6

A National Ocean
Acidification Program

image

There is growing evidence of changes in ocean chemistry and resulting biological and socioeconomic impacts due to the absorption of anthropogenic CO2 into the ocean, as summarized in chapters 2 through 5. The changes in ocean chemistry are already being detected, and because the relationship between atmospheric CO2 and seawater carbonate chemistry is well understood, future changes can also be projected. What is less predictable is the affect these changes will have on organisms, ecosystems, and society. However, there is strong evidence that acidification will affect key biological processes—calcification and photosynthesis, for example—and that it will affect different species in different ways. This will result in ecological “winners and losers,” meaning some species will do better than others in a lower pH environment, and ultimately, this will cause shifts in marine community composition and ecosystem services.

Acidification is happening globally and many ecosystems will be affected. Coral reefs appear to be particularly vulnerable because of the sensitivity of reef-builders to changes in seawater carbonate chemistry, compounded with other stressors such as climate change and overfishing. Coral reef ecosystems provide many critical resources that support a number of services, including fishing, recreation and tourism, and storm protection. They are also highly diverse ecosystems with intrinsic natural beauty whose existence alone holds high value for society. Individuals who manage coral reefs, as well as the local communities that rely on the reefs, are in urgent need of information that will allow them to mitigate and adapt to acidification impacts. Reefs are one example, but there are also many commercially-important fisheries and aquaculture species that



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 95
6 A National Ocean Acidification Program There is growing evidence of changes in ocean chemistry and result ing biological and socioeconomic impacts due to the absorption of anthro pogenic CO2 into the ocean, as summarized in chapters 2 through 5. The changes in ocean chemistry are already being detected, and because the relationship between atmospheric CO2 and seawater carbonate chemistry is well understood, future changes can also be projected. What is less pre dictable is the affect these changes will have on organisms, ecosystems, and society. However, there is strong evidence that acidification will affect key biological processes--calcification and photosynthesis, for example-- and that it will affect different species in different ways. This will result in ecological "winners and losers," meaning some species will do better than others in a lower pH environment, and ultimately, this will cause shifts in marine community composition and ecosystem services. Acidification is happening globally and many ecosystems will be affected. Coral reefs appear to be particularly vulnerable because of the sensitivity of reefbuilders to changes in seawater carbonate chemistry, compounded with other stressors such as climate change and overfish ing. Coral reef ecosystems provide many critical resources that support a number of services, including fishing, recreation and tourism, and storm protection. They are also highly diverse ecosystems with intrinsic natural beauty whose existence alone holds high value for society. Individuals who manage coral reefs, as well as the local communities that rely on the reefs, are in urgent need of information that will allow them to mitigate and adapt to acidification impacts. Reefs are one example, but there are also many commerciallyimportant fisheries and aquaculture species that

OCR for page 95
OCEANACIDIFICATION may be vulnerable to, or may benefit from, acidification. Calcifying mol lusks and crustaceans, which are important species for both aquaculture and wild harvest fisheries, and fish habitats essential for many marine species (e.g., oyster reefs, seagrass beds), are other examples. As research continues, many other sectors, communities, and decision makers that could feel an impact from acidification are likely to be identified. A better understanding of these potential biological and socioeconomic effects than we have today, as well as an ability to forecast changes, is needed for fishery managers, industry, and human communities to plan and adapt. CONCLUSION: The chemistry of the ocean is changing at an unprec- edented rate and magnitude due to anthropogenic carbon dioxide emis- sions; the rate of change exceeds any known to have occurred for at least the past hundreds of thousands of years. Unless anthropogenic CO 2 emissions are substantially curbed, or atmospheric CO2 is controlled by some other means, the average pH of the ocean will continue to fall. Ocean acidification has demonstrated impacts on many marine organ- isms. While the ultimate consequences are still unknown, there is a risk of ecosystem changes that threaten coral reefs, fisheries, protected species, and other natural resources of value to society. The U.S. federal government has shown a growing awareness of and response to concerns about the impacts of ocean acidification, and has taken a number of steps to begin to address the longterm implications of ocean acidification. Currently, there is no formal national program on ocean acidification; however, several federal agencies have shifted (or plan to shift) funds to ocean acidification activities (Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry Program, 2009a). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) began studying the impacts of anthropogenic CO2 on the marine carbonate system in the North Pacific in the 1980s (Feely and Chen, 1982; Feely et al., 1984, 1988) and continues to expand its research and observational efforts (e.g., Feely et al., 2008; Gledhill et al., 2008; Meseck et al., 2007). NOAA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have also provided extramural support for workshops, planning efforts, facilities, and research (Congressional Research Service (U.S. CRS), 2009; National Science Foundation, 2009; Paula Bontempi, NASA, personal communication). In the 110th and 111th sessions, the U.S. Congress dem onstrated concern over the problem of ocean acidification, holding mul tiple hearings and passing the Federal Ocean Acidification Research And Monitoring (FOARAM) Act of 2009 (Congressional Research Service (U.S. CRS), 2009; P.L. 11111). The FOARAM Act of 2009 (P.L. 11111) calls for an interagency working group (IWG) under the Joint Subcommittee on

