diff --git "a/data/CHRG-116/CHRG-116hhrg35233.txt" "b/data/CHRG-116/CHRG-116hhrg35233.txt"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/data/CHRG-116/CHRG-116hhrg35233.txt"
@@ -0,0 +1,1947 @@
+
+ - SEA CHANGE: IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON OUR OCEANS AND COASTS
+
+[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
+[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
+
+
+ SEA CHANGE: IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
+ ON OUR OCEANS AND COASTS
+
+=======================================================================
+
+ HEARING
+
+ BEFORE THE
+
+ SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT
+
+ COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
+ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
+
+ ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
+
+ FIRST SESSION
+
+ __________
+
+ FEBRUARY 27, 2019
+
+ __________
+
+ Serial No. 116-3
+
+ __________
+
+ Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
+
+
+[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+
+ Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
+
+
+ __________
+
+
+ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
+35-233PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
+
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
+http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
+U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).E-mail,
+[email protected].
+
+
+
+
+ COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
+
+ HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
+ZOE LOFGREN, California FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
+DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois Ranking Member
+SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon MO BROOKS, Alabama
+AMI BERA, California, BILL POSEY, Florida
+ Vice Chair RANDY WEBER, Texas
+CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania BRIAN BABIN, Texas
+LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
+HALEY STEVENS, Michigan ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
+KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma NEAL DUNN, Florida
+MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
+BRAD SHERMAN, California MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
+STEVE COHEN, Tennessee TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
+JERRY McNERNEY, California PETE OLSON, Texas
+ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
+PAUL TONKO, New York MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
+BILL FOSTER, Illinois JIM BAIRD, Indiana
+DON BEYER, Virginia VACANCY
+CHARLIE CRIST, Florida VACANCY
+SEAN CASTEN, Illinois
+KATIE HILL, California
+BEN McADAMS, Utah
+JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
+ ------
+
+ Subcommittee on Environment
+
+ HON. LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas, Chairwoman
+SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas, Ranking
+CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania Member
+PAUL TONKO, New York BRIAN BABIN, Texas
+CHARLIE CRIST, Florida ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
+SEAN CASTEN, Illinois JIM BAIRD, Indiana
+BEN McADAMS, Utah VACANCY
+DON BEYER, Virginia
+
+
+ C O N T E N T S
+
+ February 27, 2019
+
+ Page
+Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
+
+ Opening Statements
+
+Statement by Representative Lizzie Fletcher, Chairwoman,
+ Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
+ Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 10
+ Written Statement............................................ 12
+
+Statement by Representative Roger Marshall, Ranking Member,
+ Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
+ Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 14
+ Written Statement............................................ 16
+
+Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman,
+ Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
+ Representatives................................................ 18
+ Written Statement............................................ 20
+
+ Witnesses:
+
+Dr. Sarah Cooley, Director, Ocean Acidification Program, Ocean
+ Conservancy
+ Oral Statement............................................... 23
+ Written Statement............................................ 25
+
+Dr. Radley Horton, Lamont Associate Research Professor, Lamont-
+ Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University Earth Institute
+ Oral Statement............................................... 41
+ Written Statement............................................ 43
+
+Dr. Thomas K. Frazer, Professor and Director, School of Natural
+ Resources and Environment, University of Florida
+ Oral Statement............................................... 51
+ Written Statement............................................ 53
+
+Ms. Margaret A. Pilaro, Executive Director, Pacific Coast
+ Shellfish Growers Association
+ Oral Statement............................................... 60
+ Written Statement............................................ 62
+
+Discussion....................................................... 72
+
+ Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
+
+Dr. Sarah Cooley, Director, Ocean Acidification Program, Ocean
+ Conservancy.................................................... 92
+
+Ms. Margaret A. Pilaro, Executive Director, Pacific Coast
+ Shellfish Growers Association.................................. 96
+
+ Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record
+
+Letters submitted by Representative Suzanne Bonamici,
+ Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
+ Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 98
+
+Letter submitted by Representative Bill Posey, Subcommittee on
+ Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
+ House of Representatives....................................... 111
+
+
+ SEA CHANGE: IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
+ ON OUR OCEANS AND COASTS
+
+ ----------
+
+
+ WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2019
+
+ House of Representatives,
+ Subcommittee on Environment,
+ Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
+ Washington, D.C.
+
+ The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in
+room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lizzie
+Fletcher [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
+[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. The hearing will come to order.
+ Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
+recess at any time.
+ Good morning. Welcome to the Environment Subcommittee's
+first hearing of the 116th Congress. This hearing is entitled,
+``Sea Change: Impacts of Climate Change on Our Oceans and
+Coasts.'' Building on the momentum of our first full Committee
+hearing on the State of Climate Science, today we'll be
+discussing how climate change is impacting our oceans and
+coasts. This is an important topic, and I want to convey a few
+things as we begin. First, every American should care about
+changes to the oceans, even those who do not live along the
+coasts. Second, we are already seeing visible changes and
+paying a very real price. Climate change impacts are here,
+happening now, not far-off events for future generations to
+address. And those impacts can be seen in our oceans and
+coasts.
+ According to NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
+Administration), nearly half of Americans live along our 95,471
+miles of coastline, which span three oceans, the Gulf of
+Mexico, the Great Lakes, and the Pacific and Caribbean islands.
+And more people are moving to the coasts each year. The Fourth
+National Climate Assessment (NCA) found that coastal zones
+employ 134 million people and contribute a staggering $16.7
+trillion to our national gross domestic product. And for the
+other half of Americans who don't live on the coast, the oceans
+and coasts impact them directly and indirectly, too, providing
+economic, recreational, and cultural opportunities. There's a
+lot to lose--not only for the environment, but for our thriving
+economy and communities--by failing to address climate change
+impacts on our oceans and coasts.
+ As science has established, climate change is real, it's
+happening, and it's caused primarily by human activity. NOAA
+just reported last month that 2018 was the fourth-hottest year
+on record. Many people don't realize that global warming would
+be significantly worse without the buffering effects of the
+oceans. Oceans act like a big sponge, soaking up much of the
+excess carbon dioxide and heat in the atmosphere. In fact, the
+International Union for Conservation of Nature found that if
+the excess heat trapped by the oceans between 1955 and 2010
+were released back into the lower atmosphere, the temperature
+would warm up nearly 97 +Fahrenheit. The oceans are protecting
+us from climate change's impacts by buffering against this
+increase in temperature, but this buffering is causing major
+changes to the oceans.
+ Increased carbon emissions alter the oceans in three main
+ways: Making them warmer, more acidic, and less oxygenated.
+These changes are occurring at unprecedented rates. For
+example, according to research published in the journal
+Science, the chemistry of the oceans is changing faster now
+than in the last 300 million years.
+ Climate change has now claimed its first mammal in a way
+directly related to today's hearing. Just last week, the
+Australian Government reported that the Bramble Cay mosaic-
+tailed rat, a small rodent, was driven to extinction. Their
+island home became inundated with saltwater from rising sea
+levels, causing their food and shelter to disappear. The
+threats of sea-level rise, ocean warming, acidification, and
+deoxygenation are far-reaching, and many marine species face
+risk of extinction as these changes occur faster than most
+species can adapt.
