Go to Original
Monday 01 September 2008
by: Richard Morgan, The New York Times
Toolik
Field Station, Alaska - As Anne Giblin was lugging four-foot tubes of
Arctic lakebed mud from her inflatable raft to her nearby lab this
summer, she said, "Mud is a great storyteller."
Dr. Giblin, a senior scientist at the Marine Biological
Laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass., is part of the Long Term Ecological
Research network at an Arctic science outpost here operated by the
University of Alaska at Fairbanks.
Public discussion of complicated climate change is largely
reduced to carbon: carbon emissions, carbon footprints, carbon trading.
But other chemicals have large roles in the planet's health, and the
one Dr. Giblin is looking for in Arctic mud, one that a growing number
of other researchers are also concentrating on, is nitrogen.
In addition to having a role in climate change, nitrogen
has a huge, probably more important biological impact through its
presence in fertilizer. Peter Vitousek, a Stanford ecologist whose 1994
essay put nitrogen on the environmental map, co-authored a study this
summer in the journal Nature that put greater attention on the nitrogen
cycle and warned against ignoring it in favor of carbon benefits.
For example, Dr. Vitousek said in an interview, "There's a
great danger in doing something like, oh, overfertilizing a cornfield
to boost biofuel consumption, where the carbon benefits are far
outweighed by the nitrogen damage."
Soon after Dr. Vitousek's report, the journal Geophysical
Research Letters branded as a "missing greenhouse gas" nitrogen
trifluoride, which is used in production of semiconductors and in
liquid-crystal displays found in many electronics. According to the
report, it causes more global warming than coal-fired plants. Nitrogen
trifluoride, which is not one of the six gases covered by the Kyoto
Protocol, the celebrated international global warming accord, is about
17,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Its estimated worldwide
release into the atmosphere this year is equivalent to the total
global-warming emissions from Austria.
"The nitrogen dilemma," Dr. Vitousek added, "is not just
thinking that carbon is all that matters. But also thinking that global
warming is the only environmental issue. The weakening of biodiversity,
the pollution of rivers, these are local issues that need local
attention. Smog. Acid rain. Coasts. Forests. It's all nitrogen."
Dr. Vitousek's summer report followed a similar account in
May in the journal Science by James N. Galloway, an environmental
sciences professor at the University of Virginia and a former chairman
of the International Nitrogen Initiative, a group of scientists pushing
for smarter use of nitrogen.
Dr. Galloway is developing a universal calculator for
individual nitrogen footprints. "It's Goldilocks's problem," he said in
an interview. "Reactive nitrogen isn't a waste product. We need it
desperately. Just not too much and not too little. It's just more
complicated than carbon." He continued, "But we're not going to get
anywhere telling people this is simple or easy."
Dr. Giblin of Woods Hole spent the summer at the field
station here, midway between the Arctic Circle and the Arctic Ocean,
researching the nitrogen content of lakebed sediment - not the inert
nitrogen that makes up 80 percent of air, the reactive nitrogen that
Dr. Galloway referred to. In forms like nitric acid, nitrous oxide,
ammonia and nitrate it plays a variety of roles.
Nitrogen is part of all living matter. When plants and
animals die, their nitrogen is passed into soil and the nitrogen in the
soil, in turn, nourishes plants on land and seeps into bodies of water.
Dr. Giblin is pursuing her research because as the Arctic warms, the
tundra's permafrost will thaw, and the soil will release carbon and
nitrogen into the atmosphere.
When an ecosystem has too much nitrogen, the first response
is that life blossoms. More fish, more plants, more everything. But
this quickly becomes a kind of nitrogen cancer. Waters cloud and are
overrun with foul-smelling algae blooms that can cause toxic "dead
zones." Scientists call this process eutrophication, but the laymen's
translation is that the water gets mucked up beyond all recognition. A
recent such plague bedeviled China when its Yellow Sea was smothered in
algae at Qingdao, the planned site of Olympic sailing events this
summer. More than mere inconvenience, such problems routinely threaten
many coastal areas and riverside communities.
Nancy Rabalais, executive director of the Louisiana
Universities Marine Consortium, is known as Queen of the Dead Zone. She
cruises around the Gulf of Mexico every summer in the research vessel
Pelican to look for damage from nitrogen-rich river flows into the
gulf. This year, she expects a dead zone that will beat the
Massachusetts-size 8,500-square-mile bloom of 2002.
One of the problems, Dr. Rabalais said, is that the
Mississippi River involves so many communities that it requires
stronger federal guidance, which she said was not a part of the Bush
administration's policies. She is part of a national research committee
financed by the Environmental Protection Agency and run by the National
Academies of Science, but, she said, "it's so much talk and not enough
action."
She continued: "Because you're not just going up against
the agribusiness lobby, but also the livelihood of farmers. It's not
exactly popular in the Midwest."
Fertilizer use is largely inefficient. With beef, only
about 6 percent of nitrogen used in raising cows ends up in their meat;
the rest leeches out into air or water supplies. With pork, it is 12
percent; chicken, 25 percent. Milk, eggs and grain have the highest
efficiency, about 35 percent, or half of what, in the metric of report
cards, is a C-minus.
"Look," she said, "you just can't have all these states and
all these communities knowingly overfertilizing their land because they
want a bumper crop every year. That's just all kinds of bad. But Des
Moines, for example, is willing to filter their drinking water to an
extra degree just to be able to flood their water supply with
more-than-normal levels of fertilizer."
Reactive nitrogen competes with greenhouse gases that have
greater public awareness. "But it's like looking at malaria and AIDS in
Africa," Dr. Rabalais said. "They're both problems. And they both need
vigilant attention."
Environmentalists face the puzzle of how to deal with
multiple problems at once. And some worry that after the hard-fought
campaign spotlighting carbon, turning to focus on nitrogen could upset
that momentum.
The tension can plague even the most informed and
articulate campaigners. "One of the many complexities that complicate
the task I've undertaken is complexity," said Al Gore, the former vice
president who won a Noble Peace Prize for his environmental work. Mr.
Gore added, "Look, I can start a talk by saying, 'There are 14 global
warming pollutants, and we have a different solution for addressing
each of them.' And it's true. But you start to lose people."
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. h o t g l o b e has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is h o t g l o b e endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|