glass of a greenhouse – and reflect it back to Earth, causing the atmosphere to warm. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases are crucial for life on earth – without them the average surface temperature would be about minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit. But their continuous buildup due to human influence is increasing the amount of heat trapped in the atmosphere, leading to global average temperatures that are abnormally warm. Over the past century, the global temperature has increased by over one degree Fahrenheit. The rate and duration of this warming is larger than any other time during the last 1,000 years. Furthermore, evidence suggests the temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere over the past decade have been warmer than in any of the past six to ten centuries. 11 Scientists have concluded that this warming is unlikely to have been caused by natural variability within the climate system alone. Furthermore, the natural processes that influence climate are estimated to have had a cooling effect during the second half of the 20th century and therefore are also unlikely to explain the warming over the last 50 years. The evidence suggests a discernable human influence on global climate. According to scientific consensus, most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations, attributable to human activities. 12 Just like a rise in fever when you are sick, even a slight rise in the earth’s temperature is a cause for concern, as it brings other symptoms along with it. Warmer temperatures

4

increase the evaporation of water from oceans and lakes, and consequently lead to changes in precipitation. During the past century, precipitation has increased by 5% to 10% over most mid- and high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. The warming also extends to oceans: since the 1950s the top layers have warmed by approximately half a degree Fahrenheit. 13 Warmer temperatures also cause sea levels to rise, because glaciers and ice caps melt and seawater expands as it warms, occupying more space. During the last century global sea level rose 4 to 8 inches. Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have risen by over thirty percent since the onset of the Industrial Revolution in the 1750s. The rate of increase is unprecedented during at least the past 20 thousand years.14 The present carbon dioxide concentration has never been higher during the past 420,000 years and likely not during the past 20 million years. The scientific community has concluded that the burning of fossil fuels is the dominant influence on the trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations during the 21st century. 15 Assuming the continuation of current trends under “business as usual” scenarios, carbon dioxide concentrations will continue to rise, and levels by 2100, are projected to double or triple the pre-industrialization concentration. In 1895, the Swedish scientist Svente Arrhenius first suggested that burning fossil fuels could lead to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and increase global temperatures. Since then the scientific understanding of global warming has evolved tremendously. 16 Currently, the relevant question is not whether the increase in greenhouse gases is contributing to climate change, but rather what the exact changes will be, how fast they will occur, and the effects these changes will cause on natural and human systems, especially at the regional and local level.

IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON NEW ENGLAND’S MARINE HERITAGE Numerous studies and historical records concur that marine ecosystems respond to changes in ocean climate. Consequently, as climate change brings along warming seawaters, rising sea level, changes in precipitation patterns (affecting freshwater runoff), and probable changes in ocean circulation, we can expect the New England marine ecosystem will respond to these changes. Warmer Seawaters Over the course of this century, water surface temperatures are projected to increase between 3.6°F and 5.4°F in winter and 5.4°F to 7.2°F in summer for the mid-Atlantic region, from Cape Hatterras to Cape Cod. 17 While this region as well as the Gulf of Maine experience a wide range of temperatures between the different seasons, a persistent increase in the average temperatures, even if small, will bring about big changes. This can be expected as temperature has a great influence over other factors. Changes in temperature influence the processes controlling the ocean’s productivity, affect the water’s capacity to contain oxygen, shape wind patterns and ocean currents, influence biological processes, alter the abundance and distribution of species, affect the interaction between species and play a role in sea level rise. 18

5

Ocean Productivity Microscopic organisms – known as phytoplankton – are the basis of the marine food chain. Acting as a source of nourishment for practically every animal in the ocean, they define the oceans’ primary productivity. As such, any considerable change in their population, affects total productivity in the ecosystem (i.e., all the life in oceans) from zooplankton – a notch up in the feeding chain – to larger invertebrates, fishes, seabirds, mammals and ultimately cascading up to humans. Moreover, the phytoplankton is an important source of oxygen, and a consumer of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Therefore, changes in phytoplankton populations will also alter the amount of carbon dioxide that is absorbed by oceans, as well as the amount of oxygen released to the atmosphere. When conditions are right phytoplankton proliferate, or “bloom”. Some blooms nonetheless may actually be harmful, as some phytoplankton species can emit toxins that paralyze or even kill shellfish, such as clams and oysters. In the Gulf of Maine, primary productivity depends on the streams of cool nutrient-rich waters rising to the surface of the water, and is therefore influenced by temperature and the structure of the water column. Differences in density between surface and deeper waters - caused by difference in temperatures and salinity - result in the formation of layers. When this process of layer formation - known as “stratification”- becomes too intense, productivity diminishes. The intense layering slows the exchange of nutrients, alters the amount of light entering the water, causes an increase in harmful algae and reduces the amount of oxygen in the water column. Primary productivity is reduced as surface waters become depleted of nutrients and oxygen. 19 This lower production will have a bottom-up effect on the food chain, ultimately altering the growth rates and mortality of fish as well as population abundance and migration patterns of many species. Additionally, stratification affects the food chain by preventing the transfer of nutrients to greater depths, negatively affecting the productivity in ocean floors. 20 This would affect bottom-dwelling species, such as mussels, quahogs and scallops and groundfish such as cod, haddock, hake, and flounder. When a water column after winter is warmer than usual, each additional unit of heat during spring leads to increased seasonal stratification. 21 Thus, warmer winter temperatures as projected by the end of the century, coupled with increases in freshwater runoff (from increased precipitation), are expected to increase seasonal stratification. The probable result: a decline in ocean productivity, with important consequences for the marine ecosystem. Oxygen in Water As waters warm, their capacity to hold oxygen decreases. Since oxygen is vital for the health and survival of most living organisms, shortages can cause stress and even death if levels become too low. Oxygen deficits are especially problematic in shallow waters and estuaries and affect mostly young fish and immobile species, such as clams. Wind Patterns and Ocean Currents Winds, created by the uneven heating of the earth, drive the major ocean surface currents. Currents influence productivity in estuarine areas, by transporting nutrients within

6

estuaries and along the coast. Currents are important for the transport of species such as plankton, which cannot swim. Most fish species also depend on them as they produce eggs and larvae that drift according to ocean circulation. For example, currents transport the larvae of menhaden (a fish species) into bays and estuaries, where they find a suitable environment to grow. Young adults later move back to the ocean and become prey for pollock, bluefish, striped bass, bluefin tuna, swordfish, sharks and porpoises. Birds such as herons, egrets, ospreys, and eagles also feed on menhaden. In George’s Bank, a clockwise flow allows the circulation of cod and haddock eggs and larvae, so they can be within the Bank at the right place at the right time of their life cycle. Lobsters throughout the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank also depend on currents for the transport of larvae and eggs. Furthermore, currents are thought to strengthen heavily exploited populations inshore, by bringing larvae supplies from offshore populations. 22 Changes in global temperatures are expected to affect wind patterns and currents. If circulation patterns fail to provide the adequate transportation of both nutrients and larvae, many species could decline in abundance and suffer changes in distribution. This will consequently affect the populations of larger fish and other wildlife that depend on them as their source of food, as well as the many fishermen and families that depend on them as their source of living. Biological Processes Fish species are at the mercy of water temperature. For most species, body temperature is nearly equivalent to that of the water. So, temperatures outside their suitable range will affect a species health and its biological processes related to growth, reproduction, mortality and behavior. Many species just cannot cope with warming waters. As winter water temperatures rose 5.4°F between 1960 and 1990 in Narragansett Bay, RI the population of winter flounder collapsed, recovering only during successive cold winters. “Against a background of warmer winters, the winter flounder’s future is not promising”. 23 Even as many species grow faster in warmer waters, this apparent benefit has a downside to it. For example, while in Labrador, Canada a 4-year old cod may weigh approximately 1.3 pounds, in the Celtic Sea (south of Ireland) where temperatures are warmer, it may reach almost 16 pounds. 24 Thus, warming waters could boost growth rates. But, with warmer waters, fish consume more energy and therefore need more oxygen. As the metabolic demand increases, food sources have to be sufficient to quench this demand and allow the fish to grow faster. Thus, the availability of food may limit the potential growth rate at higher temperatures. A study found that growth rates for cod and haddock larvae in Georges Bank were highest at approximately 45°F (the long-term mean water temperature in May on the southern region) but declined at higher temperatures. In contrast, in laboratory studies growth rates increased with higher temperatures, at least up to 57°F. These results suggest that in the wild, increased growth rates due to higher temperatures, are limited by food availability. The study further concluded that a 3.6 to 7.2°F warming as predicted by some climate models could therefore be challenging for both these signature species. 25