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST) to develop a strategic research plan and to coordinate federal ocean acidification activities. CONCLUSION: given that ocean acidification is an emerging field of research, the committee finds that the federal government has taken initial steps to respond to the nation's long-term needs and that the national ocean acidification program currently in development is a posi- tive move toward coordinating these efforts. The FOARAM Act sets out ambitious program elements in monitor ing, research, modeling, technology development, and assessment and asks the IWG to develop a national program from the ground up. For tunately, the scope of the problem is not unlike others that have faced the oceanographic and climate change communities in the past; research strategies for addressing ocean acidification can be pulled from existing programs such as the European Project on Ocean Acidification (EPOCA) and other national and multinational ocean acidification programs (see Box 6.1); other largescale oceanographic research programs such as the Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS); and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). There have also been numerous work shops and reports that have outlined recommendations for acidification research at both the international level (e.g., Raven et al., 2005; Orr et al., 2009) and within the United States (Kleypas et al., 2006; Fabry et al., 2008a; Joint et al., 2009). Fabry et al. (2008a), for example, present com prehensive research strategies for four critical major ecosystems--warm water coral reefs, coastal margins, subtropical/tropical pelagic regions, and high latitude regions--as well as crosscutting research issues. The U.S. reports were supported by multiple agencies (NSF, NOAA, USGS, and NASA) and represent the input of a substantial community of U.S. and international researchers. The Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry (OCB) Program (http://usocb.org/; jointly sponsored by NSF, NOAA, and NASA) has been active in supporting ocean acidification research, and produced a white paper outlining the need for a U.S. Federal Ocean Acidification Research Program (Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry Program, 2009a). Finally, the components of a global ocean acidification monitoring program have been proposed by a large cohort of researchers from the international oceanographic community (Feely et al., 2010). Therefore, the committee had a wealth of communitybased input upon which it could base its recommendations for a National Ocean Acidifica tion Program. CONCLUSION: The development of a National Ocean Acidification Program will be a complex undertaking, but legislation has laid the

OCR for page 95
OCEANACIDIFICATION BOX 6.1 Existing Ocean Acidification Programs This box briefly describes three (of several) existing national and multinational ocean acidification research programs to show some similarities and differences in program elements. It also describes one program, the IMBER/SOLAS Ocean Acidification Working Group, which is not a primary research program per se, but instead works as a coordinating body. European Project on OCean Acidification (EPOCA): EPOCA was launched as a result of the submission of a proposal to an open call by the European Union (EU). The overall goal is to advance understanding of the biological, ecological, biogeochemical, and societal implications of ocean acidification. It is a four year program which began in June 2008. The project budget is 15.9M, with a 6.5M contribution from the EU. The project plans were developed by representatives of 10 core partners and they define a complete project with goals and deliverables. EPOCA brings together more than 100 researchers from 27 institutes and 9 Euro- pean countries. EPOCA has several advisory panels, including a Reference User Group which works with EPOCA to define user-related issues such as the types of data and analysis that will be most useful to managers. There is also a project office that coordinates EPOCA activities. From: http://www.epoca-project.eu/ Biological Impacts of Ocean ACIDification (BIOACID): BIOACID is a German national initiative that came as an unsolicited proposal to the German Ministry of Education and Research. The purpose of BIOACID is to assess uncertainties, risks, and thresholds related to the emerging problem of ocean acidification at molecular, cellular, organismal, population, community and ecosystem scales. Planning began in 2007, led by a 6-member group and with a bottom-up, open competition approach among all interested German institutes and universities conducting marine-oriented research. The project began in September 2009 and is scheduled for three years (with the possibility of 3 additional years). The German government will provide 8.9M for the first three years. BIOACID involves more than 100 scientists and technicians from 14 German research institutes and universities. From: http://bioacid.ifm-geomar.de/index.htm United Kingdom (UK) Ocean Acidification Research Programme: The UK program was launched as a result of the submission of a proposal to an open call by the Natural Environment Research Council and the Department for Environ- ment, Food & Rural Affairs. The overall aim of the Research Programme is to pro- vide a greater understanding of the implications of ocean acidification and its risks to ocean biogeochemistry, biodiversity and the whole Earth system. The science and implementation plans were written by an appointed 8-member team. Unlike EPOCA and BIOACID, the research will be determined through an open solicitation for individual proposals. The project will begin in mid 2010 and is scheduled for continued

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM BOX 6.1 Continued 5 years with 12M funding from the UK government. The project is being managed by representatives of the UK government with input from a scientific Programme Advisory Group. From: http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/oceanacidification/ IMBER/SOLAS Ocean Acidification Working Group: This working group was initiated jointly between the Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research (IMBER) and the Surface Ocean Lower Atmosphere Study (SOLAS)-- two international oceanographic research programs--as a subgroup of the Ocean Carbon working group which coordinates seamless implementation of ocean car- bon research between the two programs. Unlike the other programs, it is not sup- porting primary research but instead will coordinate international research efforts in ocean acidification and undertake synthesis activities in ocean acidification at the international level. The 9-member subgroup was launched in September 2009. From: http://www.imber.info/C_WG_SubGroup3.html foundation, and a path forward has been articulated in numerous reports that provide a strong basis for identifying future needs and priorities for understanding and responding to ocean acidification. An ocean acidification program will be a complex undertaking for the nation. Like climate change, ocean acidification is being driven by the integrated global behavior of humans and is occurring at a global scale, but its impacts are likely to be felt at the regional and local level. It is a problem that cuts across disciplines and affects a diverse group of stake holders. Assessment, research, and development of potential adaptation measures will require coordination at the international, national, regional, state, and local levels. It will involve many of the greater than 20 federal agencies that are engaged in ocean science and resource management. Investigating and understanding the problem will necessitate the close collaboration of ocean chemists, biologists, modelers, engineers, econo mists, social scientists, resource managers, and others from academic institutions, government labs and agencies, and nongovernmental orga nizations. It will also involve twoway communication--both outreach to and input from--stakeholders interested in and affected by ocean acidifi cation. Ultimately, a successful program will have an approach that inte grates basic science with decision support. In this chapter, the committee