+ In Texas' 7th Congressional District, which I have the
+privilege to represent, we're seeing some of the earliest
+effects of coastal climate change, and we stand to face great
+risks as the fourth-largest city and biggest energy exporter in
+the United States. At just 50 feet above sea level and as one
+of the flattest cities in America, Houston already experiences
+heavy rainfall, and our region faces the threat of storm surge,
+increasing the risk and the reality of flooding. Hurricane
+Harvey set the record for total rainfall from a tropical
+cyclone in the continental United States. Climate change is
+intensifying storms--making so called 1,000-year storms like
+Harvey more frequent--and causing sea levels to rise in
+Galveston Bay. According to the Fourth National Climate
+Assessment published in November, sea-level rise along the
+Texas Gulf Coast is twice as large as the global average.
+Experts are warning cities that cities like ours don't have
+that much time to adapt.
+ That's why I am glad we're here today to hear from our
+distinguished panel. I would like to welcome our witnesses this
+morning. Some of our scientific witnesses have been involved in
+writing and reviewing major climate change reports--the
+National Climate Assessment and the IPCC (Intergovernmental
+Panel on Climate Change) Assessment Report--and are here to
+summarize some of the major findings on ocean and coastal
+changes. We will also hear from a representative of a coastal
+industry whose experience of these issues is instructive for us
+all.
+ I was encouraged in our first Committee hearing to hear
+interest from Members on both sides of the aisle toward
+developing solutions and technologies to address climate
+change. Adaptation and mitigation are very important. They're
+important parts of this conversation, and with today's hearing,
+we're laying the foundation for future discussions that will
+lead us to legislative solutions.
+ [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Fletcher follows:]
+ [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Marshall
+for an opening statement.
+ Mr. Marshall. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Fletcher, for
+holding this hearing today to discuss a nuanced and significant
+issue. First off, I want to congratulate you on your
+appointment to Chair the Environment Subcommittee. I look
+forward to working with you.
+ In this Committee, we may not always agree on everything,
+but I hope that we can agree on objectives and goals. Our
+objectives should be thoroughly--be to thoughtfully listen to
+the science and theories surrounding these topics. And our
+goal, at least in my opinion, should be to leave this
+environment of this country and the world better than we found
+it for our children, our grandchildren, and future generations
+so that we can all flourish.
+ I was just reminded this past week. I was--I got to help my
+grandson catch his first fish in the ocean. One of my loves is
+fishing and tasting the outdoors, so it was great to be able to
+do that. But I have to be honest; the closest thing we have to
+oceans in the State of Kansas are amber waves of grain. So this
+is a unique opportunity for me to learn about the relationship
+between climate and the ocean. I'm looking forward to hearing
+from our witnesses today and hope we can find a way to talk
+constructively about these issues and, more importantly, about
+potential solutions.
+ Oceans cover more than 70 percent of the Earth and contain
+more than 90 percent of life on our planet. Oceans, more
+specifically phytoplankton, produce most of the oxygen that we
+breathe and absorb most of the carbon dioxide from the Earth's
+atmosphere, creating a constant cycle of oxygen and
+CO2.
+ I have to tell you I was giddy when I got to read some of
+your reports and go back to some of my biochemistry days. And
+it just brought me back to my college days in so many ways and
+just really, really enjoyed the papers. I know Congressmen
+aren't supposed to be excited about science, but I really am.
+ Like plant and animal life on land, marine life and oceans
+themselves evolve. The chemistry and ecology change and life
+adapts. It's been happening for millions of years, but
+unfortunately, scientific evidence suggests that the pace of
+change, like the Chairwoman said, has increased over the last
+century, adding more stress to our complex marine ecosystems.
+ Some of this stress is the result of increased levels of
+carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere
+that are absorbed by the ocean. The result is a change in the
+chemistry of the oceans in which researchers have noted
+increased water temperature, lower pH levels, and decreased
+oxygen levels in certain areas.
+ It's essential that we gain a better understanding of ocean
+chemistry, effectiveness of potential solutions, and mitigation
+of negative impacts. For instance, some species are proving
+more resilient and adaptable to changing conditions. One of our
+goals should be to better understand this resiliency and find
+ways to translate this knowledge to broader ecosystem
+sustainability.
+ One of our witnesses, Dr. Tom Frazer, is the Director of
+the University of Florida's School of Natural Resources and
+Environment. He will go into detail on his research to help us
+all better understand the impacts and changes in aquatic
+ecosystems, as well as discuss some of the potential solutions
+to maximize environmental and economic value of our oceans.
+ I believe advancing technology is the best path forward. As
+we speak, industry and governments around the world are
+examining carbon removal and carbon storage technology. There
+are some big ideas out there from direct air capture to
+genetically modified phytoplankton and giant kelp farms, which
+I'm especially interested to hear about, in the ocean that can
+absorb carbon dioxide. We learned during our hearing 2 weeks
+ago that moving entirely to renewables is not realistic or
+sustainable, so we must consider solutions like these that can
+help reduce or remove emissions generated around the globe.
+ Researching, developing, and deploying these technologies
+will take a little time, but the payoff will be significant.
+Innovating our way to solutions has been a trademark of the
+American spirit since our country's inception. For example, in
+my practice as an obstetrician I have seen how private
+innovation and response to market demand have done more to
+improve and drive down the cost of healthcare than any law or
+regulation written here in D.C.
+ Just look at the evolution of medical imaging. Forty years
+ago, MRI machines and CAT scanners were just hitting the
+market. But now we have high-resolution, microscopic cameras
+that reduce the need for invasive surgeries and provide us a
+window into human health in ways that we never thought or I
+dreamed possible.
+ Basic research, industry innovation, and thriving
+marketplace are what brought these technologies and others like
+it into our lives, not government regulation. We need to
+prioritize instruments that target the most impactful areas of
+research and provide specific steps for resiliency planning.
+America must lead the way and partner with industry to develop
+innovative technologies and solutions to the problems discussed
+here today.
+ I thank our witnesses for being here today, and I yield the
+balance of my time. Thank you.
+ [The prepared statement of Mr. Marshall follows:]
+ [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Marshall.
+ The Chair now recognizes the Chairwoman of the full
+Committee, Ms. Johnson, for an opening statement.
+ Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much, Ms. Fletcher, and
+congratulations on your first Subcommittee meeting. And let me
+say, too, let me welcome the witnesses but also welcome to our
+former Subcommittee Ranking Member Ms. Bonamici, who has
+prepared legislation in this area. I'm pleased to join you this
+morning.
+ Two weeks ago we had our first climate change-related
+hearing on the ``State of Climate Science and Why It Matters.''
+That fruitful hearing was a broad overview of the myriad of
+ways climate change is affecting multiple aspects of the
+environment and our society. Today, we continue in that same
+vein and look specifically at the science and how the
+anthropogenic carbon emissions are affecting our oceans and
+coasts.
+ NOAA has found that almost 40 percent of the U.S.
+population lives in coastal counties. I'm not one of those. We
+have manmade lakes for drinking water where I live in north
+Texas. But we do have a very large coastal area at the other
+end of the State. From the white sand beaches of Florida to the
+rocky shorelines of the Pacific Northwest, our coasts are not
+only iconic, popular tourist destinations, but also economic
+powerhouses of the Nation. Coastal counties contribute $6.6
+trillion to our economy. Given the clear societal and economic
+importance of our oceans and coastal communities, it is
+imperative that we work to protect these resources.
+ But our coastal communities are already seeing impacts of
+climate change. Ocean warming due to the anthropogenic carbon
+dioxide emissions is responsible for rising sea levels, melting
+sea ice, and lower oxygen concentrations in our seawater.
+Warmer ocean temperatures also fuel stronger storms, which can
+lead to additional coastal damage from hurricanes. The findings
+from the Fourth National Climate Assessment were very clear:
+Cutting our emissions of greenhouse gases will significantly
+and quickly help stave off the most severe potential impacts of
+climate change. Laying the foundation of the current state of
+science on our oceans and coasts in this hearing will help us
+better understand what we can expect to see if we do not act to
+mitigate our carbon emissions now.