7

Moreover, warming waters actually conspire to make conditions worse for most aquatic organisms. As waters warm, fish consume more oxygen and yet waters hold less oxygen. These counterveiling effects lead to increased stress for most organisms. Warmer temperatures may also affect toxicity and pollutant stress, by modifying the chemical reactions that take place. So, as fish attempt to intake more oxygen, their increased gill movement could increase their uptake of pollutants. Additionally, in warmer waters many marine pathogens tend to thrive, while many species lose their natural resistance to disease becoming more vulnerable to infections. For example, a winter warming trend in the mid 1980’s, removed the cold-water barrier to pathogen growth and allowed the northward movement and spreading of a parasite. This parasite expanded oyster disease to previously unexposed oysters in Maine. 26 While warming could lead to increased growth rates and extended growing periods in high latitudes, where light and temperature are limiting factors, in the long run, various environmental changes coupled with current stresses on marine ecosystems will likely offset any of the positive short-term impacts caused by warming waters. Abundance and Distribution of Species Temperature affects physical conditions, such as salinity and currents, which in turn influence the abundance and location of many species. Past warming episodes provide a useful insight as to what may be expected under future warming scenarios. A study conducted between 1967 and 1990 in the western North Atlantic revealed that changes in water temperatures explained the latitudinal distribution for 12 species. Warm water migratory species (such as black sea bass, summer flounder, northern searobin, bluefish, scup and long-finned squid) as well as migratory cold-water species (Atlantic mackerel, Atlantic herring and short-finned squid) proved to be most sensitive to changes in water temperatures, exhibiting a lot of variability in their location. 27 The findings anticipate that if waters warm by 1.8°F in fall and winter many of these migratory species could shift between 29 to 57 miles farther north and to shallower areas, than their present winter and early spring locations. Considering an increase of 5.4°F in winter water temperatures is possible, a significant northward shift of mid-Atlantic species is very likely. While, organisms with greater mobility like fish, swimming crab and shrimp can migrate along the coast at a faster speed, relatively immobile species such as clams and oysters could find it harder to migrate. 28 Additionally, different species have different suitable temperature ranges, and will therefore respond differently to warming waters. The Gulf of Maine may experience an “invasion” of species form the Mid-Atlantic region, as certain species migrate north in search of cooler waters, such as butterfish and menhaden. 29 The year-round inhabitants of the Gulf, may find themselves at a gridlock: given the semi-enclosed characteristic of the Gulf, these species – especially the less mobile ones – may find it extremely hard to migrate further north, and could be “squeezed” out of their environment. This could lead to the loss of many species. This loss and/or northward shift also extends to sensitive coastal plant species – such as seagrasses – that support a high animal life and production.

8

Thus, warming waters will likely alter the distribution and abundance patterns of many species, triggering important impacts on food chains in the region. The impacts will be felt all the way up to humans as fishing locations of many important commercial species, change. 30 Interaction Between Species Changes in abundance, movement and location of certain species will likely alter the interactions between predators and preys. For example cod, a more sedentary predator could find itself at a crossroads as it preys on more migratory species as herring and mackerel. 31 As some species decline in abundance, some are lost and new ones migrate in, competition will also increase between native and exotic species for resources. 32 Commercially, if a dominant species is lost, new “replacement” species may take over its ecological place. However, these replacement species may or may not have commercial or social value, affecting the fishermen’s business. When the population of winter flounder in Narragansett Bay collapsed during periods of warmer waters, the species that winter flounder fed upon became available for other predators. The decrease in winter flounder is one possible explanation for the increase in large migratory species into the bay such as crabs, squid, lobster, butterfish and scup. 33 Furthermore, as temperature affects many biological processes, there may be mismatches between the reproduction timing of one species, with that of its food supply. 34 For instance, while the production of phytoplankton is principally controlled by day length and nutrient availability, the spawning of fish may be temperature-related. Changes in the composition of phytoplankton affect zooplankton, in turn affecting the growth and survival of cod larvae. Many other fish species in the North Atlantic also prey on plankton during their early stages. 35 As feeding in the early stages determines survival and consequent abundance, species depend on a synchronized production of their prey, to attain a strong and vigorous population. Food chains may also be altered if temperature changes in estuaries and coastal areas allow the survival of other non-native species that were unable to survive under previous conditions. 36 Many of these species are inadvertently introduced when carried in ships' hulls, on fishing gear or in ballast water – water carried in empty cargo ships to balance their weight and maintain stability as they return to their home ports. For instance the European green crab was introduced into the waters of Massachusetts in the mid- 1800's and spread both north and south during the 1900s. It has now become one of New England’s most dominant invertebrate predators: it feasts on shellfish including soft shell clams, quahogs, and young scallops, adding another stress to valuable fisheries. 37 Additionally, ballast water may also enhance the transportation of disease – especially with warmer temperatures. For example, a higher density of marine algae – likely to result from warming temperatures – favors the transportation of cholera in ballast water. As water is released in harbors and near shore areas, this is a potential mean for introducing new cholera strains. Clams, mussels and oysters can be carriers of cholera and through their raw consumption, transmit the disease to humans. 38

9

Rising Sea Level Warming waters melt ice caps and glaciers, and cause seawater to expand and therefore occupy more volume. Rising sea level increases beach erosion and coastal flooding, threatening unique coastal environments. The effect is even more pronounced when coupled with more intense storms, as a result of climate change. Sea level is already rising in the region, ranging from 3.5 inches per century in Boston, to approximately one foot per century in coastal marshes in southern Massachusetts. 39 Additionally, southern Massachusetts experiences high average erosion rates: approximately three feet per year along the outer shore of Cape Cod, above six feet per year along the south shore of Martha’s Vineyard and eight feet per year along the south shore of Nantucket Island. 40 Cape Cod loses approximately 33 acres of land each year – nearly 75% of that due to advancing seawater, and the remainder due to erosion. At the current rate of sea level rise, 65 acres of land in Massachusetts are covered under water and lost each year. 41 As coastal marshes and swamps are within a few feet of the sea, these highly productive ecosystems are most vulnerable to the effects of rising sea levels. In general, marshes are able to adjust to gradual rises in sea levels by accumulating peat and migrating inland. But if the rate of inundation is greater than the pace of sediment accumulation, the marsh cannot migrate and becomes submerged. Natural inland migration is further hampered by the construction of seawalls, roads, houses, parking lots and other human developments along the coast. By the end of 2100, sea level in the Atlantic coast is projected to rise between 8 and 24 inches. 42 Approximately 60% of the New England population lives in coastal communities, reaching almost 70% in both Massachusetts and Maine. 43 These coastal communities are expected to double by 2100. 44 As coastal development continues to intensify coupled with a sea level that is rising faster than at any time during the past 3,000 years 45 , the survival of many of our natural coastal habitats is in doubt. Globally, close to 80% of coastal ecosystems such as marshes and tidelands, could be lost by the year 2080 due to sea level rise. 46 The loss of these highly productive ecosystems will represent the loss of numerous species that depend on them, and the end of critically important ecological functions for both nature and humans. Additionally, rising sea levels can increase contamination in estuaries and coastal areas. Rising water tables can release contaminants in landfills and septic systems located close to the shores. Viruses, bacteria and other contaminants entering estuarine and inshore food chains, pose risks for marine species and especially for humans. 47 If beaches and bays happen to survive sea level rise, increased contamination could render them unsuitable for recreational activities such as swimming and fishing. Changes in Precipitation Warmer temperatures increase evaporation and precipitation, which in turn could increase the flow from rivers and streams and the runoff from streets, that eventually

10

wash into coastal areas. Between 1895 and 1999, New England has experienced a 3.7% (1.5 inches) increase in annual average precipitation, with a greater increase (16.8%) in coastal areas and a smaller increase (2.7%) in the interior. Models predict that global precipitation will continue to increase as greenhouse gases increase. In New England models predict a continuing increase in annual precipitation between 10% and 30% by the year 2100. 48 The increase in freshwater runoff is harder to predict as it depends not only on the characteristics of precipitation but also on other factors such as vegetation, soil moisture and land use patterns, also likely to change due to changes in climate. 49 Thus while it may increase in some areas, it could decrease in others. In estuaries, the mixture of freshwater and seawater – determining their salinity – plays and important role in the high productivity of these areas. Other factors include nutrients, temperature, oxygen levels, light penetration, wind and tides. If the flow of freshwater intensifies due to increases in rain or runoff, this would decrease salinity levels and reduce the estuarine habitat, especially if at the same time rising seawater is prevented from moving into the estuary due to man-made structures. This would negatively affect species in estuaries that do not tolerate low-salinity conditions and especially those living on the bottom (clams, snails and many fish eggs) which generally move too slowly. Organisms that move more easily will follow their preferred range of salinity around the estuary, but a reduced habitat could prove inadequate to meet their needs for food or reproduction. On the other hand, if a reduction in freshwater were to occur, coupled with an unobstructed and fast sea level rise, this would increase salinity in higher reaches of the estuaries, and affect species that do not tolerate high levels of salinity. 50 The bottom line is climate change will modify freshwater flows, changing salinity levels in estuaries. A change in salinity coupled with a general warming of waters, will likely affect the distribution of species in terms of timing and migrating pathways. 51 Freshwater from rivers and street runoff, carry nutrients into estuaries. Nutrients support a high plant production, which in turn supports the production of many species, including important commercially valuable invertebrates and fish. Nevertheless, when nutrient inputs are excessive, there is a higher biological production and increased algal blooms, which cause oxygen levels to go down. As plants and algae die and decompose, shallow waters are further depleted of oxygen. This increases the stresses on seagrasses, fish and communities living in the bottom. 52 Increased water temperatures coupled with an influx of nutrients into an estuary, can cause harmful algal blooms and marine-related diseases. The consumption of shellfish that have ingested harmful algae can cause poisoning in humans. 53 This is expected to result in economic harm through shellfish closures, reduction of estuarine primary productivity, deterioration of fish habitat (e.g., seagrass beds), and mortality of fish and shellfish. 54 Freshwater also carries sediments into estuaries. While sediments help marshes adjust to gradual sea level rise, they increase the turbidity of water and diminish the amount of light –essential for phytoplankton, algae and other important estuarine plants. Sedimentation is also an important cause of fish egg mortality. Street runoff can also