OCR for page 95
00 OCEANACIDIFICATION describes some key elements of a successful program: a robust observing network, research to fulfill critical information needs, adaptability to new findings, and assessments and support to provide relevant information to decision makers, stakeholders, and the general public. Cutting across these elements are the needs for data management, facilities, training of ocean acidification researchers, and effective program planning and management. 6.1 OBSERvINg NETWORK Countless publications have noted the critical need for longterm ocean observations for a variety of reasons, including understanding the effects of climate change and acidification; they have also noted that the current systems for monitoring these changes are insufficient (e.g., Baker et al., 2007; Fabry et al., 2008a; Birdsey et al., 2009; National Research Council, 2009b). Currently, observations relevant to ocean acidification are being collected, but not in a systematic fashion. A global network of robust and sustained observations, both chemical and biological, will be necessary to establish a baseline and to detect and predict changes attributable to acidification (Feely et al., 2010). This network will require adequate and standardized measurements, both biological and chemical, as well as new methods and technologies for acquiring those measurements. It will also have to cover the major ecosystems that may be affected by ocean acidi fication, and specifically target environments that provide important eco system services that are potentially sensitive to acidification (e.g., fisheries, coral reefs). This network need not be entirely built "from scratch," and the program should leverage existing and developing observing systems. Even if anthropogenic CO2 emissions remained constant at today's levels, the average pH of the ocean would continue to decrease for some period of time, and research in the area would benefit from continuous timeseries data. Thus the program should consider mechanisms to sustain the long term continuity of the observational network. 6.1.1 Measurements The first step in developing an ocean acidification observing network is determining the requirements for biological and chemical measure ments, as well as standards to ensure data quality and continuity. For ocean acidification, requirements for seawater carbonate chemistry mea surements are well defined and include temperature, salinity, oxygen, nutrients critical to primary production, and at least two of the following four carbon parameters: dissolved inorganic carbon, pCO2, total alkalinity, and pH. Methods used for these measurements are well established (Dick

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM 0 son et al., 2007; Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry Program, 2009b; Riebesell et al., 2010; see Chapter 2 of this report). As discussed in previ ous chapters, these values vary with depth and environment, and surface measurements alone will not provide a complete picture of conditions within the ocean. Measurements of chemical parameters should be made in different zones of interest, such as the photic zone, the oxygen mini mum zone, and in deeper waters. Unlike the chemical parameters, there are no agreed upon metrics for biological variables. In part, this is because the field is young and in part it is because the biological effects of ocean acidification, from the cellular to the ecosystem level, are very complex. While biological indicators spe cific to ocean acidification have not yet been defined, however, biological monitoring programs that serve a variety of applications could also be used to track responses to ocean acidification, and it would be beneficial to monitor general indicators of marine ecosystem processes to create a time series data set that will be informative to future efforts to identify correlations and trends between the chemical and biological data. There are many potential measurements for understanding the bio logical response of marine ecosystems to acidification, and their relative importance will vary by ecosystem function and region. Some possible measurements include: rates of calcification, calcium carbonate dissolution, carbon and nitrogen fixation, oxygen production, and primary productivity, biological species composition, abundance, and biomass in pro tected and unprotected areas (Fabry et al., 2008a; Feely et al., 2010), the relative abundance of various taxa of phytoplankton (i.e., diatoms, dinoflagellates, coccolithophores), and settlement rates of sessile calcareous invertebrates (possibly commercially important species such as mussels and oysters). Although at present we cannot predict which indicators will be infor mative for ocean acidification specifically, general indicators of changes in ocean and coastal ecosystems will have value for understanding changes that are a consequence of ocean acidification or other long term stressors, such as temperature. Monitoring of ecological parameters may also help researchers identify those species most vulnerable to ongoing environ mental changes, including ocean acidification. As critical biological indi cators and metrics are identified, the Program will need to incorporate those measurements into the research plan, and thus, adaptability in response to developments in the field should be a critical element of the monitoring program. Resolution of the effects of ocean acidification on individuals, popula