+ During the first hearing, many of my colleagues on both
+sides of the aisle were excited to discuss potential solutions
+to the climate challenges that many of us are starting to face
+in our districts. However, in order to come up with robust
+solutions to the rapid changes we are seeing in our oceans and
+coastal communities, it is critical that we understand what is
+driving these changes. Successful mitigation and adaptation
+solutions will be based on robust science.
+ I'm looking forward to having another productive hearing on
+climate change today, and I'm especially interested in
+receiving testimony from our expert scientific witnesses on how
+climate change is affecting sea-level rise, the physical and
+chemical processes within our oceans, and marine ecosystems. I
+am also glad to have a representative from the Pacific Coast
+Shellfish Growers Association to speak about concrete evidence
+of climate change impacts on their livelihood, and how they
+utilized science to develop solutions to this pressing issue.
+ The diverse perspectives provided by our witnesses will
+help guide the Members of this Committee as we work to develop
+bipartisan policy solutions to address climate change and ocean
+acidification based on sound science and ensure there is
+significant Federal funding for climate research.
+ I thank you, Madam Chair, and yield back.
+ [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]
+[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Chairwoman Johnson.
+ If there are Members who wish to submit additional opening
+statements, your statements will be added to the record at this
+point.
+ At this time, I'd like to introduce our witnesses. Our
+first witness is Dr. Sarah Cooley, the Director of the Ocean
+Acidification Program at the Ocean Conservancy. Dr. Cooley is
+an expert on the impacts of ocean climate change on human
+communities and her research spans ocean climate--and her
+research spans ocean carbon cycling, science communication, and
+science-based policy development. Dr. Cooley was a lead author
+on the Second State of the Carbon Cycle Report and review
+editor on volume 2 of the Fourth National Climate Assessment,
+both released last November. She's also a lead author on the
+Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
+Climate Change, or IPCC, which will be complete in 2021. Dr.
+Cooley received her Ph.D. in marine science from the University
+of Georgia.
+ Our second witness is Dr. Radley Horton, who is Lamont
+Associate Professor--Research Professor at Columbia
+University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. His research
+focuses on climate extremes, sea-level rise, tail risks,
+climate impacts, sea-level rise, and adaptation. Dr. Horton was
+a convening lead author for the Third National Climate
+Assessment. He currently co-chairs Columbia University's
+Climate Adaptation Initiative and is Principal Investigator for
+the NOAA Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments-funded
+Consortium for Climate Risk in the Urban Northeast. He received
+his Ph.D. in earth and environmental sciences from Columbia
+University.
+ Our third witness is Dr. Thomas K. Frazer, who is Professor
+and Director of the School of Natural Resources and Environment
+at the University of Florida. His research examines water
+quantity and quality, nutrient dynamics, biogeochemical
+processes, fish population dynamics, food web interactions, and
+ecological restoration of degraded ecosystems. He's conducted
+field research in both freshwater and marine systems around the
+globe and is intimately familiar with environmental and
+resource challenges, including coral bleaching, ocean
+acidification, and sea-level rise. He received his Ph.D. in
+biological sciences from the University of California Santa
+Barbara.
+ Our final witness is Ms. Margaret Pilaro, who has served as
+the Executive Director of the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers
+Association, or PCSGA, since 2010. PCSGA represents over 100
+shellfish companies who sustainably produce mussels, oysters,
+clams, and geoduck in the States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon,
+California, and Hawaii. Prior to her current role, she worked
+for the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for 12
+years and as a municipal planner in Rhode Island where she
+dealt with storm and wastewater issues, restoring the fishery,
+and harbor management. Ms. Pilaro received an M.A. in marine
+affairs from the University of Rhode Island. Welcome to all of
+you.
+ As our witnesses should know, you will each have 5 minutes
+for your spoken testimony. Your written testimony will be
+included in the record for the hearing. When you all have
+completed your spoken testimony, we will begin with questions.
+Each Member will have 5 minutes to question the panel. Thank
+you so much for being here. We'll begin this morning with Dr.
+Cooley.
+
+ TESTIMONY OF DR. SARAH COOLEY,
+
+ DIRECTOR, OCEAN ACIDIFICATION PROGRAM,
+
+ OCEAN CONSERVANCY
+
+ Dr. Cooley. Thank you, Chairwoman. Good morning. My name is
+Dr. Sarah Cooley, and I'm a chemical oceanographer and Director
+of the Ocean Acidification Program at Ocean Conservancy. I have
+studied the ocean carbon cycle for 18 years. I'm an expert on
+the impacts of ocean climate change on ecosystem services, a
+lead author on the Second State of the Carbon Cycle Report, and
+the upcoming Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC, and I'm a
+review editor on the Fourth National Climate Assessment.
+ That report, mandated by Congress, offers three key ocean
+messages, which I'll explain in my testimony. First, the
+Nation's ocean ecosystems are being disrupted by rising
+temperatures, acidification, deoxygenation, and other aspects
+of climate change, and this will worsen. Second, the Nation's
+fisheries are at high risk from climate-driven changes. Third,
+extreme events due to climate are already harming important
+fisheries.
+ Our ocean is experiencing unprecedented changes. Rising
+temperatures and absorption of greenhouse gases is impacting
+the ocean's ability to sustain human communities and modulate
+the Earth's climate. The ocean has absorbed 93 percent of the
+heat energy trapped by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
+Despite this, our planet has still warmed by 1.8 degrees
+Fahrenheit since the turn of the last century. The ocean has
+also absorbed 22 percent of the atmospheric carbon dioxide
+released by human activity this decade.
+ While this has slightly reduced the planetary warming that
+would have otherwise occurred, it's also changing the chemistry
+of the ocean. When carbon dioxide dissolves, it lowers seawater
+pH and alters chemical balances important for marine life. This
+is called ocean acidification. In the mid-2000s, widespread
+death of larval shellfish at hatcheries in Washington State and
+Oregon was definitively attributed to ocean acidification.
+ We now know that ocean acidification causes many animals
+with hard shells and skeletons like corals and shellfish to
+grow more slowly and recover from damage less successfully.
+Some fishes and sharks become less able to find prey or avoid
+predators. Harmful algal blooms could become more frequent or
+toxic. Complex and hard-to-predict interactions occur among
+ocean acidification and other stressors, especially in the
+coastal zone. All of this can and already does impact human
+communities by disrupting fisheries, tourism, and more.
+ Ocean heat absorption is also warming seawater and melting
+sea ice. This causes sea-level rise, and is changing ocean
+ecosystems and their benefits to people. Warmer ocean water
+holds less oxygen and allows less of the deep vertical mixing
+that normally moves oxygen into the ocean. Without enough
+oxygen in the ocean, ocean species will die. Warming oceans are
+driving our marine life north at about 5 miles a decade, but
+American lobsters have shifted north at 43 miles per decade.
+Rapidly shifting fisheries are very hard to manage, and these
+strain fishing-dependent communities. Sea ice is melting,
+causing ice-dependent species to lose key habitats and Arctic
+waters to warm even more. Subsistence hunting will become
+dangerous and difficult, which threatens indigenous
+communities' food security and ways of life. Decreasing sea ice
+also allows more Arctic vessel traffic, bringing opportunities
+and risks.