11

introduce pathogens and toxic pollutants into shellfish beds, increasing contamination of seafood. 55 Global Ocean Circulation: A Look at the Bigger Picture Water masses circulate both at depth and in the surface. While winds mainly drive the surface currents, deep waters circulate around the world influenced by changes in temperature and salinity, circulating heat around the world: cold, salty and dense seawater from the North Atlantic Ocean surface sinks to deep water and moves towards the Indian and Pacific Oceans. It gradually warms, becoming less dense and slowly returns to the Atlantic Ocean surface, where it cools again in the North Atlantic (i.e., convective circulation). As cold seawater sinks, it carries oxygen and nutrients to the deep-water organisms. If this movement – commonly known as the great ocean conveyor belt – is slowed down or even stopped, the supply of oxygen and nutrients to deep-water organisms could be diminished, affecting deep-sea animals and communities on the ocean floor. 56 Melting ice (due to warming temperatures) and increased precipitation in the northern ocean, have increased the layering of freshwater across the North Atlantic, decreasing its salinity. 57 An increase in temperature and/or a decrease in salinity at high latitude could result in a reduction in the deep-water formation, with important consequences for this convective circulation. 58 Models suggest that the continuous buildup of greenhouse gases, weaken the conveyor belt circulation and at an extreme scenario, may even induce a complete shutdown. 59 Past shutdowns appear to have played a key role in triggering large and abrupt global climate changes. Thus, in the worst case of a complete shutdown, the climate would flicker for several decades before locking in to a new state. 60 What this future state could hold is uncertain. According to Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, what we are doing to the climate by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, is like “poking an angry beast” with a stick. Moreover, scientists strongly believe that the continuous buildup of greenhouse gases – especially carbon dioxide – will lead to a greater acidity of the upper layers of the ocean, affecting marine ecosystems. Carbon dioxide is absorbed by oceans through phytoplankton and sea vegetation, and through its direct dissolution in water. As such, the oceans currently absorb approximately one third of the carbon dioxide emitted annually by human activities. During the previous century (1800-1994) the oceans have absorbed about half of the man-made carbon dioxide emitted. Scientists concur that this represents one third of the oceans’ total potential.61 While this uptake may be a buffer against global warming, the increased concentration of carbon dioxide makes the seawater more acidic. This threatens the survival of many marine species – especially organisms that develop shells, like some phytoplankton species, corals and shellfish. The decline or loss of these species will disrupt food chains and harm marine life in ways that are not yet understood or predictable. While using the oceans as storage for excess carbon dioxide may be a promising strategy to combat climate change, the price for this “sweeping the dirt under the carpet” approach may be too high in the long-term.

12

Climate Variability: “El Niño of the Atlantic” Changes in atmospheric and oceanic circulation are important elements of climate, as these changes cause climate variability on a regional scale. 62 The Gulf of Maine is affected by what is known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) or “El Niño of the Atlantic”, a dominant mode of winter climate variability in the North Atlantic region. Measured by the NAO index (which measures the strength of winds across middle latitudes of the North Atlantic sector), the variability can take either a positive (high) or negative (low) phase, tending to remain in either phase for long intervals. Since the 1980s, the NAO has been strongly positive, contributing to the general warming in the Northern Hemisphere over the last two decades. 63 Changes in the NAO, lead to changes in current circulation, air temperature and precipitation, which in turn lead to changes in water temperature and salinity, vertical mixing, circulation patterns and ice formation (in northern areas). The NAO determines whether relatively warm, saltier water (positive NAO) or cold, fresher water (negative NAO) enters the Gulf of Maine. These changes cause several effects on the marine ecosystems, including the large-scale distribution and population of fish and shellfish and the production of plankton. 64 The recovery of the endangered North Atlantic Right whales also appears to be related to the NAO. The whales feed in the Gulf of Maine, preying on a species of zooplankton, whose ecology is likely affected by the state of currents in the region. 65 While the abundance of plankton is relatively high during periods of a positive NAO (bringing warmer waters), it decreases during periods of negative NAOs (colder waters). The multiyear declines in right whale calving rates, tracked the major declines in plankton abundance, consistent with the shifts in the NAO index. The rates of reproduction in Right whales are a function of food availability and number of females available to reproduce. 66 By affecting prey abundance, the NAO indirectly influences reproductive success of these whales. In this case, a positive NAO is favorable to Right whale calving rates. 67 A number of investigators have suggested that the predominant positive NAO trend in the North Atlantic may be associated with increased greenhouse gases. 68 Therefore as greenhouse gases increase, the NAO may remain in the current positive trend. However, scientists also believe that the continuous rise in concentrations of greenhouse gases, could lead to an increase in climate variability. 69 Therefore an increase in greenhouse gases may actually lead to shifts in the NAO mode and consequently to swings in climate. If the NAO were to turn negative, and the transport of cold Labrador Slope water into the deeper levels of the Gulf of Maine increases, this could cause a cooling of bottom waters, while surface waters become warmer. This cooling would influence bottom-dwelling species and could also cause a general cooling in the mid-Atlantic region, as water masses from the Gulf of Maine flow southwards into this region. Scientists suggest that this cooling would be opposite in sign to the atmospherically driven warming, and in general would have opposite implications for fish stocks. 70 However, the net result in the mid-Atlantic region might be either a warming or a cooling of the bottom water temperatures, consequently with different implications for organisms.

13

A negative NAO could also have detrimental effects on whale calving rates and hence, negative effects on recovery of this endangered species. 71 While it is hard to predict what the results will be, there is little doubt that our contribution to the increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations is altering the climatic system. There is also little doubt that climate changes that could take place will most likely be unfavorable for the natural ecosystems we depend upon. In the case of our marine environment, climate change will cause the destruction of many valuable coastal habitats as a result of sea-level rise, and will probably cause many fish and other marine species to disappear from their historical areas. This will leave New England with reduced biodiversity and less stable marine ecosystems.

THE NEED TO ACT NOW The threats of climate change for coastal fisheries and the marine ecology of New England are serious, and it is important to take action immediately - especially as pollution generated in the past as well as the one generated today, will have long lasting effects for many centuries ahead. Greenhouse gases linger in the atmosphere long after the emission has occurred. About a quarter of the carbon dioxide concentration caused by emissions today, will still be present in the atmosphere several centuries from now. 72 So, even stabilizing emissions at current levels will not be enough to prevent a dangerous accumulation of greenhouse gases in the years to come. In order to stabilize the concentration of greenhouse gases and minimize the risks to our coastal economy, the actions have to aim at a 75% to 80% reduction below today’s emission levels.

Who is responsible for all these emissions? Climate change is not someone else’s fault and New England plays its part. Containing almost 5% of the total US population, New England is responsible for over 3% of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions. Due to its energy use and consumption, and its industrial and agricultural activities, New England generated 224 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 1 in the year 2000. 73 This represents a 12% increase from the year 1990. Approximately half of the emissions are generated by the burning of fossil fuels for electricity, cooking our food and heating homes, businesses and institutions. Powering all forms of vehicles – from cars to airplanes – generates almost 35% of the emissions, making the transportation sector the single largest source of primary energy consumption and of greenhouse gases. 74 The remainder of the emissions are generated by waste treatment, industrial processes and agricultural activities.

1

Measure reflecting the emission of all greenhouse gases. Gases other than carbon dioxide are expressed as the equivalent release of carbon dioxide based on their global warming potential relative to this gas. For example as methane has 21 times the strength of carbon dioxide, one ton of methane is treated as 21 tons of carbon dioxide.

