Satellite observes agricultural runoff causing algal blooms

Space Daily ^ | December 9, 2004 | SPX

[cogitator]

Living in the Chesapeake Bay watershed in Maryland, we're now paying a "flush tax" to pay for improvements in wastewater treatment plants to cut down on the amount of nutrients pouring into the Bay. Hopefully that'll help a little.

[gridlock]

Hopefully that'll help a little.

Until they start taking out those ChemLawn trucks with RPGs, I'm afraid the situation is hopeless. Every manicured lawn is dumping nutrients right into the watershed. It's all gotta go somewhere!

[GreenFreeper]

This is a big problem in the Great Lakes region as well. From our digital orthophotos we can see algal blooms as well as sediment plumes coming from the tributaries. This is going to be a hotbed issue.

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[cogitator]

This is going to be a hotbed issue.

Excess nutrient input is probably the biggest remaining pollution problem in the United States right now -- most of the more noxious and dangerous chemicals and substances have been pretty well (with some exceptions) cleaned up. But improving stormwater runoff and wastewater treatment is difficult and expensive.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!!

[evets]

Same problem on Mars

[SierraWasp]

The solution to pollution is dilution, right???

[GreenFreeper]

I agree, I've done some work with the CSO (combined sewer overflow) problems in the Great Lakes region. Many communities still have these antiquated waste water treatment plants that discharge untreated water directly into lakes, streams, etc. after rain events. Instead of separating storm and sewer water, they often take the bandaid approach of increasing the plants water retention capacity. There are hundreds of communities that aren't in compliance with the EPA's NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) permiting system. At least around here communities don't seem to care as the polluted water flows into surrounding communities, eventually ending up in Lake Michigan. A people wonder why the beaches are closed due to contamination.

[Aracelis]

The solution to pollution is dilution, right???

Very punny! But actually, you are correct...although it really doesn't solve the problem, it just disperses pollutants over a larger area.

[cogitator]

I grew up in New London, WI and went to college at UW-Oshkosh. One of the big environmental issues while I was in high school and college was the sad state of the Fox River that flows from Lake Winnebago to Green Bay. At the time, it was a mess. It's substantially better now, and the improvement shows that progress can be made. It's still got problems, mainly PCBs, but they're being addressed.

[GreenFreeper]

I don't worry too much about PCB's, they often are trapped under the sediment layer. Evil environmental consulting firms (I can name quite a few) use somewhat stabilized PCB measures from underneath the sediment to push environmentally hazardous and costly dredging. Then they have no where to dump the toxic sediment, which begins a whole new debate.

Speaking of eutrophication, you ever go to Lake Koshkenog (spelling?). My grandmother lived on that lake near Edgerton, WI until she passed away a few years ago. That has to be the most algae fill lake I have ever seen!

[GeekDejure]

Excess nutrient input is probably the biggest remaining pollution problem in the United States right now
=====
Considering all of today's triumphant technology, surely there must be a way to convert excess nutrient input to a new form of breathtaking breakfast cereal !!! ;-))

[cogitator]

Speaking of eutrophication, you ever go to Lake Koshkenog (spelling?). My grandmother lived on that lake near Edgerton, WI until she passed away a few years ago. That has to be the most algae fill lake I have ever seen!

Koshkenong. I've been by it on I-90 but never actually to it. Any idea why it was so green? (There's a lot of dairy around there -- I might be able to guess.)

[Smokin' Joe]

Not until they quit dumping sewage sludge on agricultural land, (within 25 ft. of the water).

[untrained skeptic]

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Algal blooms can either be very good or very bad.

On the good side the nutrients are feeding algae that is important to the food chain in the ocean.

On the bad side, some types of algae release bad toxins.

Which happened in the blooms in Mexico?

I'm a bit skeptical about this report, because it seems to be leaving a lot of information out.

It talks about red tides and hypoxia, but it doesn't say that they saw evidence of those occurrences in the areas they were observing.