OCR for page 95
0 OCEANACIDIFICATION tions, and communities will require wellcontrolled manipulative experi ments to assess their sensitivity and elucidate the underlying physiologi cal mechanisms. Studies designed to understand which fundamental metabolic processes are affected by higher CO2 or lower pH are critical to clarifying which effects on marine populations are due to ocean acidifica tion and which to longterm or acute environmental stressors. It should also be noted that to create a time series data set that is informative for efforts to identify correlations and trends between the chemical and bio logical data, chemical data must be collected whenever biological data are collected. Though chemical data may stand alone, understanding the effect of ocean acidification on biological species will require that both types of data are available for analysis. Additionally, as ocean acidifica tion is expected to be a concern into the future, data collected today will likely be analyzed by many different researchers from different areas of expertise. To facilitate archiving and sharing of information between investigators and across disciplines, the Program should support the development of standards and calibration methods for both chemical and biological samples. Investments in technology development could greatly improve the ability to routinely measure key chemical and biological parameters in the field with expanded temporal and spatial coverage. For ocean car bonate chemistry, current instrumentation for automated pCO2 measure ments (using equilibrators and infrared detection) are robust, but similar instrumentation for continuous automated measurements of a second carbon parameter are also needed. Additional autonomous sensors could be developed for measuring particulate inorganic carbon (PIC) and par ticulate organic carbon (POC). There are also promising new technolo gies being developed for in situ pH measurements (e.g., autonomous spectrophotometric pH sensors, Seidel et al., 2008; solid state pHsensing ionselective fieldeffect transistor electrodes, Martz et al., 2008; basin scale spatially averaged acoustic pH measurements, Duda, 2009). In the absence of direct synoptic measurements for carbonate chemistry charac terization, proxy measurements have proven useful. For example, salin ity and temperature have been successfully used to estimate global (Lee et al., 2006) and regional (Gledhill et al., 2008) alkalinity fields. Synoptic remotely sensed sea surface temperature measurements are available and complementary sea surface salinity measurements (SSS) should soon be available through NASA's Aquarius mission and will allow for a better understanding of current temporal and spatial variability in ocean car bonate chemistry. The temperature/salinity/alkalinity relationship may however drift in the mid to longterm in response to acidification; sus tained largescale alkalinity measurements will therefore be needed to groundtruth proxy methods if they are to be used in the longterm. Other

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM 0 biooptical sensors for in situ and remote sensing may also provide use ful ocean acidification measurements. In addition, automated sensors for detecting biological parameters will need to be developed, including imaging and molecular biology tools, for detecting shifts in communi ties, both benthic and pelagic and across key marine ecosystems, and physiological stress markers of ocean acidification, including molecular biology tools, for key functional groups and economically important spe cies (Byrne et al., 2010b; Feely et al., 2010). Finally, it will be important not only to develop new sensors, but also methods of deploying these on moorings, drifters, floats, gliders and underway systems. CONCLUSION: The chemical parameters that should be measured as part of an ocean acidification observational network and the methods to make those measurements are well-established. RECOMMENDATION: The National Program should support a chemi- cal monitoring program that includes measurements of temperature, salinity, oxygen, nutrients critical to primary production, and at least two of the following four carbon parameters: dissolved inorganic carbon, pCO2, total alkalinity, and pH. To account for variability in these values with depth, measurements should be made not just in the surface layer, but with consideration for different depth zones of inter- est, such as the deep sea, the oxygen minimum zone, or in coastal areas that experience periodic or seasonal hypoxia. CONCLUSION: Standardized, appropriate parameters for monitoring the biological effects of ocean acidification cannot be determined until more is known concerning the physiological responses and population consequences of ocean acidification across a wide range of taxa. RECOMMENDATION: To incorporate findings from future research, the National Program should support an adaptive monitoring program to identify biological response variables specific to ocean acidification. In the meantime, measurements of general indicators of ecosystem change, such as primary productivity, should be supported as part of a program for assessing the effects of acidification. These measurements will also have value in assessing the effects of other long term environ- mental stressors. RECOMMENDATION: To ensure long-term continuity of data sets across investigators, locations, and time, the National Ocean Acidifica- tion Program should support inter-calibration, standards development, and efforts to make methods of acquiring chemical and biological

OCR for page 95
0 OCEANACIDIFICATION data clear and consistent. The Program should support the develop- ment of satellite, ship-based, and autonomous sensors, as well as other methods and technologies, as part of a network for observing ocean acidification and its impacts. As the field advances and a consensus emerges, the Program should support the identification and standard- ization of biological parameters for monitoring ocean acidification and its effects. 6.1.2 Establishing and Sustaining the Network A number of existing observing systems are already conducting open ocean carbon system measurements. These include existing time series sites (e.g., Hawaii Ocean TimeSeries [HOT], Bermuda Atlantic Time Series Study [BATS]) and repeat hydrographic surveys (e.g., CLIVAR/ CO2 Repeat Hydrography Program). Some of the sites include regular biogeochemical and biological measurements; at the HOT and BATS sites; for example, vertical profiles of inorganic carbon chemistry, nutrient, and chlorophyll concentrations and the rates of biological primary production and sinking particle flux are measured approximately monthly. Addi tional oceanic timeseries sites have been proposed (e.g., OceanSITES; Send et al., 2009). There are also several existing marine ecosystem monitoring sites within the United States that are supported by various federal agencies, including the NSF LongTerm Ecological Research (LTER) program and NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries (Table 6.1). Monitoring is also con ducted within the National Estuarine Research Reserve System under a partnership between NOAA and the coastal states. In addition, EPA is mandated to conduct monitoring within certain sanctuaries (e.g., the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary), and conducts the Environmental Moni toring and Assessment Program (EMAP). There also exist formal and informal networks of coastal marine laboratories that provide opportu nities for assessing past historical conditions and trends, leveraging on going observation programs, and establishing new observational systems and process studies. There are two additional ocean observing systems in development within the United States: the Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) and the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). The NSFsupported OOI will provide a framework for sustained observations at four openocean sites in the north and south Atlantic and Pacific, a regional observing network off the Pacific Northwest, and a coastal pioneer array, initially to be deployed at the shelfbreak off New England (Consortium for Ocean Leadership, 2009). The IOOS, a federal, regional, and privatesector part nership, provides potential observational opportunities through a sub