14

To date emissions in Maine and Vermont have continued to increase in every sector and the rate has not slowed. Greenhouse gas pollution in New Hampshire from transportation soared during the last decade and there are no evident signs of adopting clean vehicle standards or investing in alternative transportation. If action is not taken, New England’s carbon dioxide emissions could increase by 30% between 2000 and 2020. 75 The growing emissions are related to our growing energy demands. Since 1970 through 1999, the region’s energy consumption increased by about 23% (approximately 1 % per year), primarily due to the region’s economic growth. The growth in consumption occurred even with government and private sector conservation and efficiency programs in place, as well as changes in the economy and technology advancements that led to increased energy efficiency. 76 As the region’s economy became more “digital” and service-oriented, the commercial sector has led the growth in energy demand since the 70s, followed closely by the transportation sector: New Englanders have bought more cars, increased the relative use of them as well as that of less efficient vehicles. While residential consumption increased at a slower rate, energy conservation and efficiency have started to decline given the increase in use of air conditioning and high-tech (high-consumption) appliances, as well as the use of larger and less energy efficient homes. While there has been a reduction in the use of oil in the region’s primary fuel mix, New England is still 40% more reliant on oil than the rest of the nation because of its use in residential heating and electricity generation. The generation of electricity consumes 33% of the primary fuels used in the region, with oil still representing an important percentage: in fact New England uses five times more oil than the rest of the nation for electricity generation. And while coal represents only 2% of the fuel mix, it is responsible for 16% of the region’s electricity supply. 77 Since the oil shocks of the 1970s, no new large oil-fired power plants have been built in New England and many have been converted to coal or natural gas. Thus, the existing facilities tend to be among the oldest and least efficient in the region. Nuclear generation has decreased significantly since the early 1990s due to the retirement of four units. The remaining nuclear facilities still contribute to almost 30% to the region’s electricity generation mix, but this proportion is expected to decrease significantly as additional units are decommissioned in the near future. New England’s coal-fired power plants are responsible for the bulk of greenhouse gases emitted by the electricity generation sector. In addition to carbon dioxide, power plants like Brayton Point and Salem Harbor Station emit other air pollutants such as nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, ozone and particulate matter, which contribute to smog and acid rain. Smog has negative health effects. Acid rain not only damages infrastructure but also poses harmful environmental effects, especially in shallow lakes and coastal estuaries. Natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants represent 18% of the electricity generation – up from only 1% in 1970. These are nearly twice as efficient as traditional boiler units and therefore less polluting than coal and oil-based power plants. Worth considering is the 15

fact that as much as 15% of New England’s annual natural gas supply comes from liquefied natural gas (LNG). The percentage is likely to increase as the demand for natural gas is expected to grow the fastest of any fuel in the region. 78 However, proposals for new LNG terminals in New England have become extremely controversial and have pitted communities against one another in wrestling with the merits and the risks of specific proposals. The major concerns range from the risks of catastrophic events in urban settings, to the need to dredge fragile marine environments in order to accommodate LNG tankers. While increasing LNG supplies presents an opportunity to reduce our dependence on dirtier fuels, any new LNG terminal must be sited fairly, strategically and in an environmentally protective manner. For the time being, natural gas is an important transitional fuel. In the near future, the region needs to move to a comprehensive renewable energy base. The region’s greenhouse gas emissions will still experience a substantial net increase as the demand for energy is rising across the board, particularly for natural gas and electricity due to an expanding digital economy. Forecasts indicate that, unless there is an unprecedented push for greater efficiency, the demand for energy will grow 1% annually, through the year 2025. 79

POLICY OPTIONS TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE With ambitious goals set forth in the 2001 Climate Action Plan, New England should be stimulated to create and adopt innovative policies and actions to address climate change in a short time frame. To reduce emissions by at least 10% of the 1990 levels (199.88 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent) by the year 2010, New England has to work on reducing over 19% of the region’s year 2000 emissions. 80 Moreover, if it will abide by what the scientific consensus deems necessary to stabilize climate, New England has to start formulating a plan to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 75%85% below the 2000 levels by the year 2050. Fortunately, New England has ample opportunities to move forward and meet its commitment of effectively addressing climate change: participating in the Northeast regional cap-and-trade initiative, fostering the adoption of California’s “Clean Cars” program, advocating for environmentally sound wind power, while continuing to enforce the Massachusetts “Filthy Five” power plant regulations. These are only some of the actions the region can undertake to catalyze the implementation of local and regional climate protection strategies. If New England embraces all these opportunities, it will become a model for other regions and the nation as a whole. Promoting Energy Efficiency According to the New England Council, the region is a leader in energy efficiency: New England more than doubled its overall efficiency since 1975 achieving greater progress than the nation as a whole. Nevertheless, these gains do not compensate fully for the increase in demand caused by a strong economy and new technology applications. For instance the new Internet “server hotels” – buildings converted into “web farms” to handle Internet traffic – use 10 times more energy than traditional office buildings. Furthermore, people are driving more (doubling annual mileage) and Sport Utility 16

Vehicles (SUVs) with poor fuel efficiency constitute 25% of the market. 81 So at best, efficiency programs thus far are effective only in slowing the growth in demand. There is a need for promoting stronger and improved energy efficiency programs. Advancing Cleaner Power Generation Coal-fired power plants not only are responsible for the bulk of carbon dioxide emitted, but also for the release of many other harmful pollutants. Nationwide power plants contribute to 59% of the nitrogen oxide emissions, 76% of total sulfur dioxide emissions, and 37% of mercury emissions. 82 Nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide react with water and other compounds to form pollutants that fall as acid rain. Acid rain degrades water quality in shallow bodies, harming fish and other aquatic life. Excessive nitrogen deposited from the atmosphere can degrade estuaries and coastal ecosystems, as it can lead to massive die-offs of estuarine and marine plants and animals, loss of biological diversity, and degradation of essential coastal ecosystem habitat such as seagrass beds. Excessive nitrogen in coastal waters are also thought to contribute to harmful algal blooms, such as red tides, that kill millions of fish each year and are a toxic threat to humans. 83 Mercury can accumulate in fish tissues and move up the food chain to fish-eating birds, larger mammals and humans. Exposure to mercury can cause brain damage, lack of motor skills, impaired cognitive skills, and difficulty speaking and hearing, as well as disorders that hamper growth and the ability to reproduce - effects that are enhanced in fetuses and young children. In the United States 79% of all public health advisories on fish consumption are at least partly due to mercury contamination, as mercury can damage the liver, kidney or brain. 84 Furthermore, power plants such as the Brayton Point station, the largest power plant in New England, use millions of gallons of water per day for their cooling systems. The water, used to absorb heat is dumped back into the bay, often as hot as 95 degrees Fahrenheit. As implemented, this cooling process kills fish and other aquatic life. Small organisms, fish, larvae, and plants are killed through entrainment because of exposure to extreme heat, chemical pollution, and turbulence within the cooling system. Larger fish do not fare better - they are impinged against the intake filters, where they are crushed or drown. While, the Region I of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recently required Brayton Point to retrofit it’s cooling system to one that will slash its discharge of heated water, the permit however also allows it to revert to its “inappropriate” cooling cycle on some occasions. Forcing old coal and oil burning plants to clean up to modern standards is crucial to reduce the numerous environmental and health impacts they cause and to level the playing field so that new, cleaner power plants can compete fairly against these old inefficient ones. In order to achieve this, firm enforcement of the Massachusetts “Filthy Five” power plant regulations is necessary. Additionally water-permitting issues must be carefully scrutinized.

17

In terms of addressing the contribution of power plants to climate change, New England’s participation in a multi-state cap and trade program is a step in the right direction. Beginning with power plants, this policy will set a maximum amount of carbon dioxide emissions for the region, allocating authorizations to emit among the different power generators. As the costs of controlling pollution vary among the power plants, generators then have the choice of either reducing their emissions or trading allowances among each other. The cap manages to keep carbon dioxide levels down and as the economy grows and the demands for energy increase, power plants must find ways to keep emissions beneath the required cap. As a total of ten northeastern states participate in the initiative, and others join along the way, this could set a national precedent and a roadmap to dealing with greenhouse gas pollutions. Renewable Energy is a Significant Part of the Solution Renewable energy has an important role to play in meeting New England’s growing demand for energy, while at the same time reducing its contribution to climate change. While many renewable energy resources are already being utilized – such as hydropower, biomass and landfill gas (mostly methane) there are other competitive technologies – such as wind turbines – presently available which could further boost the region’s use of clean energy. 85 At present, 15% of the region’s electricity fuel mix is composed by renewable sources – primarily hydropower. 86 Wind energy in New England is a vast resource, which has yet to be untapped – especially given that technologies are now economically competitive, providing affordable, fixed-cost electricity. Current costs range between 7 and 9 cents per kilowatthour (kWh) compared to about 6 cents per kWh for traditional coal fired power plants. 87 Winds however, are strong and steady enough for significant energy production on high mountain ridges and offshore. New England’s oceans are the single most important venue for wind development. Thus, while windpower must be part of the strategy to fight climate change, good decision-making must aim at protecting the marine environment, and also be sensitive to local concerns. In 2001 Cape Wind Associates proposed a 420 MW wind farm for Nantucket Sound, which could generate enough electricity to meet 75% of Cape Cod's daily needs. While it would be the first offshore wind farm in the US, a smaller project has just been proposed off Long Island. Internationally, large-scale development of offshore windpower is getting underway in Europe, particularly in Great Britain, Ireland, and Denmark. A single 750-kilowatt (kW) wind turbine produces roughly 2 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity annually. Based on New England’s average fuel mix, approximately 0.98 pounds of CO2 are emitted for every kilowatt-hour of electricity that is generated. This means that in one year, the average single wind turbine prevents roughly 2 million pounds (~900 metric tons) of carbon dioxide from being produced. The reduction in emissions for each wind turbine would be equivalent to removing almost 80 Ford Expeditions, or over 150 Ford Focus station wagons, from the road. 88

