i sat down with gowans, who specializes in cetacean (or marine mammal) research at eckerd. gowans leads the school’s dolphin project and collaborates with amy siuda, an eckerd associate professor of marine science, on a microplastics monitoring project. 

when i sat down with gowans, she told me that the red tide this past summer “was one of the most severe ones i’ve ever seen. i’ve been here now 18 years and i’ve never seen the level of fish kills that we saw in tampa bay.” 

in the following conversation, we discuss how the dolphin and microplastics research projects have been impacted by the piney point spill and the past summer’s red tide event. we also discuss the value of long term studies and the insight they provide when dealing with ecological disasters such as piney point.

—

this interview has been edited for clarity and length. 

kaitlyn copland: what research have you conducted that is related to the piney point spill? 

shannon gowans: amy siuda and i have had a long term monitoring project looking at microplastics in tampa bay. one of our monitoring sites that we’ve been monitoring for quite some time is close to the sunshine skyway, a bridge not that far from where the outflow was.

our initial concern was: how did this plastic barrier break down? and is it shedding microplastics into tampa bay? we found that the values that we got while the piney point outflow was going on were much, much higher than we’d ever seen before in our years of monitoring. 

we then set out to try to collect some more samples and try to see what was going on––and also to see if we could get some samples much closer to the outflow. we’re again seeing some elevated levels, but not as high as they had been.

the question is: were we getting elevated out-flow levels from piney point? there were so many boats in the area that it might have been stirring up sediments that may have had microplastics in them. or, was it after they started pumping the water that caused all this turbulence and registered things?

overall, we are not sure if these statements hold true. we’re continuing on with our long term monitoring to see what happens. microplastics were not the first level of concern with something like piney point, but because we had this long term monitoring program it was worthwhile to investigate.

kc: can you share how the dolphin project has been impacted? 

sg: currently, nutrient pollution is unlikely to harm marine mammals because the pollutants are not problematic for mammal’s health. we’re much more concerned about how the nutrient input that is having a long term impact on the ecology of tampa bay, and how that relates to these top predators.

we know that when we have harmful algal blooms that lead to large fish kills, we end up with issues with our dolphins because their food source has been largely removed. 

kc: how has the past summer’s red tide event affected the current dolphin population? 

sg: we didn’t see an uptick in mortality directly due to piney point, but we are concerned about what’s going to happen given the prey base that got lost with that red tide. it’s difficult to tie those two events completely together, but it is likely that these events may be related; the red tide was already present before piney point came in, but the nutrients that were released would fuel an algal bloom––which is exactly what we saw.

kc: was this past summer’s red tide more severe than in recent years?

sg: one thing is that it was within tampa bay itself and happened over a relatively short time period. that may mean that it didn’t impact all of tampa bay, which may mean fish and animals that are feeding on fish may be able to just move somewhere slightly different and find better conditions. 

so, we may not see that large an impact because it was a very intense event but over a short time period. in 2005, we had an exceptionally long red tide event that actually persisted over several years––there were high levels of red tide over several years. they weren’t as high as we saw last summer, but that’s what had a really profound impact on the dolphin population because they went through a long spell where their food––their prey––was produced. so, both can be problematic and it’s just going to be waiting and seeing what we end up with.

kc: do you have any thoughts on how this spill might play out over the coming months, and maybe even into the next year?

sg: so much depends on what happens with the interaction with the currents and the tides. at the initial input of nutrients, they were dispersing through skyway bridge and moving outwards into the gulf. piney point was initially very, very strong in tampa bay, but that has dissipated into the gulf of mexico. 

that’s also going to be something to watch because to remove (a lot of these nutrients) from the system they either have to be diluted in a larger quantity of water, or they end up in the sediments. if they get out to the deeper water into the sediments, then it’s harder to have storms that stir them up. in the shallow waters like tampa bay, those sediments can be easily disturbed by storms. so, again, it’s going to be seeing what happens to that nutrient influx. 

we don’t have the high algal counts right now that we were seeing earlier in the summer, but the nutrients haven’t completely disappeared from the system. we’re actually just starting to head into the time when we typically see larger red tide events, because red tide is typically a fall-winter event. seeing what happens to those is going to be something that we want to watch long term––and really looking at what kinds of larger-scale, ecological changes may be happening.

kc: if an event similar to piney point was to occur again, what do you think needs to happen? 

sg: what needs to happen is to have regulations to ensure that, if we have these phosphate reservoirs, (they) need to be well maintained, and, ideally, (regulations) working on removing them so that they’re no longer at this bar. that’s the work of land use policies and a lot of other people. 

we need to change legislation to hold the companies that are producing these pollutants responsible. even if the companies sold or closed down, they’re still the ones who created those pollutants.

kc: do you have any final thoughts, or something important to share about like the piney point spill regarding your research?

sg: i think one of the things that piney point shows is the value of having long term monitoring plans where we know what happened, what the conditions were like before something happens so that we can see what happened during the event, and then afterwards. 

if you go in at the crisis point, you don’t know what the conditions were like beforehand. yes, you can see what they’re like during the crisis point and what happened moving forward, but you don’t have that comparison. if we really want to understand what’s going on with our ecosystems and, if there is a catastrophic event, be able to then try to turn them back to those pre-existing conditions, we have to know what those conditions were. we don’t know if all we ever do is respond to catastrophe. we have to be monitoring (conditions) in the long term to see what’s going on and not waiting until it’s a crisis point.