+ This Committee can make a difference immediately by
+supporting science that focuses on solutions on how best to
+apply them, as well as continuing to support research that
+uncovers how the ocean-human system works. The common theme in
+the research recommendations detailed in my written testimony
+is that we need to understand how to apply individual findings
+to ecosystem scales and how to use that knowledge in an
+equitable, well-planned approach that will reduce the stress
+from ocean climate change on marine ecosystems and the human
+communities they support.
+ The fundamental solution to ocean climate change is to
+decrease emissions, particularly of carbon dioxide. That is a
+formidable global challenge. But the United States is the home
+of modern oceanography. After the World Wars, we unraveled the
+secrets of the deep oceans to gain a global military edge. In
+doing so, we have learned how our planet works. With this rich
+history, I have no doubt that the United States is up to the
+task of understanding and addressing climate change, the ocean
+challenge of today.
+ Thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony.
+ [The prepared statement of Dr. Cooley follows:]
+ [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Cooley. We'll now hear
+from Dr. Horton.
+
+ TESTIMONY OF DR. RADLEY HORTON,
+
+ LAMONT ASSOCIATE RESEARCH PROFESSOR,
+
+ LAMONT-DOHERTY EARTH OBSERVATORY,
+
+ COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY EARTH INSTITUTE
+
+ Dr. Horton. Madam Chair, Members of the Subcommittee, my
+name is Radley Horton. I'm a Lamont Associate Research
+Professor at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth
+Observatory. Thank you very much for the opportunity to
+participate in this important hearing. I'm going to focus my
+remarks today on how the anthropogenic activities that we've
+heard about that have warmed the upper oceans are causing sea
+levels to rise.
+ So there are two primary ways that global sea level rises
+as a result of that ocean warming. First and foremost, the
+upper oceans have warmed the surface of the ocean a degree
+Fahrenheit since 1900. That warming has made its way down to
+about 3,000 feet. That literally causes the ocean to stand
+taller. It's called thermal expansion.
+ The second centrally important process globally is what's
+happening to land-based ice sitting in Greenland, Antarctica,
+and in high mountain glaciers. As the ocean warms, it's
+literally wearing away at the dams or buttresses if you will
+that are preventing that ice from sliding in part into the
+ocean. As more and more of that ice on land melts and makes its
+way into the water, we add mass to the ocean, causing further
+sea-level rise.
+ So we've seen about 7 or 8 inches of sea-level rise
+globally since 1900. And there--importantly, there's been some
+acceleration over the past 2 decades or so. As we look to the
+future, projections of sea-level rise for, say, 2100, we see a
+big range. We hear about a most-likely range in the last
+National Climate Assessment of 1 to 4.3 feet. In my remarks I'm
+going to take an optimistic approach and just focus on what 1
+foot of sea-level rise would mean, as I say, a very optimistic
+take on it.
+ And really, you know, fundamentally what I want to
+highlight is that even a little bit of sea-level rise means
+much more frequent coastal flooding and much more intense and
+higher-magnitude coastal flooding whenever you're having a
+storm.
+ [Slide.]
+ And as we can see from figure 1 here, we're already seeing
+that nuisance or sunny-day flooding is happening far more often
+than it used to across the U.S. coastline. For many locations,
+a five- or tenfold increase just over the last two generations
+in how often we are seeing these high water levels from Miami
+to Norfolk, for example. These are events that flood people's
+basements, make it impossible for businesses to open for normal
+operations, prevent people from being able to drive home along
+their normal coastal routes. When these events are rare, we can
+call them nuisances, but at what point if they're happening
+more and more often do they become something more than that,
+something that impacts real estate values, the ability to fund
+key infrastructure?
+ Now, let's go to slide 2 and focus as we look out to the
+future at what just 1 foot of sea-level rise by 2100 could
+mean.
+ [Slide.]
+ What could it mean for the really extreme high water levels
+that currently happen once every 100 years along various parts
+of the U.S. coast? These are the high water levels that
+determine insurance rates and zoning plans. And what we can see
+is across the whole United States, events--high water levels
+that used to happen once per 100 years become things that you
+expect during the lifetime of the typical home mortgage. And in
+many places every year or two you could be seeing those high
+water levels occurring that used to happen once every 100
+years. Again, this is with just 1 foot of sea-level rise and no
+assumption about stronger storms. In reality, we expect--the
+balance of evidence suggests that the strongest hurricanes
+probably get stronger precisely because of ocean warming. That
+would make these effects worse than what you see here.
+ It's not just more frequent coastal flooding, though. It's
+also higher magnitudes of flooding whenever a storm happens.
+One recent study found that if the New York region had been
+precisely the same when Hurricane Sandy struck except somehow
+the oceans had been a foot lower, as they were 100 years ago,
+80,000 fewer people would have experienced flooding in their
+homes. That's the impact of just a little bit of sea-level
+rise.
+ So this is also obviously a public health and safety issue.
+It means less time for people to evacuate around low-lying
+coastal areas, and for those unable to evacuate, it means
+greater risk of death, more damage to buildings as those water
+levels are higher, waves are able to penetrate further inland.
+ Along our coasts are assets worth trillions of dollars:
+businesses, homes, hospitals, I-95, Amtrak, our airports. But
+the economic impacts are going to make their way further inland
+as well. U.S. taxpayers bear the brunt of the bill for these
+coastal flood damages, and our coasts are economic hubs for all
+activities. There are also national security implications that
+I hope we may have a chance to discuss.
+ Far inland from our coasts, extreme weather events are
+impacted by that warming of the ocean as well. We're loading
+the dice toward more heavy rain events and combinations of high
+heat and humidity that harm our most vulnerable populations and
+affect the economic productivity of our outdoor laborers as
+well.
+ I've had the good fortune to learn a great deal from
+decisionmakers, as well as young people eager to tackle these
+problems and learn more. For example, investors are demanding
+now that companies disclose their exposure to sea-level rise.
+These experiences have convinced me that although we are fast
+running out of time, a window still remains open for the
+ultimate tipping point or surprise, specifically rapid societal
+action to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and prepare all
+of us for these climate changes that are underway.
+ Thank you for inviting me to testify, and I look forward to
+our discussion.
+ [The prepared statement of Dr. Horton follows:]
+ [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Horton. We'll now hear
+from Dr. Frazer.
+
+ TESTIMONY OF DR. THOMAS K. FRAZER,
+
+ PROFESSOR AND DIRECTOR, SCHOOL OF NATURAL
+
+ RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
+
+ Dr. Frazer. OK. Good morning, Madam Chair and Members of
+the Committee. So my testimony is a little longer than 5
+minutes, so I think I'll cut right to the meat of it.
+ My background is in marine ecology and fisheries science,
+and I draw on my academic training and other professional
+experiences to provide here some examples of how and where
+investments in science would yield substantial value.
+ Wild-caught fisheries yield approximately 90 million metric
+tons of fish and shellfish per year. However, this bountiful
+natural resource is already threatened with about 1/3 of global
+fish stocks classified as overfished. And changing climate
+introduces new challenges. Among those challenges are changes
+in the ranges of exploited species, both expansions and
+contractions, and changes associated with alterations to
+habitats. As sea surface temperatures increase, some warm water
+species can expand their ranges northward, but some colder
+water species will be forced to contract their ranges.
+ As global climate changes, we will also see changes in
+habitats. These changes range from shifts in major ocean
+currents that will alter patterns in movement and recruitment
+to potential loss of inshore structural habitats such as
+seagrass meadows that provide food and shelter for a large
+number of exploited fishery species.