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM 0 stantial network of openocean, coastal, and Great Lakes measurement sites and moorings (Integrated Ocean Observing System, 2009). Many of these existing chemical and ecological monitoring sites could serve as a backbone for an ocean acidification observational network. However, to understand and manage effects of acidification fully, new observational efforts likely will be required in additional locations, in particular for ecosystems that may be sensitive to acidification but are currently undersampled. Fabry et al. (2008a) identify four broad eco system areas that will require observations: warmwater coral reefs, subtropical/tropical pelagic regions, high latitude regions, and coastal margins. Within coastal regions, they highlight several specific areas: the Gulf of Alaska, western North American continental shelf, Bering Sea, Chukchi Sea, Arctic Shelf, the Scotian Shelf, Pacific coast of Central America, and the Gulf of Mexico. While existing and developing observing networks obtain measure ments relevant to ocean acidification, they were not originally designed with ocean acidification in mind and thus do not have adequate cover age of these regions. The ocean inorganic carbon observing network is primarily in the open ocean with a U.S. coastal system just being devel oped (Doney et al., 2004; Borges et al., 2009); in contrast, the ecological monitoring networks are almost entirely in coastal areas (see Table 6.1). Similarly, not all sites have adequate measurements of biological or chem ical parameters relevant to ocean acidification. Current oceanic inorganic carbon monitoring programs do not always measure enough parameters to fully constrain the seawater carbonate system; additional inorganic carbon measurements could greatly increase the value of existing moni toring programs for understanding acidification (Ocean Carbon and Bio geochemistry Program, 2009b; Feely et al., 2010). Ecosystem monitoring sites measure a number of biological parameters, but have not yet been addressing acidification effects directly. The observing network can be further expanded into additional poorly sampled, but critical, coastal, estuarine and coral reef ecosystems by incorporating ocean acidification related measurements into existing longterm ecological monitoring stud ies (e.g., marine LongTerm Ecological Research Network sites, NOAA Marine Sanctuaries, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System). Some systems may require finer spatial and temporal resolution of obser vations to match the environmental variability in chemical and biological parameters (e.g., tropical coral reefs and estuaries). Finescale measure ments may also be necessary and costeffective in areas where critical ser vices may be affected, for example in locales with intensive aquaculture. The national ocean acidification network could also become a com ponent of or partner with OOI and IOOS; this would allow the acidifica tion network to leverage the assets of a developing integrated network

OCR for page 95
OCEANACIDIFICATION organisms vulnerable to ocean acidification. Where facilities or data resources are lacking, the Program should support their development, which in some cases also may require additional investments in tech- nology development. The Program should also support the develop- ment of human resources through workshops, short-courses, or other training opportunities. 6.6 PROgRAM PLANNINg, STRUCTURE, AND MANAgEMENT The committee presents ambitious priorities and goals for the National Ocean Acidification Program, which are also echoed in the FOARAM Act and many other reports. To achieve these goals, the Program will have to lay out clear strategic and implementation plans. While the ulti mate details of such plans are outside the scope of this study, there are some elements that the committee believes are necessary for a successful program. In considering recommendations on program implementation, the committee took lessons learned from largescale research projects such as the NSF LTER Network, the USGCRP, and in particular, major oceanographic programs in its analysis and recommendations for the successful implementation of a National Ocean Acidification Program. It is important to stress, however, that a National Ocean Acidification Pro gram--which must also link the science to decision making--will have challenges beyond these largely researchoriented programs. The challenges to improve understanding of largescale oceano graphic phenomena with global implications has led to the rise of major U.S. oceanographic programs such as Climate VARiability and Predict ability (CLIVAR), Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics (GLOBEC), Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS; see Box 6.2 for case study), Ocean Drilling Program (ODP), Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere (TOGA), and World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE) programs (National Research Council, 1999). These major oceanographic programs have been recognized for their important impact on the ocean sciences, achieving an understanding of largescale phenomena not likely without such a concentrated effort; they also produced a legacy of highquality data, new facilities and technologies, and a new generation of trained scientists (National Research Council, 1999). In 1999, the NRC reviewed the major oceanographic programs and devised a list of guidelines and recommen dations for the creation and management of largescale oceanographic programs (see Box 6.3). The FOARAM Act calls for the IWG to develop a detailed, 10year strategic plan for the National Ocean Acidification Program. The com mittee first addresses the issue of program length. The committee agrees that a clearly defined end is appropriate because it allows for the develop