18

Considerable amount of data must be gathered, studied and debated before New England's communities and regulatory agencies can decide where offshore and inland wind energy development should take place. Yet, given its potential to displace fossil fuel generation and reduce the threat climate change poses on the marine environment, harnessing of New England’s wind resources must be given careful consideration. Other renewable technologies that could play an important part in our energy future include solar photovoltaics and hydrogen fuel cells. Solar photovoltaics (PVs), while sufficient for many local installations, currently cannot sustain large utility applications. Moreover, the production of electricity from this source is still expensive at 30 cents per kWh. 89 Widespread commercial use of hydrogen cells is also still many years away. This technique, which uses hydrogen as a base fuel and only emits water and heat, still has the drawback of finding a source of “pure hydrogen”. Today, hydrogen is “cracked” off from more conventional fuels (such as natural gas, propane, naphta, methanol, as well as fuel oil and coal) involving a very energy intensive process. While renewable sources could be used in this process, the hydrogen fuel cell technology is still highly dependent on fossil fuels: not only for the cracking process but also as a base source for hydrogen. Additionally, costs are greater than 45 cents per kWh. 90 When used in the car industry, the fuel cell can cost as much as 80 times the standard gasoline engine. 91 Nevertheless, the use of these and other cleaner alternatives could be facilitated if demand for clean energy is created throughout the region. This would require adequate incentives and the removal of barriers presented by the existing legislation. One way of leveling the playing field is through the encouragement and support of Distributed Generation (DG). DG is the production of electricity by small generators that will be used near or at the site it is produced – whether they be solar or fuel cells, wind turbines, small natural gas turbines or combined heat and power systems (that efficiently use the energy for heating or cooling a building also to generate electricity). DG not only provides clean, efficient and reliable local power – especially when the main grid has outages – but also reduces the loss of electricity during transmission as it travels over long distances along the grid. Small generators should be able to use the electricity they produce as well as keeping an emergency backup connection to the larger grid. Until recently interconnection rules and large “standby fees” stood in the way. Vermont is setting the example by implementing the state’s first voluntary renewable energy project. CVPS Cow Power as it is known, would stimulate farmers to generate electricity through anaerobic digestion of cow manure, small-scale wind projects and other renewable energy systems and sell it to the utility company. Utility customers then have the option of buying a quarter, half or all their electricity from the CVPS Cow Power. For households with a typical consumption of 500 kW a month, this would only represent between a $5 a $20 premium. 92 Initiatives like these should be fostered, while rules and rates should not discriminate against, but actively encourage renewable sources and clean distributed generation. Especially since reducing even a small amount of the demand on the New England electricity grid during peak hours can bring about large overall cost reductions for all electric customers.

19

Another tool to widespread renewable power in the region, is through the effective implementation of Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). RPS mandate that utility companies produce a minimum percentage of the electricity from renewable sources, gradually increasing over time. Massachusetts requires a minimum of 4% by 2009, Connecticut 10% by 2010 and Maine 30% starting in 2000. Nevertheless, the scope of these initiatives is limited and may in fact unintentionally inhibit the development of additional renewable power generation. In Maine, while the RPS target appears more aggressive than Massachusetts’, the RPS regulation is written such that the state’s existing hydropower and biomass resources already cover most of the requirement. 93 In order to encourage new renewable sources, some of these RPS have to be reformed while new ones have to be created in the New England states that lack them. Moreover, state governments, municipalities and other large institutions should take the lead and purchase electricity from renewable sources. By fostering increased energy production from highly efficient local generation and renewable resources, the consumption of polluting fossil fuels in large central power plants will be reduced. Moreover, costs would stabilize and even decrease. Historically oil and natural gas prices have been volatile, a trend which is expected to continue in the future. With no local resources of oil, gas or coal New England depends exclusively on domestic and international imports, and consistently pays a premium: energy costs about 27% more than the rest of the nation. 94 Therefore, expanding the diversity in its fuel mix by increasing the percentage of renewable energy, also helps assure reliable supplies, less dependence on foreign oil and more stable costs. Curbing Vehicle Impacts and Controlling Sprawl The transportation sector is the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the region. Since 1970, the amount of energy consumed by transportation increased by 32% due to an absolute increase in the number of cars, an increase in their relative use as well as the increased popularity of more polluting, less efficient vehicles. SUV’s – with very poor fuel efficiencies - make up for 25% of the market. On the other hand the use of alternative fuel vehicles, which produce very few emissions is still extremely low – representing only 3.6% of the country’s total use. 95 New England must build a market for cleaner and high efficiency cars. Following California’s lead, the region should set minimum sale requirements for advanced fuel technology vehicles, such as highly efficient gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles. By creating the right incentives for the purchase of efficient vehicles, an adequate tax and regulatory structure to discourage the purchase of inefficient vehicles like SUV’s, the region would be one step ahead in dealing with this source of greenhouse gas pollution. Several states (Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Jersey) have already implemented the Low Emission Vehicles (LEV) program, which requires that all new passenger vehicles sold and registered in the state meet cleaner California motor vehicle emission standards. These standards protect public health by reducing harmful pollutants such as carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds,

20

nitrogen oxides and toxics as benzene. California is now working to incorporate within the LEV program, regulations to reduce greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles. While carbon dioxide is produced in the greatest abundance, two other greenhouse gases (nitrous oxide and methane) are also by-products of fossil fuel combustion in cars, and hydrofluorocarbons emanate from the vehicle air conditioning systems. As California develops the “Clean Cars” program, the states of the Northeast must follow California’s lead – especially considering the increase in driving, typically expressed as vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) or in vehicle trips. For example between 1991 and 1999 alone, VMT in the Boston metro region increased by almost 14% and registered vehicles increased by 25.6%. The increase in VMT has almost tripled the population growth (approximately 5%) during the same period and more than quadrupled the growth in people of driving age (2.7%). 96 Sprawl is a leading factor increasing vehicle miles traveled and therefore greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, sprawl must be controlled and automobile use curbed, in order to effectively address the sector’s impact on climate change. Transportation infrastructure decision-making has to be shifted away from roads and towards smart growth and transit. Encouraging transit-oriented development and increasing the availability and use of public transportation is a crucial part of the strategy. One way to push this forward, is to require decision-makers to take into account the impact of greenhouse gas emissions when deciding on transportation infrastructure planning and spending. Until decisionmakers become aware of the climate change implications of the choices they make, sprawl and automobile dependent development in the region is likely to increase.

SOLUTIONS TO RESTORE THE HEALTH OF NEW ENGLAND’S OCEANS Unfortunately, given the long lasting effects of greenhouse gas pollution and the inertia within the climate system, even if the policy actions described above are taken today, New England’s marine environment will still have to deal with a changing climate in the near future. If New England’s oceans were healthy, they’d have a better chance to withstand the impacts. But, New England’s waters are not at their best. The multiple ongoing stresses caused by overfishing, pollution and habitat destruction make it more vulnerable and less capable of adapting to a changing climate. Fortunately, many policy options exist to restore the health and vigor of our marine heritage and thus minimize the damage posed by a changing climate. Sustainable Fisheries Due to the rapid advances in fishing technology over the centuries, overfishing has caused many populations of species to diminish in number – especially in recent decades. Commercial catches in New England between 1980 and 1998 dropped by almost 80% for both Atlantic cod and yellowtail flounder and 90% for haddock. By the beginning of the 21st century, almost two thirds of all federally managed species in the Gulf of Maine were considered overfished, with an additional 25% of species considered “fully exploited”. 97

