Hands Across the Sand at Neptune State Park. Photo by Gus Gates, Oregon Surfrider.
If you missed the weekend protest against offshore oil and gas drilling, here’s a way to experience it on your computer.
We’re getting video and photos from some of the Hands Across the Sand events in Oregon. There were 17 of these gatherings in Oregon on Saturday, part of a national movement to draw attention to the dangers of offshore drilling, and to promote clean and renewable energy.
Hundreds of Oregonians, maybe thousands, will join hands tomorrow to send a message about offshore oil drilling.
It’s called Hands Across The Sand. More than a dozen events are planned across the state.
When Northwest coasts were hit by a major algae bloom this fall, the results were devastating to seabirds. Thousands died after being exposed to toxic sea foam – foam that was produced by the algae breaking apart in the waves.
As for people, news stories at the time said there was no danger to human health, despite a handful of reports about surfers and kayakers possibly getting sick.
Now, a group of health officials and other scientists are in the very early stages of studying the issue. Can these events harm people who are playing in the water or walking along the shore? To answer the question, they’re asking for help from surfers.
New rules approved today by the Fish and Wildlife Commission will ban fishing and hunting at Oregon’s first two Marine Reserves. The rules will take effect July 30, 2011 for the Otter Rock reserve near Newport and the Redfish Rocks reserve near Port Orford.
Marine reserves are sort of like state parks in the ocean. They’re designed to protect marine life and make the areas available for scientific research. While banning activities like fishing and hunting, people will still be able to enjoy other kinds of recreation that don’t involve removing marine life. Crabbers will be allowed in to remove crab pots that have drifted into the areas.
And that’s what makes them so controversial.
California Sea Lion pup. Photo from NOAA.
It’s not as if California Sea Lions are strangers to the Oregon Coast, but this winter they’re showing up in unusually large numbers.
Wildlife officials think the reason is El Nino, the every-so-often warming of the waters of the Pacific Ocean near South and Central America. They say during an El Nino, the prey that sea lions eat are carried northward by changes in ocean currents. So the sea lions are simply following the food.
See the story from the Eugene Register Guard: Surplus of sea lions
An OSU wave energy prototype being tested in 2007. Photo from OSU.
I love stories that challenge conventional wisdom. This is one of them.
Take a guess at what kind of Oregonians are most likely to support wave energy. If you think it’s people who hold strong pro-environment views and love nature, you’d be wrong.
New research from Oregon State University paints a very different picture. The most reliable supporters of wave energy are older, conservative, white males. Generally speaking, they don’t concern themselves too much with the environment and are opposed to government regulations to protect it.
The results were very surprising to Maria Stefanovich, an OSU graduate student in Environmental Science. Stefanovich was part of a team that studied the attitudes of Oregonians towards wave energy.
See our earlier story: Oregonians Unsure About Wave Energy
She says conservatives are lining up behind wave energy because they believe it will help drive economic growth and create jobs for the state. They see wave energy as a way to harness nature to serve the needs of people, but don’t care that it reduces carbon and helps in the fight against global warming.
There’s a lesson here for policy makers, according to Stefanovich. She says if they really want to convince people about the need to switch to renewable energy, they need to stress the economic benefits as well as the environmental ones.
In a recent editorial for Sea Technology Magazine she writes:
“These findings have important policy implications, because they suggest that our current methods of conveying the urgency of transitioning to renewable energy are off base. This survey indicates that policymakers may be more effective in getting the public to adopt renewable energy more quickly if they leverage the public’s economic bias and stress the socioeconomic benefits that wave energy could provide, rather than issues like climate change and the depletion of traditional energy sources.”
An OSU wave energy prototype being tested in 2007. Photo from OSU.
The drive to develop wave energy off the Oregon coast may be moving too quickly for many people in the state.
A new survey by Oregon State University shows that while a lot of Oregonians like the idea of wave energy, they’re also concerned about impacts on the coastal environment and commercial fishing.
One of the authors of the study is OSU sociology professor Flaxen Conway. Conway has been working for years with coastal residents, helping them try to understand the effects of wave energy and other demands being placed on the coast.
“Some state officials are pushing this pretty hard, maybe too hard for some people’s taste.” she says. “Many coastal residents and others want to be heard, like all of us they are often skeptical of change, and in some pretty crowded community meetings it’s clear they want answers to their questions before going to commercial scale. They recognize the value of space and place in the ocean. And there are a lot of concerned people in the fishing industry who don’t want this to be just one more thing working against them.”
How quickly are things moving along? As Conway notes, wave energy wasn’t an issue only a decade ago. But with Oregon trying to meet state goals to get 25% of its energy needs from renewable sources by 2025, the pressure is building.
One of the recommendations from the study is for government, industry and academic leaders to work closely with coastal residents and listen to their concerns before choosing wave energy sites. The study predicts some of the biggest battles will take place over where wave projects are located. Listening and collaboration should help avoid some of those fights.
Conway says leaders need to pay attention to the “human dimension” of wave energy.
“It’s not just a case of developing technologies that work and finding industrial partners who want to develop them,” says Conway. “People care about the environment, they care about existing uses of the ocean, they care about their concerns being addressed, they care about the ocean view from their porch. All of these things matter.”
Other findings include:
Cascade Head near Lincoln City. Photo by NOAA Commander Bruce Hillard.
Saying our coast ecology is under deep stress, Environment Oregon is calling for a major expansion of the state’s system of marine reserves.
Marine reserves are sort of like state parks in the ocean. They’re areas where most major commercial activity, such as fishing and energy development are banned. But recreation activities, such as diving, boating and surfing, are allowed. So far, Oregon has set aside two areas off the coast as marine reserves and four other locations are being studied.