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM BOX 6.2 The Joint Global Ocean Flux Study: A Model for Success The U.S. Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS) was a multi-agency and multi-disciplinary research and monitoring program, linked to an international pro- gram, which coordinated an ambitious agenda to study the ocean carbon cycle. The U.S. JGOFS program, a component of the U.S Global Change Research Program, was launched in the late 1980s and ran until 2005. The international program, which began a few years after the U.S. program, had over 30 participat- ing nations; it began under the auspices of the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR) and eventually became a core program of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP). The main goal of the JGOFS program was to understand the controls on the concentrations and fluxes of carbon and associated nutrients in the ocean. Some of the accomplishments include improved understanding of the roles of physical and biological controls on carbon cycling, improved understanding of the role of the North Atlantic in the global carbon cycle, and improved modeling of oceanic carbon dioxide uptake (National Research Council, 1999). As a result of the program, ocean biogeochemistry emerged as a new field, with emphasis on quality measurements of carbon system parameters and interdisciplinary field studies of the biological, chemical, and physical pro- cesses which control the ocean carbon cycle. U.S. JGOFS was supported primarily by the U.S. National Science Foundation in collaboration with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administra- tion, the Department of Energy, and the Office of Naval Research. FROM: http://www1.whoi.edu/ ment of milestones and assessment to ensure that goals are met (National Research Council, 1999). A 10year time frame may be adequate time to achieve many of the goals set out, but based on the experience of other major research programs, the program in its entirety may need to span a longer period (possibly 1520 years) to incorporate an adequate synthesis phase following the field and laboratory components (e.g., Doney and Ducklow, 2006). The ultimate length of the plan will have to reflect the minimum time needed to adequately address the questions posed, and will require community input. Further, a National Ocean Acidification Program will have many elements (e.g., operational elements such as decision support) that will naturally continue beyond the initial decade; it will be critical to establish a legacy program for extended ocean acidifica tion observations, research, and management at the outset. In applying the guidelines from the NRC review of major oceano graphic programs (National Research Council, 1999) to the design of a National Ocean Acidification Program, the committee identified some

OCR for page 95
OCEANACIDIFICATION BOX 6.3 Lessons Learned from Major Oceanographic Programs The following paraphrases the recommendations made in Global Ocean Science: Toward an Integrated Approach (National Research Council, 1999) that address management of major programs. These recommendations are directly relevant to the development of a National Ocean Acidification Program. The federal sponsors . . . should encourage and support a broad spectrum of interdisciplinary research activities, varying in size from a collaboration of a few scientists, to intermediate-size programs, to programs perhaps even larger in scope than the present major oceanographic programs. Major allocation decisions (for example, extramural and internal funding of agency research) should be based on wide input from the community and the basis for decisions should be set forth clearly to the scientific community. . . . Sponsors and organizers of any new oceanographic program should maintain the flexibility to consider a wide range of program structures before choos- ing one that best addresses the scientific challenge. During the initial planning and organization of new major oceanographic programs, an effort should be made to ensure agreement between the program's scientific objectives and the motivating hypotheses given for funding. The structure should encourage continuous refinement of the program. The overall structure of the program should be dictated by the complexity and nature of the scientific challenges it addresses. Likewise, the nature of the admin- istrative body should reflect the size, complexity, and duration of the program. All programs should have well defined milestones, including a clearly defined end. An iterative assessment and evaluation of scientific objectives and funding should be undertaken in a partnership of major ocean program leadership and agency management. Modelers, [experimentalists,] and observationalists need to work together during all stages of program design and implementation. A number of different mechanisms should be implemented to facilitate com- munication among the ongoing major ocean programs [and other ocean acidifica- tion programs], including (but not limited to) joint annual meetings of SSC chairs and community town meetings. When the scale and complexity of the program warrants, an interagency project office should be established. Other mechanisms, such as memoranda of understanding (MOU), should also be used to ensure multi-agency support throughout the program's lifetime. . . . The program and sponsoring agencies should establish (with input from the community) priorities for moving long-time series and other observations initiated by the program into operational mode. Factors to be considered include data quality, length [i.e., duration of program], number of variables, space and time resolution, accessibility for the wider community, and relevance to established goals. . . . Federal sponsors and the academic community must collaborate to preserve and ensure timely access to the data sets developed as part of each program's activities. FROM: National Research Council, 1999.

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM priorities for program planning, structure, and management that will help to bring about a successful program. While the strategic plan being developed by the IWG may not contain all of the details necessary, the committee believes it is critical that an implementation plan define, at a minimum: ()Goals and objecties: Clear research, observational, and operational priorities and objectives are essential to develop a National Ocean Acidification Program. Without them, meaningful program assess ment is not conceivable. ()Metricsforealuation:Without welldefined metrics tied to both goals and objectives, meaningful or effective program operation is not pos sible. One cannot manage without measurement. Program operation includes and requires process, outcome, and impact evaluations--all of which depend upon welldefined measurement (National Research Council, 2005b). ()Mechanismsforcoordination,integration,andealuation: Given the pro posed Program's complexity, particular care and attention will be required to assure needed coordination between, integration of, and communication among the numerous, diverse program elements and entities. Mechanisms will also need to be put in place to facilitate two way communication among research community, decision makers, and stakeholders. ()Meanstotransitionresearchandobserationtooperations: The plan will need to anticipate and account for the transition of some research and observational program elements to operational status. The tran sition plans will ensure the continuity of longterm observations and research products and facilitate the establishment, where called for, of legacy elements that continue beyond the termination of the Program. ()Agencyrolesandinstitutionalresponsibilities: Roles and responsibilities of every federal agency participating in the Program must be care fully specified and clearly conveyed to all of those involved (Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry Program, 2009a). The Program could take advantage of existing and new mechanisms for interagency fund ing of targeted research and observational elements. ()Coordinationwithexistinganddeelopingnationalandinternationalpro- grams: Ocean acidification is being recognized and taken seriously in numerous countries and diverse organizations in the United States and around the world. Given the global scope of ocean acidification, special efforts are required to take advantage of and leverage joint research and observational opportunities. Coordination is also needed to avoid possible duplications of effort. In particular, there are several different types of natural linkages with: a. ongoing largescale ocean and climate projects in the United States such as CLIVAR and OCB, the USGCRP, OOI, and IOOS;