21

While a tightening of regulations over the past few years halted the overfishing on some species and permitted a slight increase in their abundance (for example scallops and yellowtail flounder), many others remain in an overfished and severely depleted state. Cod in Georges Bank shows almost no signs of recovery from record low numbers hit in the mid-1990s and the current population is less than 15% of what is considered healthy and sustainable. This hampers the ability of the species to bounce back from the impacts caused by climate change. Thus, while New England has come a long way since the days of record-low fish abundance levels in the mid-1990s, the region still needs new and innovative strategies to restore the health and sustainability of New England’s fisheries, thereby ensuring a viable future for fishing communities. One key ingredient to bring sustainability to New England fisheries is the regional implementation and compliance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This federal legislation on fishery conservation and management, sets requirements for overfishing, rebuilding depleted populations, reducing bycatch (practice of catching and discarding unmarketable fish and other ocean life) and protecting essential fish habitats (defined as the areas necessary for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity). 98 As management plans have violated the federal statute on several occasions, there is a need to ensure full compliance of this law. As an example, New England has all but ignored the requirement to monitor and minimize bycatch and thus this wasteful practice continues. Plans must specify objectives and measurable targets to reduce this practice, as well as incorporate an adequate observer program (on-board observers monitoring fishing operations). Every species plays an important role in the marine environment – and many organisms that currently have no commercial value, can actually hold the key to the health of the ecosystem. Thus, conservation efforts must not be focused exclusively on commercially valuable species but on all species that make up the New England rich and productive marine environment. On the positive side, the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC – the quasi governmental body responsible for developing fishery management plans in the region) has recently approved an innovative management approach based on enforceable catch quotas (total amount of fish that can be caught over a specific time) and community co-management of the resource (engaging all the sectors of a community in the responsibility of managing a sector of the marine environment). This approach, known as “sector allocations”, allows fishermen to voluntarily create cooperative sectors and distribute shares of the overall quota based on their catch history. Thus, fishermen are not exposed to restrictive regulations and are motivated to take good care of the resources within their sector. Another promising tool that must be promoted and implemented to ensure sustainable fisheries in New England, is the concept of area-based management. Under this approach management plans are developed for particular geographic regions based on the ecology of the area. Fishermen would help to develop the plan with resource managers and would be bound by its provisions. The fisheries literature strongly suggests that sustainable

22

fisheries are often built on place-based management regimes, where incentives are created for local fishermen to act as stewards for their fishing grounds, and the local community is held responsible for the results. While drawing restrictive areamanagement boundaries on New England’s marine maps will be controversial and challenging, the time for meeting that challenge is now. By restoring the health and diversity of the marine ecosystem, with sustainable populations, not only are we directly protecting our marine resources for the future but also indirectly, by positioning the ecosystem in a better way to face the potential impacts of a changing climate. Marine Protected Areas While the Gulf of Maine is experiencing severe stress on nearly every aspect of its precious ecosystem, most efforts to restore and maintain healthy marine resources are shortsighted and inadequate. First, management systems are fragmented between state and federal jurisdictions. While municipalities control shorelines and coastal ecosystems, near-shore areas fall under the jurisdiction of states, and offshore waters are administered by federal administrations. Secondly, management systems are mostly reactive, responding to known impacts and after the fact. Given the constant rate of change in human society, new activities with unforeseen effects are likely to develop and therefore a more proactive approach is needed to protect the marine environment from current and future impacts. 99 Finally, management systems focus mainly on two key components of effective management - pollution control and fishery extraction rates – while almost completely disregard the fundamental building block that sustains the abundance and diversity of the marine environment: marine habitats. Although the unprecedented depletion of commercial fish stocks and the decline of so many species of marine mammals and seabirds are vivid symbols of the troubles of New England’s marine resources, the problems go deeper. Recent discoveries suggest that other less mobile species in the Gulf are also being destroyed by our activities including deep-sea corals, brittle stars, and a myriad of other marine flora and fauna. Given the complex relationships in the marine ecosystem, management strategies must look at the bigger picture and not focus on single species management. The marine environment is a unified ecosystem and therefore needs a more coherent and comprehensive approach to ecosystem management and marine biodiversity protection. One that is capable of ensuring the long-term ecological health of New England’s marine environment and the economic vitality of the people and communities that depend upon its resources. This approach must include a comprehensive system of marine protected areas (MPAs). Marine protected areas (MPAs) are areas where lasting protection against disturbing and extractive activities is guaranteed either through law or other effective means. These areas are chosen because they represent different marine habitats and are areas of special ecological significance as they are home to a spectrum of fish, whales, dolphins, and phytoplankton among other marine species. Just like we have many types of protection on land – wilderness areas, national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, or national forests – it makes sense to protect our waters in similar ways. Thus, as on land, marine protection

23

can come in different sizes and types: ranging from prohibitions only on one or more uses (e.g., oil drilling or fishing) to complete restrictions on all activities within an area – apart from scientific research and monitoring and light recreation. Prohibitions can be temporary (only during certain times of the year) or permanent and can cover areas of different sizes. A network of MPAs, including fully protected marine reserves (ocean wilderness areas), would permanently protect portions of each type of ocean wildlife habitat and restore unique ecological areas. Furthermore, by including fully protected reserves, they would create baseline and control sites to help understand the basic ecological relationships and processes that take place as well as assess the impact of activities that disturb marine habitats. Consequently, MPAs are effective to rehabilitate and protect New England’s rich marine biodiversity and increase the environment’s ability to recover from adverse impacts. Although a seemingly obvious marine resource management tool, there are few MPAs in New England waters or the nation and those that exist, were created independently for very specific management purposes. Less than 1% of U.S. ocean waters are fully protected from human activities: New England’s waters are not among them. While home to one of the Nation’s thirteen marine sanctuaries (Gerry E. Studds Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary in Massachusetts Bay), the protection provided here only extends to sand and gravel mining activities. 100 MPAs are acknowledged as the critical next step for marine conservation and support for their establishment, is rising rapidly and forcefully from the scientific and political communities. New England’s governors and legislatures must establish task forces and push for legislation that explicitly recognize the need to create a coordinated system of MPAs, based on a sound scientific basis. Furthermore, the region’s governors must recognize the power of each state to protect and restore its own marine resources. The promotion of strong marine conservation policies is a critical first step in establishing MPAs. Habitat Protection The demands on New England’s marine environment are rapidly growing and changing. Traditional activities like fishing, boating and commercial shipping could soon be sharing the waters with fiber optic cables, natural gas pipelines, offshore liquid natural gas facilities, wind energy farms, and aquaculture (fish farms). The new development proposals are currently dealt with by a variety of state and federal agencies on an ad-hoc case-by-case basis. New England – and the Nation – needs to implement a comprehensive and coordinated ocean management planning system, to promote environmentally sound development and to protect our marine habitat. With additional proposals to build liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals popping up throughout New England, state and federal officials must develop a strategic regional approach to LNG terminal siting that fairly and objectively evaluates the environmental, social, and economic merits of adding new LNG terminals, as well as potential locations – especially as they relate to the marine environment.

24

There is also a need in New England to identify areas that are appropriate for aquaculture (fish farms). Aquaculture is a rapidly growing industry in much of the Gulf of Maine, and while an important contributor to the economic base of many rural coastal communities, it also presents the potential for significant environmental degradation. As aquaculture siting and management remains underregulated, this practice can potentially exacerbate the stress on wild species by contributing to coastal pollution in fragile ecosystems (through the excessive introduction of nutrients), releasing toxic compounds and fragmenting or destroying natural foraging, spawning or nursery habitat for wild species. The disruption of habitats upsets an ecosystem’s delicate balance and weakens its ability to face the likely impacts of a changing climate. For example, the introduction of a nonnative oyster in the fragile upper reaches of Taunton Bay in Maine could upset the bay’s delicate ecosystem with unforeseen consequences for resident wildlife and migratory birds that depend on the bay for their survival. Thus proposals such as this one that could imperil the marine environment must not be permitted. Local "home rule" zoning ordinances must be developed – local authority to take action as allowed by the state or as long as it does not interfere with state or federal interests – to allow towns to zone their nearshore areas and regulate aquaculture among other activities, to avoid unnecessary damage to our marine environment, while promoting an economically sustainable activity. The mounting demands on New England’s waters, enhanced by increasingly crowded coastal areas, calls for the development of ocean zoning to manage the multiple uses that conflict – from shipping lanes, underwater cables and pipelines, fishing areas, whale watching areas, research activity, and existing or planned oil and gas activity. Only when these uses coexist in a carefully planned way, will we achieve a thriving marine environment - for us, as well as for future generations. Land-Sea Connections Many of our activities on land, produce impacts that have overflowing effects on New England’s oceans. Intense coastal development, extensive habitat losses resulting from clearance and filling of unique coastal habitats - particularly in biologically rich salt estuaries – and land-based sources of marine pollution, are among the many activities that currently undermine the health of our marine environment. There is a need for a responsible development of coastal areas and urban waterfronts – especially given that 60% of New England’s population already lives in coastal towns. Land-based pollution ranges from sewage discharges and industrial sources, to contaminated stormwater runoff, to thermal pollution caused by power plants like the Brayton Point station on Mount Hope Bay, Rhode Island. While the larger municipal and industrial sources are coming under tighter pollution controls, monitoring and enforcement must be strengthened. Additionally, there is a need for tighter controls on pollution flowing into New England’s bays and oceans from runoff and on pollution entering rivers that eventually drain to coastal waters. 101

25

Coastal development has also led to alteration of the coastline through engineered structures (roads, jetties and breakwaters), dredging and sediment disposal (from excavation of navigation channels) and more importantly through filling activities, that have eliminated over 50% of the original salt marshes along the Gulf of Maine, all the way up to the Bay of Fundy, Canada. 102 Critical coastal habitats must be protected through initiatives like the ones adopted in the Great Bay Estuary, in New Hampshire. The NH Estuaries Project has identified land use issues as the most significant threat to the estuary, a critical breeding and nursery ground for finfish, shellfish, and other invertebrates, as well as an important food source for many fish, mammals, birds, and invertebrates. Over the years, the Great Bay Estuary has shown early warning signs of its vulnerability, including shellfish closures and loss of eelgrass habitat. Furthermore significant portions of the estuary violate New Hampshire's water quality standards. There is a clear link between land use and water quality. Thus the initiative will complement ongoing land conservation efforts by using federal and state laws to prevent, or minimize the impacts of, land uses that contribute to the degradation of the Great Bay Estuary. Acknowledging and addressing these connections, through a comprehensive land management and planning system throughout the region, will help reinvigorate the New England marine environment and increase its chances of adapting to climate change.