+ In response to such challenges, managers will have to adapt
+their strategies with the key thrust being a commitment to
+ecosystem-based fishery management, as proposed by NOAA
+Fisheries. For example, managers will need to be able to
+differentiate between range expansions driven by increased
+stock abundances that result from effective management actions
+and range shifts driven by changes simply due to water
+temperatures and ocean currents. Fisheries managers will also
+need to factor habitat and other environmental variables into
+stock assessments and stock projections because altered
+habitats appear to be an inevitable consequence of climate
+change.
+ Overall, managers will need to move from harvest quotas
+established primarily on the basis of historical landings to
+quotas that account for a changing or nonstationary
+environment. In addition, managers will need to consider ways
+to help, potentially even fund, adaptation by the recreational
+and commercial fishing industry such as moving access points in
+wholesale and retail outlets. Without such adaptations, we in
+the United States stands to lose a substantial portion of more
+than 1.7 million jobs, more than $212 billion in sales, and
+$100 billion in gross domestic product generated by these
+industries.
+ Science comes into play because it is the best base for
+designing and implementing the necessary adaptations to
+existing management of our Nation's fisheries. One way that
+science can help us by providing timely and accurate
+information on the status and trends of stocks and habitats. A
+second way that science can help us is to transform the tools
+and techniques needed to mitigate undesirable changes in fish
+stocks or the habitats that support them.
+ Given the time constraints imposed on this hearing, I will
+focus on one example in mitigating loss of habitat:
+Rehabilitating coral reefs. Coral reefs occupy a relatively
+small proportion of the ocean realm, but harbor more than 25
+percent of marine biodiversity. Coral reefs also support
+important recreational, commercial, and subsistence fisheries
+around the globe. In fact, coral reefs yield approximately 25
+percent of the total fish catch in developing nations and
+contribute substantially to the economies of more than 100
+countries that promote reef-related tourism, including our own.
+They are, however, one of the most imperiled habitats on the
+planet due to nutrient pollution, physical damage, overfishing,
+and other local stresses.
+ Global climate change only exacerbates this problem.
+Managers must continue to address local stresses and, as
+already indicated, we need to reduce emissions of greenhouse
+gases to address global stresses. Regardless of our efforts,
+nearly all coral reefs will be threatened by conditions
+generated from existing levels of climate change by the year
+2050. In fact, managers should prepare to mitigate both
+existing damage and the damage that will occur from the
+inevitable changes in global climate that have already been
+initiated.
+ Rehabilitating and restoring damaged and degraded reefs
+will require transformational innovations and advancements
+based on sound science. Key questions to be addressed are
+included in my written testimony. Answering those questions and
+transferring the new knowledge into effective and efficient
+innovations and investments will take time and a consistent
+stream of resources. In fact, it is an investment that we
+should begin now.
+ In conclusion, I reiterate my agreement with much of what
+you have heard from others. Climate change poses significant
+threats, and now is the time to begin addressing the human
+activities that drive it. My goal today was to introduce a
+potentially new topic, the need for consistent investment in
+science that will support incremental adaptation to the effects
+of climate change and build the basis for transformational
+change in mitigating existing and future effects. My hope is
+that this initial contribution might persuade you and the
+Committee Members to include discussion of the risk and rewards
+associated with long-term investments in science in your future
+deliberations.
+ I will close by saying that I am happy to participate in
+those discussions.
+ [The prepared statement of Dr. Frazer follows:]
+ [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Frazer. We'll now hear
+from Ms. Pilaro.
+
+ TESTIMONY OF MARGARET A. PILARO,
+
+ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PACIFIC COAST SHELLFISH
+
+ GROWERS ASSOCIATION
+
+ Ms. Pilaro. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for having me
+here today.
+ I am--as the Director of the Pacific Coast Shellfish
+Growers Association, I am extremely proud to represent some of
+the hardest-working women and men on the West Coast. Shellfish
+farming, which employs thousands of people in rural economies
+on the West Coast, depends on the tides, with the most rigorous
+work occurring at low tide, which half the year falls during
+the winter months. And as a bit of a cruel joke from Mother
+Nature, those tides occur during the middle of the night.
+ There is both significant amount of pride and
+responsibility among shellfish growers because most of the
+members of my organization are second-, third-, and fourth-
+generation farmers, all of which depend upon a healthy
+environment to farm, and therefore are avid protectors of
+coastal and marine ecosystems.
+ Shellfish farming began commercially in the mid-to-late
+1800s, and we know that oysters fueled the California gold
+rush. In the 1920s the native oyster populations along the West
+Coast became depleted from overharvesting but also due to poor
+water quality, and this was one of the first periods of
+adaptation that growers faced.
+ The shellfish industry turned west to Japan and brought
+over the Pacific oyster, which naturalized well. However, in
+part because of natural reproduction of that oyster was not
+robust enough to support the growing demand, the industry in
+the 1970s moved to hatchery production for larvae and seed, or
+baby oysters. The largest of these hatcheries at the time was
+Whiskey Creek Shellfish Hatchery in Oregon. It's a family run
+business to this day, which at that time supplied over 70
+percent of the West Coast farms with seed. The predictability
+of hatchery seed allowed the industry to flourish well beyond
+Oregon and Washington and now to California, Alaska, and
+Hawaii, and beyond oysters to now clams, mussels, and a large
+West Coast burrowing clam called the geoduck.
+ In 2007, Whiskey Creek stumbled upon the next chapter in
+shellfish farming's path of adapting when the hatchery
+witnessed a 70 to 80 percent mortality of oyster larvae. They
+immediately tried to determine the cause, looking to natural
+bacteria and disease, but in consultation with researchers at
+the University of Washington understood that the issues related
+to acidic water, or low pH, and carbonate concentration.
+ Buffering the water, Whiskey Creek Hatchery and a second
+hatchery experiencing the same fate had begun to do, had been a
+solid fix, although somewhat temporarily. A longer-term
+adaptation needs to be considered and is necessary, especially
+since oceanographers tell us that this change in pH is due to
+older water, which has been absorbing the Earth's carbon
+emissions for a century and that even stopping the carbon
+emission inputs today would mean 30 to 50 years of acidic
+waters in the future. It also means issues not just for oysters
+but for all marine organisms.
+ During the past 10 years, we are beginning to learn that
+other climate-related changes impact the growth and health of
+shellfish beyond the hatchery and onto the beaches of farms. We
+are experiencing hypoxic periods, increasing temperatures, a
+decrease in available food in the water column, an increase of
+disease and harmful algal blooms, changes in growth patterns
+for the shellfish such as yield, size, and the way in which
+they grow generally. One specific example is that we are seeing
+impacts to the abyssal threads of mussels. These threads are
+what allows mussels to attach to structure for them to grow.
+Without healthy abyssal threads, mussels cannot grow. We are
+also seeing a decrease in resistance to shellfish predators,
+such as oyster drills, and an increase in intensity and
+frequency of storm events. These are all things to which the
+industry must adapt.
+ Real-time oceanography data collected by the Integrated
+Oceanographic Observing System, or IOOS, plus the guidance of
+NOAA's Ocean Acidification Program have been essential to the
+industry. Shellfish farmers who had just been used to
+consulting tide books are now looking at real-time temperature,
+salinity, and carbonate data on their phones while they are on
+the beach working. In addition, the industry on both coasts.
+The industry on both coasts takes advantage of discussions at
+local universities, nonprofits, and governments in finding ways
+to help.