They mention problems with hypoxia at the end of Mississippi river, but they don't really show that they have any evidence to show that it's related to algal blooms or nutrient runoff. I suspect that there are a lot of different pollutants in the Mississippi river, what ties the hypoxia to the nutrients?

The article mentions bacteria that eats the algae uses up oxygen. However green algae is the biggest source of oxygen in the oceans. I'm having a hard time buying the argument that more green algae results in a net loss of oxygen levels in the water. That kind of seems to violate the natural cycle.

""In the Sea of Cortez, there's the possibility that hypoxia could occur at a local scale, which could be devastating to the shrimp and shellfish industries," Matson said"

Sounds like another way of saying that we saw widespread evidence of algal blooms but no evidence of hypoxia, yet you should still be concerned because we say it could be happening.

""Shrimp fisheries are very important economically, and they're already under a lot of stress from overfishing and aquaculture. It is possible that agricultural runoff could cause additional stress if it does lead to toxic blooms or hypoxia." She and her colleagues plan to conduct follow-up studies to assess the ecological impact of Yaqui Valley runoff events."

Shrimp eat algae. So unless the runoff is causing toxic blooms, I would think that the shrimp population would thrive during algal blooms. If the shrimp populations are low, it sounds like there might be other causes.

It sounds like they gathered some good information with their research. However the tone of the article seems to imply that these algal blooms are bad. All they've done so far is show that the nutrients appear to effect algae growth, but they don't know what type of algae or if it's good or bad.

They appear to be concentrating on possible harm. It always scares me when environmentalists go into research and appear to already assume that there is harm being caused, and then look for evidence that they are right.

[SierraWasp]

"...it just disperses pollutants over a larger area."

Too much concentration of just about anything can be considered a pollutant these days! The so called pollutants come directly, or indirectly from the ground and even the ground it'self is considered a "pollutant" by militant GANG-GREEN when ANY erosion occurs... it's called TURBIDITY and according to them... MUST be eliminated!!!

In 1998, I attended a much ballyhooed conference attended by both Clinton and Bruce Babbit at Lake Tahoe about lake clarity. As usual, one could only submit questions on 3x5 cards in advance. It rained heavily that day and I submitted two and one was "I noticed on the way in here through the parking lots that a lot of ugly yellow stuff was being washed down the parking lot drains and into the lake! It appeared to be coming from our beautiful pine trees! What program does the Federal Government have in place to stop this detrimental substance from polluting the lake?"

The other question I submitted was, "Erosion is perceived as the prime cause of degradation in lake clarity. Since the time Lake Tahoe was formed, how does one explain how all the buildable level and semi-level land got into this basin and the lake remain as pristine as it has been?"

[GreenFreeper]

I'm having a hard time buying the argument that more green algae results in a net loss of oxygen levels in the water.

Its more of an indirect effect. Untreated wastewater is generally rich in organic matter. This organic matter feeds the bacteria and algae normally present in healthy water sources. The presence of excessive amounts of nutrients discharged as a result of untreated wastewater will cause an increase in concentration of both bacteria and algae within the surface water. Beside organic matter, wastewater also contains both organic and oxidizable inorganic compounds. These organic and inorganic compounds directly and indirectly consume the available oxygen present in the ecosystem. This process is called eutrification and will eventually kill off other living organisms (plants, animals, & insects) in the aquatic system.

[SierraWasp]

I meant to ping you to this discussion. I think you will probably have many enlightening things to add to offset my rhetorical questions, platitudes, puns and hypercritical replies. So get in here, quick!!!

[GreenFreeper]

Any idea why it was so green? (There's a lot of dairy around there -- I might be able to guess.)

From what little I know/remember of that area, Lake Koshkenog was formely farmland. The native americans farmed it previously and then I believe white settlers also farmed it. Somehow we altered the Rock River (most likely dammed upstream) and the farmland flooded. I remember hearing the Lake has only a maximum depth of 7 feet, so that would support that theory-- pretty shallow for a lake that size. So I would assume the lake bed soil was already pretty nutrient rich to begin with and I'm sure the nearby dairy industry doesn't help.