26

In the end, reducing the threats from global climate change on New England’s marine environment will require a powerful blend of multiple strategies and policies. To stabilize the climate we need to: foster greater efficiency in our vehicles; make our homes, offices, schools, and all of our buildings more energy efficient; and generate more and more of our power from a diverse collection of renewable sources. We also need to reform our land-use policies to build sustainable communities where commuters, children, and all residents can walk, bike, and take transit to work, school, and all the other destinations that define their daily travels. While the climate stabilizes, we need to minimize the effects of a changing climate, by increasing the health and resiliency of New England’s oceans. To achieve this we must: end overfishing of our signature species and achieve sustainable fisheries; create marine protected areas to preserve important habitats and areas of ecological importance; and reform our land-use policies to address the negative effects of land-based activities on the marine environment.

Most importantly we need for our state governments to live up to their rhetoric and lead the way to this future through regulation, by creating the right incentives and by leading by example. Only then, can we be confident that our marine heritage will continue to support the livelihood of New England’s coastal communities for many centuries to come.

27

ENDNOTES 1

United Nations Development Programme, “Human Development Indicators 2003. Carbon Dioxide Emissions – Share of World Total (%)”. [cited June, 2004]; Available at http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2003/indicator/indic_182_1_1.html. 2 New England Climate Coalition. “Local Action Can Solve a Global Problem.”[cited June, 2003]; Available at http://www.newenglandclimate.org/solutions.html. 3 Christopher L. Sabine et al., “The Ocean Sink for Anthropogenic CO2”, Science 305(2004): 367-371. 4 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), “July 16, 2004 Press Release. Research Shows Oceans Becoming More Acidic”, [cited July 21, 2004]; Available at http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=21758&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. 5 The Committee on the Environment and the Northeast International Committee on Energy of the Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers, “Climate Change Action Plan, August 2001”, p.6. 6 Jed Thorp, “2004 Report Card on Climate Change Action. First Assessment of the Region’s Progress Towards Meeting the Goals of the New England Governors / Eastern Canadian Premiers Climate Change Action Plan of 2001” June 2004. [cited June, 2004]; Available at www.ClimateActionNetwork.ca and www.NewEnglandClimate.org. 7 New England Regional Assessment Group (NERA), Preparing for a Changing Climate: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change. New England Regional Foundation Report for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, (University of New Hampshire: 2001). 8 Gulf of Maine Ocean Observing System (GoMOOS), “About the Gulf of Maine.” [cited October 31, 2003]; Available at http://www.gomoos.org. 9 Jennifer Atkinson Priscilla M. Brooks, Anthony C. Chatwin and Peter Shelley, The Wild Sea. Saving Our Marine Heritage, (Conservation Law Foundation September 2000), p.20. 10 American Museum of Natural History, “Will the Fish Return? How Gear and Greed Emptied Georges Bank.” [cited June 17, 2004]; Available at http://sciencebulletins.amnh.org/biobulletin/biobulletin/story1208.html. 11 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, p.28-29. 12 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, p.10. 13 Sydney Levitus, John I. Antonov, Timothy P. Boyer and Cathy Stephens, “Warming of the World Ocean”, Science 287(2000): 2225-2229 14 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, p.7. 15 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, p.12. 16 Conservation Law Foundation, “Our Heritage In Peril. New England and Global Warming.” [cited 2004]; Available at http://www.clf.org/pubs/climate 17 Donald F Boesch, John C. Field, and Donald Scavia, The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change on Coastal Areas and Marine Resources: Report of the Coastal Areas and Marine Resources Sector Team, U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change. U.S. Global Change Research Program. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analyses Series No. #21. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program. (Silver Spring, MD, 2000) 18 Victor S. Kennedy, Robert R. Twilley, Joan A. Kleypas, James H. Jr. Cowan and Steven R. Hare, Coastal and Marine Ecosystems & Global Climate Change. Potential Effects on U.S. Resources, Prepared for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. 2002. 19 Allan Michael, Possible Effects of Global Warming on Biological Processes in the Ocean, A White Paper presented at the Symposium on Climate Change and Fisheries in the Gulf of Maine, held on April 5, 2002 at the College of the Atlantic, Bar Harbor Maine. Sponsored by the Sierra Club National Marine Wildlife and Habitat Committee. Available from http://www.sierraclub.org/marine/fisheries/symposium02/whitepaper_globalwarming.pdf 20 David G. Mountain, Potential Consequences of Climate Change for the Fish Resources in the MidAtlantic Region, A White Paper presented at the Symposium on Climate Change and Fisheries in the Gulf

28

of Maine, held on April 5, 2002 at the College of the Atlantic, Bar Harbor Maine. Sponsored by the Sierra Club National Marine Wildlife and Habitat Committee. Available from http://www.sierraclub.org/marine/fisheries/symposium02/whitepaper_midatlantic.html 21 Mountain 2002. 22 Lewis S Incze and Christopher E. Naimie, “Modelling the Transport of Lobster (Homarus americanus) Larvae and Postlarvae in the Gulf of Maine”, Fisheries Oceanography 9 (2000): 99-113. 23 Perry Jeffries, “Rhode Island's Ever-Changing Narrangansett Bay”, Maritimes 42, no. 4 (2000) [cited 2003]; Available at http://www.gso.uri.edu/maritimes/Current_Issue/00%20Winter/Text/winter_00.html . 24 Keith Brander, Effects of Climate Change on Cod (Gadus morhua) Stocks. In Effects of Climate Change on Cod Stocks in Global Warming: Implications for Freshwater and Marine Fish, eds. Wood, Chris M. and D. Gordon McDonald, (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 255-278. 25 Lawrence J. Buckley, Elaine M. Caldarone and R. G. Lough, “Optimum Temperature and Food-limited Growth of Larval Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua) and Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) on Georges Bank”, Fisheries Oceanography 13, no. 2 (2004): 134-140. 26 Drew C. Harvell, Charles E. Mitchell, Jessica R. Ward, Sonia Altizer, Andrew P. Dobson, Richard S. Ostfeld, Michael D. Samuel, “Climate Warning and Disease Risks for Terrestrial and Marine Biota”, Science 296, no. 5576 (2002): 2158-2162. 27 S.A. Murawski, “Climate Change and Marine Fish Distributions: Forecasting from Historical Analogy”, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122 (1993): 647-658. 28 Kennedy et al. 2002 29 Boesch et al. 2000. 30 Murawski, 1993. 31 Ibid. 32 Kennedy et al. 2002. 33 Jeffries 2000. 34 Kennedy et al. 2002. 35 Nils C. Stenseth, Atle Mysterud, Geir Otterson, James W. Hurrel, Kung-Sik Chang and Mauricio Lima, “Ecological Effects of Climate Fluctuations”, Science 297(2003): 1292-1296. 36 Boesch et al. 2000. 37 Michael Fincham, “An Endless Invasion? Green Crabs, New England Intruders, Move West.” Maryland Sea Grant. [cited July, 2004]; Available at http://www.mdsg.umd.edu/MarineNotes/Mar-Apr96/index.html. 38 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 1995. Climate Change 1995. Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analysis. Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 39 NERA 2001. 40 The Heinz Center, “The Hidden Costs of Coastal Hazards. A Collaborative Project of the H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment”. Prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency Contract EMW-97-CO-0375 (2000). 41 Graham S. Giese, “Potential Impacts of Sea-Level Rise in Massachusetts”, New England Regional Climate Change Impacts Workshop Summary Report. September 3-5 1997. [cited October 31, 2003]; Available from http://www.necci.sr.unh.edu/necci-report/sum-rept.pdf. 42 National Assessment Synthesis Team (NAST), Climate Change Impacts on the United States: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change Report for the US Global Change Research Program, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 2001). 43 US Census 2000 and "State and Territory Coastal Management Program Summaries," [cited 2003]; Available from http://www.ocrm.nos.noaa.gov/czm/czmsitelist.html. 44 NERA 2001. 45 Shannon Spencer and Barret Rock, “Appendix I: Climate Change and its Impacts on New England: A White Paper”, New England Regional Climate Change Impacts Workshop Summary Report, September 35, 1997, p.67. 46 IPCC 2002, Climate Change and Biodiversity, IPCC Technical Paper V. [cited 2003]; Available at http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/tpbiodiv.pdf.