+ We need more. We need to better understand the interactions
+of shellfish and other organisms such as kelp and grasses. We
+need to look into genetics to see if there are families much
+better suited to survive these changes, much like we've done in
+the wheat and grain industry. We need to understand how rising
+sea levels will impact where and how shellfish will grow. We're
+in exciting times of technology, and shellfish farmers are not
+easily discouraged because if they were, they wouldn't get out
+of bed each morning. But we need help in policies and
+leadership to allow the tradition of shellfish and the families
+that have been farming shellfish for generations to continue
+long into the future.
+ Thank you very much for inviting me here today.
+ [The prepared statement of Ms. Pilaro follows:]
+ [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Ms. Pilaro.
+ At this point we will begin our first round of questions.
+And the Chair recognizes herself for 5 minutes.
+ So I want to ask a general question to everyone on the
+panel. It seems that--to us that the scientific consensus that
+we've heard in this hearing this morning and in our full
+Committee hearing is pretty solid, but on the state of the
+oceans it seems that there are major challenges to being able
+to understand because of the breadth and the scope of the
+research left to do.
+ There have been some major advances in our understanding of
+how carbon emissions impact the oceans and coasts through ocean
+warming, acidification, deoxygenation. But I think there's
+still a lot that we understand is unexplored, inaccessible, and
+expensive to study.
+ So my question, if each of you could share with us your
+thoughts on what the biggest challenges to studying these
+changes are and what are the ways that the Federal Government
+can help in exploring these and addressing the challenges that
+you experience in your research?
+ Dr. Cooley. I would say that one of the biggest challenges
+is the ocean is vast. And as you note, it's very difficult to
+be everywhere and understand all the processes. There have been
+substantial advances in the last decades on remote observing
+systems where autonomous devices can go out through the ocean
+and measure different variables and then send back the data to
+researchers on land. That's only one piece of it, though. We
+have satellites that can help as well with that same type of
+work. However, bringing that information together and making
+sure that there's no drift in the instruments still requires
+some individuals to be out there sampling.
+ So I think an integrated viewpoint of how to inquire what
+is happening in the ocean is important to keep in mind. You
+know, no one is more excited than oceanographers about cool
+devices that go through the ocean, but we realize that there
+is--there needs to be sort of a network to bring that
+information together and put it to work.
+ Dr. Horton. Another piece I might highlight is the modeling
+component, greater resources, and supercomputing that leverages
+some of those observations and helps us understand processes at
+various scales in the ocean, but also as we think about some of
+the tail risks that I didn't have a chance to talk about, why
+we might get more than a foot of sea-level rise, for example,
+to really understand those risks, we have to understand the
+interaction of things like changes in ocean currents with loss
+of Arctic sea ice, what might that indirectly mean for the
+Greenland ice sheet, for example, and how could changes in that
+ice sheet feed back on ocean circulation? Those are where we
+start to see the uncertainties, and the further we push
+greenhouse gas concentrations, the bigger the risk of
+unpleasant surprises, so we need models to help us understand
+those risks more fully.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thanks.
+ Dr. Frazer. I would agree with what I just heard. Data are
+key, and there are certainly observing systems that are
+becoming better and better all the time. I think we need to
+continue to improve on those and develop the technologies that
+will allow them to advance further. Again, I come from a
+fisheries background, right, and data in that regard, real-time
+data collection or near real-time data collection is super,
+super important. Right now, we assess stocks based on data that
+might have been collected 5 years ago, but things are changing
+much faster than that, and so we need to probably incorporate a
+more regular sampling of fishes, to get the data that we need
+to make good assessments to inform the industry as to what they
+can do.
+ And I would agree also that modeling is key. Modeling
+integrates all of that information and helps us to make
+predictions so that we can adapt in a timely manner. Thank you.
+ Ms. Pilaro. Well, I will agree with everything else that
+the panel has said. I will emphasize the relationship between
+species is important, how does shellfish interrelate to other
+organisms in the ocean?
+ Funding is harsh. There's a lot of competition for small
+amount of funds. And getting the data, the information, the
+output from models, all of what was mentioned into the hands of
+someone who really can use it like the shellfish growers is
+beneficial because: A) they're using it to solve real-world
+problems, and B) it brings attention to the applicability of
+the data and research, which then hopefully will reinforce the
+need and the acceptance of funding these important activities.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you all. I yield back the
+remainder of my time, and I now recognize Mr. Marshall for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Marshall. All right. Thank you, Chairwoman.
+ I'm going to ask you all about innovation. I want you to
+think about what's out there, the greatest, latest, don't be
+afraid if it's a crazy idea. Think outside the box. What's
+going on in the world that's innovative? I'm particularly
+interested in phytoplankton farming or kelp farming, and I
+think about, you know, the shellfish industry. Maybe we should
+be trying to grow more kelp than worried about the genetic
+editing of oysters or something like that. So maybe, Ms.
+Pilaro, we'll start with you and go backward. Maybe take 30
+seconds. What's out there that's great and late in innovation?
+ Ms. Pilaro. Well, I agree with you that there is some
+really great innovation in kelp farming, and the relationship
+between kelp and shellfish is fabulous.
+ Mr. Marshall. Right.
+ Ms. Pilaro. Multi-trophic farms, where shellfish and kelp
+are growing together, have been difficult to permit. So when we
+talk about policies, this is something that we'll need to talk
+a little bit more about.
+ Also, to make a connection with your amber waves of grain,
+I think there's a lot of fabulous genetics work for wheat and
+grain that can also be applied to shellfish, which is a fairly
+new approach, compared to other agriculture crops. We're not
+looking to alter the organisms genetically, rather finding
+families that are more resistant to some of these challenges.
+ Mr. Marshall. Great. If you can get to us your--what you
+need. You mentioned some type of--some processes or--that would
+help you to do more of the kelp farming. Let us know. And, by
+the way, I think the Department of Agriculture would do a great
+job overseeing the gene editing compared to the FDA (U.S. Food
+and Drug Administration), just an aside. Dr. Frazer, you're up.
+ Dr. Frazer. Great, thank you. So I would agree as well. I
+think that there are certainly molecular advances that we can
+employ to help identify more resilient strains of particular
+organisms and to focus on perhaps using those in mitigation
+efforts.
+ I'm interested in your phytoplankton and kelp question. I
+agree with you there that phytoplankton and kelp take up and
+assimilate a large amount of CO2, and so do other
+things such as seagrass beds. And I think what we should try to
+do is safeguard those habitats so that they can continue to
+perform like they're supposed to. The issue of actually trying
+to increase their abundance or grow them, I think we do face
+some challenges right now with regard to scalability, and it's
+something that----
+ Mr. Marshall. Are people doing it? Are people researching
+it? Is University of Florida leading the charge? Who's leading
+the charge on it?
+ Dr. Frazer. I think there's--universities are--certainly
+the University of Florida is doing some of that, and other
+universities around the Nation are trying to invest to figure
+out how to increase the capabilities of autotrophs, including
+phytoplankton, and other organisms to grow, and sequester that
+carbon.
+ Mr. Marshall. Thanks. Yes, Dr. Horton.
+ Dr. Horton. Yes, I like how your question about innovation
+references both the potential for greenhouse gas mitigation,
+measures that could take carbon out of the atmosphere but also
+adaptation and resilience. I think we really do need both. By
+reducing emissions, we can buy ourselves time for some of these
+technologies to come into play with the right kind of
+investments, as you say.