But Environment Oregon argues that much more needs to be done. It says establishing a larger system of marine reserves will help coastal areas recover faster from overfishing, climate change, and the impact of those summer “dead zones”. The group says that in other parts of the world, marine reserves have a proven record of increasing the population of marine plants, fish and animals.
Here’s a look at what Environment Oregon wants to see happen.
It says the legislature should move forward to establish marine reserves at the four areas still being studied. This includes Cape Falcon south of Cannon Beach, Cascade Head near Lincoln City, Cape Perpetua south of Yachats, and Cape Arago – Seven Devils near Coos Bay.
Then it suggests three other areas as future marine reserves. On that list is Three Arch Rocks, home to a colony of tufted puffins. Next is Orford Reef, where a large kelp forests provides habitat for the red sea urchin. Finally, it wants to include Mack Reef, home to a wide variety of marine species including almost a dozen types of seabirds.
Marine reserves have been a tough sell on the coast. Commercial fishermen are worried about being locked out of prime fishing grounds as more ocean territory is set aside for reserves, and offshore energy projects such as wave and tidal energy and offshore wind farms.
For more information see Environment Oregon’s report, Oregon’s Marine Treasures: The Case For Conservation.
Three Arches Rock. Photo from Environment Oregon.
Allowing oil and natural gas drilling off the Oregon coast is not worth the risk, according to a new report from Environment Oregon.
The environmental dangers are well known. Offshore oil spills can kill or harm marine life, fish and seabirds. They damage coastal ecosystems and can be awfully expensive to clean up.
But this new report argues there’s an economic risk too. The coastal economy depends on a healthy coastal environment, says Nicole Forbes with Environment Oregon. “Our clean beaches and ocean enable coast business and jobs from tourism, commercial fishing and recreational fishing.” The group puts a price tag on this economic activity at about $1.2 billion annually.
So how does this compare to how much oil and gas there is off our shore?
It’s hard to make a precise comparison. This information about Oregon is part of a much bigger nationwide report released by Environment America and the Sierra Club. But here’s what it tells us.
Along the Pacific Coast, there’s an estimated $23.1 billion worth of oil and natural gas to be extracted on a yearly basis. That’s based on energy prices as of Spring 2009 and a production life of about 25 years. But the value of coastal tourism, recreation and fishing is almost three times more, at $65.5 billion per year.
But since most of the West Coast energy is off California, that difference grows when you look at just Oregon and Washington. For these two states, the value of tourism, recreation and fishing is about ten times bigger than the value of oil and natural gas.
Which is one of the reasons why State Rep. Ben Cannon (D-Portland) also appeared at the news conference where this information was announced. He wants to see oil and natural gas exploration permanently banned from Oregon territorial waters which extend about three miles offshore. Cannon will introduce this legislation during February’s special session. Meanwhile, the current ban runs out in early January.
While there may not be any current interest in exploring Oregon’s coast for oil and natural gas, Cannon believes that if a permanent ban becomes law, it sends an important message. He says it tells federal regulators, and the oil and gas industry, that Oregonians don’t want offshore drilling in state or federal waters. ”Oil and gas are very successful at opening new areas,” he says. ”But there’s not enough of it (off Oregon) to make it worth the cost.”
The news comes as the Interior Department gets closer to making a decision about allowing more exploration for offshore oil and natural gas. The public comment period on the plan was closed about a month ago.
With time running out on this year’s legislative session, work is accelerating on bills that are central to the environmental agenda in Oregon. The Senate approved two bills and the House passed one.
Here’s a look at each of them:
Flame Retardant Ban
The House voted 39-19 to approve a bill that phases out Deca-PBDE, a flame retardant used in a variety of consumer products such as carpeting, furniture, mattresses, computers, and televisions. The ban takes effect January 1, 2011. It’s similar to a ban passed by the Washington legislature earlier this year.
PBDEs have been in the news a lot, with growing evidence about the damage they do to the environment. In January, the Environmental Protection Agency released a report that PBDE levels are increasing in the Columbia River Basin, especially in bass, trout and walleye. In April, a report from NOAA says they’re increasing in coastal areas too, including six test locations along the Oregon Coast.
How do PBDEs harm wildlife? They accumulate over time in fish, birds and bird eggs. A 2008 study found high levels of PBDEs in Peregrine Falcons. PBDEs cause neurological and behavioral problems that can interfere with a bird’s ability to reproduce. In high doses, they can even lead to cancer in animals. The EPA says there’s no direct evidence, so far, that people can be affected in the same way.
Senate Bill 596-A now goes to Governor Kulongoski for his signature.
Marine Reserves
One of Governor K’s long sought environmental goals will become law thanks to today’s vote in the Senate. On a 24-3 vote, Senators approved House Bill 3013A that establishes two marine reserves on the coast, one near Depoe Bay and the other near Port Orford. It also creates four study areas where reserves could be established in the future. Marine reserves are areas in the ocean where aquatic life is protected and where scientists can conduct research. Commercial harvesting, such as fishing, would be banned in these areas.
Kulongoski originally wanted a much larger system. But opposition led by commercial fishermen convinced the Ocean Policy Advisory Committee to propose this system of two reserves and four study areas.
The House has already approved the bill.
Greener Building Codes
New buildings in Oregon will have to be more energy efficient if Senate Bill 79A become law. The bill tells the Department of Consumer and Business Services to write up new building codes that will increase energy efficiency by 10% – 15% for residences and 15% – 25% for other buildings. The Oregon League of Conservation Voters says the new standards will have people and companies millions of dollars by spending less on energy to cool and heat buildings.
The bill now goes to the House.
Thanks to the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, Oceana, and the Senate Democratic Caucus for updates on these bills.