—

the value of research

ultimately, long term monitoring research projects provide great value when mitigating ecological disasters similar to piney point. gowans’ research has discovered that plastic levels have increased significantly and the dolphin’s prey population––fish––have decreased. 

it is currently undetermined if the spill is the source of the elevated microplastic levels and increased severity of the red tide that killed the fish. this is an event that will play out over the coming months, and its effects will be determined by currents and tides.

for more information and updates on the piney point spill, visit protecting florida together.

blue skys farm is chemical free and keeps a low carbon footprint by selling the food in a close proximity to the farm. by selling the food so close to home the flavor is being preserved and they expend a minimal amount of fossil fuels. dedora believes that local farmers are crucial to small local economy, due to the importance of keeping local dollars locally spent. food + innovation = local farming, in that an innovating way to incorporate sustainable food into the local community is to turn to local farmers. not only do they need the support, but they are working to benefit the local consumer, and the food is freshest when it is right in your backyard.

senator frank lautenberg (d-nj) has introduced the safe chemicals act of 2011 to update the toxic substances control act, (tsca) which was last updated in 1976. this bill puts a mandate on companies to establish the safety of chemicals in products before they are available to consumers. current law puts the burden on the environmental protection agency to seek out and identify dangerous chemicals.

toxic chemical exposure, even in small amounts, has been linked to cancer, fertility problems and learning disabilities, and the epa has acknowledged shortcomings in their ability to identify dangerous chemicals and protect the public from exposure under existing law. “tsca is showing its age, and its limitations. our tsca inventory currently lists over 84,000 chemicals, very few of which have actually been studied by the epa for their risk to families and children,” says steve owens of the epa.

although there has been ongoing friction between safe chemical advocacy groups and big business, larger companies who would be greatly impacted by this legislation, including corporate giants sc johnson and basf, support one federal standard, for the sake of consumer confidence as well as global competitiveness. the lack of effective legislation at the federal level has caused states to create their own regulations, which forces national companies to comply with vastly different regulations from state to state. “complying with as many as 50 different state chemical management policies will only create uncertainty in our markets and costly inefficiencies. if we have more confidence, it does help the bottom line for companies like ours,” says kelly semrau of sc johnson.

the new bill calls for a prioritization of chemicals based on risk, creating open access to reliable chemical information and the promotion of safer, green chemistry. the epa and other proponents of this legislation say that it is time to give the american people the protection from toxic chemicals they need and deserve.

environment for safe, easy disposal.”

the company, based out of whidbey island in washington state (the same place that has tidal turbines in the works), focuses on everything from contaminated mine water to air quality and stormwater runoff. xr-88 is applied to a contaminated site, which then breaks down the harmful chemicals into a safe, sludge-like substance.

the company focuses mainly on sites in the pacific northwest, including the 3,800 abandoned mine sites, the 12 million tons of coal from washington’s lone coal plant, and 14 million pounds of pollutants dumped in the puget sound annually.

the puget sound (photo from wikimedia commons)

wi environmental is expanding, though. according to a recent article in the seattle times, the company has just “signed a multi-million-dollar deal to license his environmental technology to begin cleaning up china’s heavily contaminated rivers and

soil.”

founder and president tim wandell spent five years in china, and witnessed plenty of pollution at their many factories, “all types of places are loaded with contaminants,” said wandell to the seattle times, “look out
the back side of a factory and here’s this huge mountain of the stuff.”

beyond china, wi environmental continues to move forward, announcing just last week a partnership with a company in south africa to export their xr-88 product.

is a product like xr-88 really the best and most efficient way to clean our earth and air, though? certainly avoiding pollution in the first place would be best, but we have to try out as many solutions as possible.

this technology isn’t without it’s problems, either. often environmental remediation of this kind can release many of those trapped chemicals into the air during the cleansing process, in addition to being a large and expensive undertaking.

what do you think about environmental, specifically soil remediation? how about xr-88, does it really work? is there a better way to clean up our earth and water? share your thoughts below…

a recent and tragic accident at a refinery in anacortes, washington makes these concerns all too real. an explosion killed 5 people and critically injured two more and many speculate it was due to poor safety regulations.

tesoro refinery in anacortes, washington (from flickr.com)

adding worry to the issue is the fact that these plants are what barack obama called in 2006, “stationary weapons of mass destruction”. the seattle pi article claims there are approximately 6,000 plants in need of special security provisions, yet only 12 are currently under inspection. furthermore, many federal programs are full of delay that keeps us from being much further along than we should be.

the security concerns for these plants an important issue, but what about the environmental impacts of an incident? be it from a threat or accident, incidents at these chemical plants are usually quite severe. the recent accident in anacortes shows that even a small explosion can have disastrous consequences. events that result in zero loss of life, such as the exxon valdez spill, had terrible effects not only on the local wildlife, but the fishing and tourism industries.

how big are these security and safety concerns for chemical plants? it may be difficult to tell now, but the environmental and economic impacts of potential chemical accident are not. do you think we need to make significant steps towards improving both the safety and security of chemical plants? is this a lost cause? are there too many plants for this to be a realistic goal? share you thoughts below