+ I guess one other quick thing to highlight within the
+adaptation space is, again, from a modeling perspective, can we
+test out some of these solutions, things like storm surge
+barriers, dredging, so we can better understand costs and
+benefits associated with those activities? There might be an
+obvious benefit of preventing a storm surge, but what could be
+some of the potential downsides? And some of that gets into the
+social science, that sort of moral hazard, what if a barrier
+fails? I think those are a whole bunch of social science
+questions involved in those living at the coast, how they
+perceive some of these emerging hazards, potential changes in
+real estate value that are maybe sort of outside the realm of
+the science component but deep social science questions that we
+are engaging with communities and as they sort of lead the
+charge in thinking about these resilience issues.
+ Mr. Marshall. Thanks. Yes, Dr. Cooley?
+ Dr. Cooley. I think it's a great question. Innovation is so
+important, but technology and devices is just one piece. So the
+other piece is innovation and decisionmaking and how we put
+that information to work. You mentioned that you work in
+healthcare. You've gotten a great front seat to what innovation
+has done. What we see there is that new devices have given more
+information for better patient care and better collective
+decisionmaking. We're learning a lot more about how to do that
+in the ocean environment.
+ The example that Ms. Pilaro outlined in the West Coast has
+been a great example of how better technology for shellfish
+growers has led to a better regional outcome. And I think we
+need to take the best lessons from that and learn how to apply
+it to the ocean common resources that we want and care about.
+ Mr. Marshall. All right. I'm going to go over my time here,
+so I better yield back since this is a new Chairwoman in charge
+here. I'll yield back. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Marshall.
+ I'll now recognize Ms. Bonamici for 5 minutes.
+ Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Chair Fletcher and Ranking Member
+Marshall. And thank you to our witnesses. I've been looking
+forward to this hearing, and I'm really glad, Mr. Marshall, to
+hear you're excited about science. And this is an important
+issue even for our colleagues and constituents who do not
+represent coastal areas because, as we've heard this morning
+and we know, the health of our oceans reflects the health of
+our planet.
+ Oregon's economic vitality is dependent on the health of
+the Pacific Ocean and the lower Columbia River estuary. We're
+very vulnerable to the effects of climate change, especially
+ocean and coastal acidification. As Co-Chair of the House
+Oceans Caucus, I know that the health of our natural resources
+and marine resources is critical, and I'm advocating for
+investments in research to predict and adapt these challenges.
+ I recently reintroduced the bipartisan Coastal and Ocean
+Acidification Stressors and Threats, or COAST, Research Act,
+with Representative Young, also the other Co-Chair of the
+Oceans Caucus, Representative Pingree, and Representative Posey
+to expand the scientific research and monitoring to improve our
+understanding of ocean and coastal acidification. The bill
+would improve research on ocean and coastal acidification in
+the context of environmental stressors, assess adaptation and
+mitigation strategies, and designate NOAA as the lead Federal
+agency responsible for implementing the Federal response.
+ Additionally, the bill would increase our understanding of
+the socioeconomic effects of ocean acidification and coastal
+acidification in estuaries. It would engage stakeholders,
+including the commercial fishing industry, researchers, and
+community leaders through an advisory board, and provide for
+the long-term stewardship and standardization of data on ocean
+acidification from different sources, including the National
+Centers for Environmental Information and the Integrated Ocean
+Observing System. These efforts will help identify risks and
+inform vulnerable communities, industries, and coastal and
+ocean managers on how they can best prepare and, when possible,
+adapt to changing conditions.
+ Dr. Cooley, I appreciate in your written testimony you
+discuss some of the research gaps. Thank you for that. You also
+discuss how the fundamental solution to ocean warming,
+acidification, and oxygen loss is to decrease greenhouse gas
+emissions, emphasizing the connection between ocean
+acidification and greenhouse gas emissions. And I think we
+heard that from everybody on the panel today.
+ How do you--Dr. Cooley, how do human-caused greenhouse gas
+emissions change seasonal upwelling, when the winds cause
+nutrient-rich deeper water to rise from below, especially on
+the Pacific coast?
+ Dr. Cooley. Thank you for that question, Congresswoman, and
+thank you for your leadership on introducing the COAST Research
+Act.
+ The action of atmospheric warming tends to change or
+enhance upwelling favorable winds. Winds that come from a
+certain direction along the coastline will drive upwelling
+naturally, and that can be enhanced when those winds become
+stronger. And that allows deeper waters to move up along the
+coast and reach coastal resources and fisheries decades sooner
+than they would be expected to.
+ So in the Pacific Northwest, as Ms. Pilaro highlighted,
+shellfish growers were experiencing waters that upwelled 50 to
+100 years earlier than expected, and they were carrying water
+that had an extra enhanced amount of carbon dioxide in it from
+being exposed to the atmosphere this century.
+ Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. I want to get two more questions
+in. Dr. Cooley and Dr. Horton, how can Congress best support
+adaptation and mitigation strategies to address the
+socioeconomic effects? And if you could answer briefly because
+I really want to get in a question for Ms. Pilaro.
+ Dr. Cooley. I think probably the most important piece is to
+support structures that involve multiple stakeholders and set a
+collective vision.
+ Ms. Bonamici. Great. Dr. Horton?
+ Dr. Horton. I would agree with that. Vulnerable
+communities, just to give one example. When we think about the
+combination of high temperature and high humidity, that's going
+to affect the elderly, those with pre-existing health
+conditions. It's not one-size-fits-all. We need science to help
+us understand how different communities differ in their
+vulnerability and in the adaptation strategies that make the
+most sense for them because ultimately these are about long-
+term decisions that are good for all of society.
+ Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. And, Ms. Pilaro, at Oregon State
+University Dr. Burke Hales developed the Burke-o-Lator, a
+device the size of a piece of carry-on luggage that can analyze
+when the shellfish growers across the Pacific Northwest should
+grow larva based on the acidity and effects of calcium
+carbonates needed for the shell formation. As you discuss in
+your testimony, the shellfish hatcheries, especially Whiskey
+Creek Shellfish in my home State of Oregon, have been on the
+frontlines of responding. Why are Federal investments in tools
+like the Burke-o-Lator and the data from the Integrated Ocean
+Observing System necessary for our fishers and the shellfish
+industry?
+ Ms. Pilaro. It's critically necessary because some of these
+impacts are happening regardless of where the shellfish farming
+happens and where hatcheries are, so it's not bound by a State,
+it's not bound by a region. And so having that Federal
+commitment and input is vitally important. We don't want to be
+in a situation where a private entity builds something and then
+keeps it to themselves. It would be helpful to have something
+that all of the folks who are interested in harvesting from the
+sea, whether it's kelp or shellfish or anything else could use.
+Any other fisheries resource can gain access to that
+information and that technology.
+ Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. And, Chair Fletcher, I apologize
+for going over time, but as I yield back, I request unanimous
+consent to add several letters from ocean stakeholder groups to
+the record in support of the COAST Research Act.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Without objection.
+ Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. I will now recognize my colleague from
+Texas, Mr. Babin, for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Babin. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it. And
+thank you, witnesses, for being here as well.
+ Dr. Horton, many of the Green New Deal proponents are
+suggesting that greenhouse gas emissions are at a catastrophic
+level, some of which are claiming that we have 12 years left.
+Do we have 12 years in your opinion?
+ Dr. Horton. So----
+ Mr. Babin. Just keep it as brief as you can if you don't
+mind. I've got some other questions, too. You need to turn on
+your microphone.
+ Dr. Horton. The further we turn up the dial on greenhouse
+gas emissions, the greater the risk of potential surprises that
+are very hard to predict.
+ Mr. Babin. So it's--we're getting close to that point then
+in other words? And also, do you think it's responsible for
+some of our Nation's leaders and the media to suggest that
+certain doom will arrive unless we adopt the Green New Deal
+policies?