OCR for page 95
0 OCEANACIDIFICATION b. JSOSTled efforts on the three existing nearterm priorities of the Ocean Research Priorities Plan: Response of Coastal Ecosystems to Persistent Forcing and Extreme Events, Comparative Analy sis of Marine Ecosystem Organization, and Sensors for Marine Ecosystems; c. other national and multinational carbon cycle, climate change, and ocean acidification programs (e.g., EPOCA, BIOACID, UK Ocean Acidification Research Programme, IMBER, SOLAS) and in particular the recently formed SOLASIMBER ocean acidification working group; d. international scientific bodies such as the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), the International Council for Science Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR), the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), the International GeosphereBiosphere Programme (IGBP), the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), and the North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES) that have had demonstrated success in planning and coordinating international oceanographic research programs. ()Resourcerequirements:Based on the Program's stated goals and objec tives, realistic resources must be identified and allocated to ensure success. Scrupulous attention to specific program elements, including those devoted to program management, data management, training, outreach and decision support, will be necessary. Given the dynamic and complex character of the ocean acidification problem, the com mitment of significant resources for exploratory, innovative, and high risk research will also be necessary. ()Community input and external reiew: Progress toward achievement of the Program's goals and objectives can only be measured and weighed based on periodic, transparent, and effective assessments and reviews. Peer reviews for proposals and performance are criti cal to keep the Program on course toward its targeted goals and objectives. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should create a detailed implementation plan with community input. The plan should address (1) goals and objectives; (2) metrics for evalu- ation; (3) mechanisms for coordination, integration, and evaluation; (4) means to transition research and observational elements to opera- tional status; (5) agency roles and responsibilities; (6) coordination with existing and developing national and international programs; (7) resource requirements; and (8) community input and external review. If fully executed, the elements outlined in the FOARAM Act and recommended in this report--monitoring, interdisciplinary research,

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM assessment and decision support, data management, facilities, training, reporting, and outreach and communication--would create a largescale and highly complex program that will require sufficient support. These program goals are certainly on the order of, if not more ambitious than, major oceanographic programs and will require a high level of coordi nation that warrants a program office. This program office would not only coordinate the activities of the program, but would also serve as a central point for communicating and collaborating with outside groups such as Congress and international ocean acidification programs. Ocean acidification is a global problem that presents challenges for research, but it also presents opportunities to share resources and expertise that may be beyond the capacity of a single nation. Therefore, international collaboration is critical to the success of the Program. It will be important to coordinate with the various other national and multinational ocean acidification programs, as well as other international ocean carbon cycle, climate change, and marine ecosystem research programs to leverage existing resources and avoid duplication of efforts. There are many models for such an office. The IWG called for in the FOARAM Act can be an effective approach for linking research efforts across the federal government because it resides within the JSOST, which provides for the coordination of science and technology across ocean agencies; however, a mechanism for outside input from academic scien tists would be required since IWG membership is limited to federal agen cies. An outside scientific steering committee consisting of representatives from the community, usually principal investigators, has been used in many major oceanographic programs (e.g., U.S. JGOFS), but this group would need to represent all stakeholders and there would still need to be a mechanism for interagency coordination of resources. An approach that combines both elements may be the best for a National Ocean Acidifica tion Program; for example, some current interagency working groups such as the Carbon Cycle IWG work closely with an external Scien tific Steering Group. Many largescale programs (e.g., U.S. CLIVAR, U.S. GCRP) also include dedicated administrative staff that can coordinate logistics, reporting requirements, integration between program elements, communication, and other program elements. A program office is likely warranted for the National Ocean Acidification Program given the large number of stakeholders, reporting requirements, and broad research port folio that covers both basic and applied research. Adequate resources will need to be supplied to staff a program office to support the activities of the IWG, whose participants are typically drawn from program managers and federal scientists. Where possible, efficiencies in the program office could minimize overall costs and maximize funds available to support research while completing all required tasks.

OCR for page 95
OCEANACIDIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should create a program office with the resources to ensure success- ful coordination and integration of all of the elements outlined in the FOARAM Act and this report. COMPILATION OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSION: The chemistry of the ocean is changing at an unprec- edented rate and magnitude due to anthropogenic carbon dioxide emis- sions; the rate of change exceeds any known to have occurred for at least the past hundreds of thousands of years. Unless anthropogenic CO 2 emissions are substantially curbed, or atmospheric CO2 is controlled by some other means, the average pH of the ocean will continue to fall. Ocean acidification has demonstrated impacts on many marine organ- isms. While the ultimate consequences are still unknown, there is a risk of ecosystem changes that threaten coral reefs, fisheries, protected species, and other natural resources of value to society. CONCLUSION: given that ocean acidification is an emerging field of research, the committee finds that the federal government has taken initial steps to respond to the nation's long-term needs and that the national ocean acidification program currently in development is a posi- tive move toward coordinating these efforts. CONCLUSION: The development of a National Ocean Acidification Program will be a complex undertaking, but legislation has laid the foundation, and a path forward has been articulated in numerous reports that provide a strong basis for identifying future needs and priorities for understanding and responding to ocean acidification. CONCLUSION: The chemical parameters that should be measured as part of an ocean acidification observational network and the methods to make those measurements are well established. RECOMMENDATION: The National Program should support a chemi- cal monitoring program that includes measurements of temperature, salinity, oxygen, nutrients critical to primary production, and at least two of the following four carbon parameters: dissolved inorganic car- bon, pCO2, total alkalinity, and pH. To account for variability in these values with depth, measurements should be made not just in the sur- face layer, but with consideration for different depth zones of interest, such as the deep sea, the oxygen minimum zone, or in coastal areas that experience periodic or seasonal hypoxia.