29

47

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 1995. Climate Change 1995. Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analysis. Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 48 NERA 2001. 49 Robert J. Wood, Donald F. Boesch and Victor S. Kennedy, “Future Consequences of Climate Change for the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem and its Fisheries”, American Fisheries Society 32 (2002): 171-184. 50 Kennedy et al. 2002. 51 IPCC 1995. 52 Kennedy et al. 2002. 53 Ibid. 54 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. 55 Center for Health and the Global Environment, Harvard Medical School (HMS), “Oceans, Climate Change and Human Health”, A White Paper presented at the Briefing on Capital Hill held on January 29, 2004. [cited 05/04 2004]; Available at http://www.med.harvard.edu/chge/policy/white.pdf. 56 Kennedy et al. 2002. 57 Center for Health and the Global Environment, Harvard Medical School (HMS) 2004. 58 Boesch et al. 2000. 59 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, p.16. 60 Wallace S. Broecker, What if the Conveyor Were to Shut Down? Reflections on a Possible Outcome of the Great Global Experiment. GSA Today, Vol.9 no. 1(1999): 1-7. 61 Sabine et al. 2004. 61 UNESCO 2004. 62 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. 63 Kennedy et al. 2002. 64 James W. Hurrell, Yochanan Kushnir and Martin Visbeck, “The North Atlantic Oscillation”, Science 291, no. 5504 (2001): 541-776. 65 Charles H. Greene, Andrew J. Pershing, Robert D. Kenney, Jack W. Fossi, “Impact of Climate Variability on the Recovery of Endangered North Atlantic Right Whales”, Oceanography 4, no.2 (2003): 98-103. 66 Charles H. Greene and Andrew J. Pershing, “Climate and the Conservation of North Atlantic Right Whales: Being a Right Whale at the Wrong Time?”, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (2004). [cited June 15, 2004]; Available at http://www.eas.cornell.edu/pershing/papers/docs/FEE04.pdf. 67 Greene et al. 2003. 68 Hurrell et al. 2001. 69 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. 70 Mountain 2002. 71 Greene et al. 2003. 72 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, p.17. 73 Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the New England and Eastern Canadian Region, 1990-2000, (March 2004). 74 Thorp 2004. 75 Ibid. 76 The New England Council, “New England Energy Supply & Demand: 2001 Report & Agenda for Action”, A New England Council Report. 2001 [cited 2004]; Available at http://www.newenglandcouncil.com/issues/NECFullReport.pdf. 77 Ibid. 78 Energy Information Administration (Department of Energy), “Annual Energy Outlook 2003 with projection to 2025”. [cited 2003]; Available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/. 79 Ibid. 80 NESCAUM March 2004.

30

81

The New England Council 2001. Center for Policy Alternatives, “Clean Power Plants”, [cited July, 2004]; Available at http://www.cfpa.org/issues/cleanpower/index.cfm. 83 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Human Health and Environmental Effects of Emissions from Power Generation”, [cited July 15 2004]; Available at http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/capandtrade/power.pdf. 84 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “STAR Researchers Study Environmental Behavior of Mercury”, [cited July 15 2004]; Available at http://www.epa.gov/ord/archives/2003/july/htm/article1.htm. 85 Conservation Law Foundation, “Our Heritage In Peril. New England and Global Warming”, [cited 2004]; Available at http://www.clf.org/pubs/climate. 86 The New England Council. 2001. 87 Stuard Baird (ICLEI), “Wind Energy”, [cited July 14 2004]; Available at http://www.iclei.org/EFACTS/WIND.HTM. 88 Conservation Law Foundation, “Our Heritage In Peril. New England and Global Warming”, [cited 2004]; Available at http://www.clf.org/pubs/climate. 89 Stuard Baird (ICLEI), “Photovoltaic Cells”, [cited July 14 2004]; Available at http://www.iclei.org/EFACTS/PHOTOVOL.HTM. 90 Isidor Buchmann, “Including fuel, maintenance and equipment replacement. The Fuel Cell: is it ready?”, [cited July 14, 2004]; Available at http://www.buchmann.ca/Article1-Page1.asp. 91 Peter Hemberger, “Fuel Cell: FAQs”, [cited April 28, 2003]; Available at http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/995303594_1008081206.html. 92 Central Vermont Public Service (CVPS), “News Release. CVPS Cow Power™ Links Customers, Farms, Environment. March 11, 2004.” [cited July 15, 2004]; Available at http://www.cvps.com/documents/CowPowernewsrelease.pdf. 93 Conservation Law Foundation, “Our Heritage In Peril. New England and Global Warming.”[cited 2004]; Available at http://www.clf.org/pubs/climate. 94 The New England Council. 2001. 95 Ibid. 96 Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), A Decade of Change. Growth Trends in the Greater Boston Area from 1990 to 2000, (2001). 97 Conservation Law Foundation. September 2000. The Wild Sea. Saving Our Marine Heritage. 98 NOAA Fisheries, “National Marine Fisheries Service. Essential Fish Habitat.” [cited August 9, 2004]. Available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ess_fish_habitat.htm. 99 Atkinson et. al 2000, p.33. 100 Colin Woodard, “A Beacon of Hope for an Ocean Birthright.”, Conservation Matters. Journal of the Conservation Law Foundation, Vol 8. Fall 2001. Available at http://www.clf.org/CM/01Fall/beacon_of_hope.htm. 101 Atkinson et al. 2000, p.32. 102 Ibid, p.8. 82

31

oceans in peril

precipitation and cloud cover at some specific location and at some specific time. Thus,. 3 ...... produce as well as keeping an emergency backup connection to the larger grid. Until recently ...... http://www.clf.org/CM/01Fall/beacon_of_hope.htm.

248KB Sizes 1 Downloads 189 Views

Recommend Documents

Describing the Oceans
For More Information: What's Happening in the ... Photograph courtesy of the Naval Postgraduate School. MM/1. The Mathematical Moments program promotes appreciation and ... plays in science, nature, technology, and human culture.

Seeing Promise and Peril in Digital Records
Jul 17, 2011 - American,” says Ben Shneiderman, a computer ... Campbell, a software developer at Epic. Systems ... health technology company, expressed.

Maxine's Journey - Two Oceans Aquarium
campaign include AOCA's multi-functional website (www.aoca.org.za) and its' 'project Update' link, which ... In her own right Maxine is a minor public figure.

Maxine's Journey - Two Oceans Aquarium
moment in the limelight as bright lights lit the pool and curious residents gathered to witness her transfer into a holding tank. The transport back to the Aquarium was successful and upon arrival she was introduced into the largest display, the I&J

Atmospheric inversion strength over polar oceans in ...
ozone destruction, cloud formation, and negative longwave feedback mechanisms .... inversion strength over the Arctic, which we define as north of 64N, and the ...

Maxine's Journey - Two Oceans Aquarium
Struisbaai on the southern Cape Coast on 18 March 2004 and it is hoped that ... The anglers had been informed that the Two Oceans Aquarium in Cape Town was ... Your symbolic adoption of these ragged-tooth sharks will help to support the ...

Investing for Sustainable Global Fisheries - Vibrant Oceans
FIGURE 3: Small-Scale Fisheries Investment Blueprint Summaries ... Rare to implement policy and community stewardship programs, respectively, in ... that impact-oriented business models benefiting from stock stabilization or .... 8 “Sustainable Fis

Investing for Sustainable Global Fisheries - Vibrant Oceans
as a roadmap for the growing number of investors, entrepreneurs, and ... that impact-oriented business models benefiting from stock stabilization or ...... Increases incomes for almost 1,800 artisanal fishers across 12 communities through.

[PDF] The Light Between Oceans
... about library services and programs and more UpdateStar is compatible with ... u otro material unidas por un lado es Web oficial de la Universidade da Coru ... Between Oceans pdf The Light Between Oceans amazon The Light Between ...

Kanna-Oceans-UPorto-16.pdf
Current robotic platforms. however have inherent limitations; pre-defined sequences of commands are used to determine. what actions the robot will perform and ...

Underwater acoustic communication using time reversal - OCEANS ...
energy back to a probe source location despite the complexity of the propagation channel. A probe source pulse is transmitted and a complicated multipath signal is measured by an array of source/receiver elements. The signal is time reversed and retr

pdf-0968\those-in-peril-by-smith-wilbur-author-thomas ...
... of the apps below to open or edit this item. pdf-0968\those-in-peril-by-smith-wilbur-author-thomas-dunne-books-publisher-hardcover-by-wilbur-smith.pdf.

Living-With-Peril-Eisenhower-Kennedy-And-Nuclear-Weapons.pdf ...
Whoops! There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Living-With-Peril-Eisenhower-Kennedy-And-Nuclear-Weapons.pdf. Living-With-Peril-Eisenhower-Kennedy-A

Delay Kindergarten at Your Child's Peril
Sep 24, 2011 - Some children, especially boys, are slow to mature emotionally, a process that may be aided by the presence of older children. Kindergartners show age-related differences in social acceptance and self- perceptions, but these difference