- Oct 17, 2011
- 48,389
- 50,781
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
The Trump administration is dismantling a $368 million deep-ocean observation system that was put in place a decade ago to monitor coastal environments, marine ecosystems and powerful currents that affect the global climate.
The National Science Foundation said it would send ships in June to begin removing more than 900 deep-sea instruments anchored off Oregon, Washington State, Alaska, North Carolina, and an area between Greenland and Iceland known as the Irminger Sea.
Scientists have used data from the system to understand how the ocean is absorbing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, how changes in ocean temperature such as marine heat waves might affect fisheries or signal bigger shifts in the climate, and coastal flooding along the East Coast.
The station in the Irminger Sea has been key to understanding changes in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, a global conveyor belt of water that some scientists are concerned may be weakening as a result of climate warming. A collapse of the current could have severe and far-reaching weather effects.
The ocean observation system began operating in 2016 and was expected to continue for 25 years. Jim Edson, a marine meteorologist who led the Ocean Observatories Initiative, called it “the world’s most advanced continuously operating ocean observing systems.”
The Trump administration repeatedly tried to shutter [this program], proposing to cut its funding by 80 percent in both 2025 and again in 2026. Congress pushed back, restoring the money. [So now they're trying to do it within the executive branch.]
Michael England, a spokesman for the National Science Foundation, said the decision to dismantle the network, known as the Ocean Observatories Initiative, “aligns with N.S.F.’s wider strategy to have a nimbler approach to prioritizing support for evolving scientific priorities and emerging technologies as well as a deliberate approach to smart life cycle management within its portfolio of research infrastructure.”
[Not sure what that gobbledygook is supposed to mean, but it can't be cost-effective to physically remove them, rather than just ignoring them.]
The National Science Foundation said it would send ships in June to begin removing more than 900 deep-sea instruments anchored off Oregon, Washington State, Alaska, North Carolina, and an area between Greenland and Iceland known as the Irminger Sea.
Scientists have used data from the system to understand how the ocean is absorbing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, how changes in ocean temperature such as marine heat waves might affect fisheries or signal bigger shifts in the climate, and coastal flooding along the East Coast.
The station in the Irminger Sea has been key to understanding changes in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, a global conveyor belt of water that some scientists are concerned may be weakening as a result of climate warming. A collapse of the current could have severe and far-reaching weather effects.
The ocean observation system began operating in 2016 and was expected to continue for 25 years. Jim Edson, a marine meteorologist who led the Ocean Observatories Initiative, called it “the world’s most advanced continuously operating ocean observing systems.”
The Trump administration repeatedly tried to shutter [this program], proposing to cut its funding by 80 percent in both 2025 and again in 2026. Congress pushed back, restoring the money. [So now they're trying to do it within the executive branch.]
Michael England, a spokesman for the National Science Foundation, said the decision to dismantle the network, known as the Ocean Observatories Initiative, “aligns with N.S.F.’s wider strategy to have a nimbler approach to prioritizing support for evolving scientific priorities and emerging technologies as well as a deliberate approach to smart life cycle management within its portfolio of research infrastructure.”
[Not sure what that gobbledygook is supposed to mean, but it can't be cost-effective to physically remove them, rather than just ignoring them.]