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM CONCLUSION: Standardized, appropriate parameters for monitoring the biological effects of ocean acidification cannot be determined until more is known concerning the physiological responses and population consequences of ocean acidification across a wide range of taxa. RECOMMENDATION: To incorporate findings from future research, the National Program should support an adaptive monitoring program to identify biological response variables specific to ocean acidification. In the meantime, measurements of general indicators of ecosystem change, such as primary productivity, should be supported as part of a program for assessing the effects of acidification. These measurements will also have value in assessing the effects of other long-term environ- mental stressors. RECOMMENDATION: To ensure long-term continuity of data sets across investigators, locations, and time, the National Ocean Acidifica- tion Program should support inter-calibration, standards development, and efforts to make methods of acquiring chemical and biological data clear and consistent. The Program should support the development of satellite, ship-based, and autonomous sensors, as well as other methods and technologies, as part of a network for observing ocean acidification and its impacts. As the field advances and a consensus emerges, the Program should support the identification and standardization of bio- logical parameters for monitoring ocean acidification and its effects. CONCLUSION: The existing observing networks are inadequate for the task of monitoring ocean acidification and its effects. However, these networks can be used as the backbone of a broader monitoring network. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should review existing and emergent observing networks to identify existing measurements, chemical and biological, that could become part of a comprehensive ocean acidification observing network and to iden- tify any critical spatial or temporal gaps in the current capacity to moni- tor ocean acidification. The Program should work to fill these gaps by: ensuring that existing coastal and oceanic carbon observing sites adequately measure the seawater carbonate system and a range of bio- logical parameters; identifying and leveraging other long-term ocean monitoring programs by adding relevant chemical and biological measurements at existing and new sites;

OCR for page 95
OCEANACIDIFICATION adding additional time-series sites, repeat transects, and in situ sensors in key areas that are currently undersampled. These should be prioritized based on ecological and societal vulnerabilities. deploying and field testing new remote sensing and in situ tech- nologies for observing ocean acidification and its impacts; and supporting the development and application of new data analysis and modeling techniques for integrating satellite, ship-based, and in situ observations. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should plan for the long-term sustainability of an integrated ocean acidification observation network. CONCLUSION: Present knowledge is insufficient to guide federal and state agencies in evaluating potential impacts for management purposes. RECOMMENDATION: Federal and federally funded research on ocean acidification should focus on the following eight unranked priorities: understand processes affecting acidification in coastal waters; understand the physiological mechanisms of biological responses; assess the potential for acclimation and adaptation; investigate the response of individuals, populations, and communities; understand ecosystem-level consequences; investigate the interactive effects of multiple stressors; understand the implications for biogeochemical cycles; and understand the socioeconomic impacts and inform decisions. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should focus on identifying, engaging, and responding to stakeholders in its assessment and decision support process and work with exist- ing climate service and marine ecosystem management programs to develop a broad strategy for decision support. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should create a data management office and provide it with adequate resources. guided by experiences from previous and current large- scale research programs and the research community, the office should develop policies to ensure data and metadata quality, access, and archiving. The Program should identify appropriate data center(s) for

OCR for page 95
ANATIONALOCEANACIDIFICATIONPROGRAM archiving of ocean acidification data or, if existing data centers are inade- quate, the Program should create its own. RECOMMENDATION: In addition to management of research and observational data, the National Ocean Acidification Program, in estab- lishing an Ocean Acidification Information Exchange, should provide timely research results, syntheses, and assessments that are of value to managers, policy makers, and the general public. The Program should develop a strategy and provide adequate resources for communication efforts. RECOMMENDATION: As the National Ocean Acidification Program develops a research plan, the facilities and human resource needs should also be assessed. Existing community facilities available to support high-quality field- and laboratory-based carbonate chemistry measure- ments, well-controlled carbonate chemistry manipulations, and large- scale ecosystem manipulations and comparisons should be inventoried and gaps assessed based on research needs. An assessment should also be made of community data resources such as genome sequences for organisms vulnerable to ocean acidification. Where facilities or data resources are lacking, the Program should support their development, which in some cases also may require additional investments in tech- nology development. The Program should also support the develop- ment of human resources through workshops, short-courses, or other training opportunities. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should create a detailed implementation plan with community input. The plan should address (1) goals and objectives; (2) metrics for evalu- ation; (3) mechanisms for coordination, integration, and evaluation; (4) means to transition research and observational elements to opera- tional status; (5) agency roles and responsibilities; (6) coordination with existing and developing national and international programs; (7) resource requirements; and (8) community input and external review. RECOMMENDATION: The National Ocean Acidification Program should create a program office with the resources to ensure success- ful coordination and integration of all of the elements outlined in the FOARAM Act and this report.

OCR for page 95