+ Dr. Horton. I can't speak to the specifics of Green New
+Deal policies. What I can say is that to the extent that it
+represents an appreciation of the urgent need to reduce
+greenhouse gas emissions, I agree that's something that we
+really do need to do, given the hazards I described in my
+testimony.
+ Mr. Babin. OK. Thank you. Because some of these policies
+may cost some jobs, and some of the costs that we've heard have
+been stunning.
+ And, Dr. Cooley, do you think that the Green New Deal
+should be passed into law?
+ Dr. Cooley. Well, I'm not here to talk about the Green New
+Deal, but what is----
+ Mr. Babin. Do you think it's a good idea that we--that it's
+been put forward----
+ Dr. Cooley. The Green New Deal has started a conversation
+about details, which we haven't had before. We're having
+discussions across the aisle about the future we want and the
+specific ways we can get there, and that is incredibly
+inspiring as a scientist who's interested in details and
+solutions. How do we get from here to there?
+ Mr. Babin. OK.
+ Dr. Cooley. That's a really tough question.
+ Mr. Babin. Yes, thank you very much.
+ Dr. Cooley. Thank you.
+ Mr. Babin. And, Dr. Frazer, what are some of the solutions
+that you think will aggressively target climate change that
+might not hurt American families or the economy? Because some
+of the proponents of the Green New Deal have put forward these
+provisions that would absolutely hurt my District 36 in Texas
+and much of the economy. Give me some ideas that you have of
+what might be some of these solutions that wouldn't be so
+hurtful because of my constituents--concerns for my
+constituents?
+ Dr. Frazer. Well, as I said in my testimony, I think that
+there are lots of vulnerable habitats out there, for example,
+that are affected by a large number of stressors. And if we
+could make sure that we manage and maintain those habitats,
+they would continue to play a role in ameliorating some of the
+risk associated with climate change but not entirely. So I
+would pay attention on proper management of the habitats so
+they don't continue to degrade. Seagrass, this would be one of
+those, kelp habitats, and others.
+ Mr. Babin. Absolutely. Thank you.
+ And, let's see, Dr. Frazer, one more. If the United States
+does implement the Green New Deal, how would we keep American
+jobs here? In your opinion would costs rise as much as some of
+these--we've looked at $93 trillion of costs to the American
+taxpayer. In your opinion, would that--is that true? We've seen
+time and again that green companies take their production
+overseas for cheaper cost and production, so how do we address
+this, you know, when the American taxpayer is expected to foot
+the bill for some of the biggest polluters in the world, and
+China being one of them? It doesn't seem fair. What is your
+opinion there? What are your thoughts?
+ Dr. Frazer. So, again, I--what I would say is that what
+we've heard today is that there's an investment that needs to
+happen with regard to data collection, and it's all kind of
+data collection from innovation and technologies, modeling, and
+real-time data collection.
+ With regard to the area that I'm mostly involved in,
+fisheries, that increased data collection actually increases
+the certainty by which we can estimate the stocks that we can
+access, and by increasing that certainty, we can actually
+exploit more fishes. And that actually ends up being an
+economic benefit. So sometimes in order to make money, you have
+to pay money, right----
+ Mr. Babin. Sure, yes.
+ Dr. Frazer [continuing]. And so I think what we should be
+thinking about is making wise investments and getting good
+return on those investments.
+ Mr. Babin. Do you think the Green New Deal is a good thing
+and should be passed into law?
+ Dr. Frazer. I'm not going to speak specifically to the
+Green New Deal because I don't--I haven't read it. I apologize.
+ Mr. Babin. OK. All right. Well, Madam Chair, I think that
+finishes me up. Thank you very much.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Babin.
+ I'll now recognize Mr. Crist for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Crist. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member
+Marshall, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
+ The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's special
+report that came out last year states that coral reefs are
+projected to decline by an additional 70 to 90 percent with an
+increase in global temperatures of 1.5 +C. A 99 percent loss
+would be experienced with an increase of 2 +C. Florida, where I
+live, which is home to the fourth-largest barrier reef in the
+world, the Florida Keys reef system, is already experiencing an
+unprecedented coral disease outbreak.
+ Dr. Cooley, can you discuss in more detail how global
+temperatures increases to impact our coral reefs and what this
+means for places like Florida that rely on these oceans and
+coastal resources?
+ Dr. Cooley. Thank you for that question. Coral reefs are
+extremely sensitive to temperature, and when they receive too
+much of a heatwave effect or too much intense heating in a
+short period of time, they will lose the cells that live inside
+the corals that help them produce food. And so the corals are
+without resources at that point. That's a coral bleaching
+event. That can quickly lead to coral death. And at the same
+time acidification is sort of decreasing the ability of those
+corals to recover because it's decreasing the net growth rate
+of corals. So when corals experience bleaching or breakage,
+they're less able to recover. And that really is a one-two
+punch. It's very, very serious for corals.
+ Mr. Crist. Thank you. My next question is addressed to all
+of the panelists. What can we do to preserve our coral reef
+systems overall? Whoever wants to go first.
+ Dr. Frazer. I'm happy to field that one for sure. I mean,
+there's a tremendous amount of local pressure on coral reefs.
+There's eutrophication that's a consequence of increased
+nutrient delivery. There's physical damage, again, due to
+anchoring and other activities. There's sedimentation due to
+coastal development. All of those types of things contribute to
+the degradation of coral reefs, and they make them more
+vulnerable obviously to the stresses that are associated with
+increasing warming temperatures. So I think you need to pay
+attention to both the local stressors and certainly continue to
+increase the greenhouse gas emissions problem.
+ Mr. Crist. Anyone else?
+ Ms. Pilaro. I would just add I'm not a scientist but one of
+the things that's important in a situation like this be it
+coral reef reduction or shellfish larvae mortality, is
+education is education and communication and sharing that
+information with a wide variety of people. To a certain extent,
+it affects everybody, and you need to find the right message,
+the right way to tell that story to as broad a population as
+possible.
+ Dr. Horton. So maybe this is a window to talk a little bit
+about correlation across different types of extreme events and
+sort of compounding factors. So for those reefs if we're seeing
+even just a little bit of an increase in rainfall and more
+runoff as a result and if we're seeing just a little bit
+stronger storms as those oceans warm, once we couple that with
+sea-level rise, we see nonlinear combinations now where
+suddenly there's a lot more standing water, a lot more runoff,
+and maybe some unpredictable effects on coral reefs related to
+that sort of linking of the global and more local scales. So
+those are the kind of hazards we need to understand better, and
+we need science to do so.
+ Mr. Crist. Great. Thank you. Dr. Frazer, as a fellow
+Floridian, I know that you're extremely familiar with the red
+tide outbreak that Florida suffered this past year. One thing
+that struck me about the outbreak was the lack of information
+as to why the--it was so severe this past year. Do you have any
+suggestions as to that?
+ Dr. Frazer. Again, I--I'm super familiar with that as well,
+and I--and one of the things that we don't understand about red
+tides is why they actually establish themselves. And it gets to
+this issue that we talked about earlier about data acquisition,
+right? And we need to make sure that we have the data
+collection systems in place so that we're not behind the eight
+ball in this particular case. So that's my answer.
+ Mr. Crist. OK. Thank you, sir.
+ Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Crist.
+ I now recognize Mr. Gonzalez for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member
+Marshall, for holding the hearing today. I also want to thank
+the witnesses for being here. I know it takes a lot of prep and
+can be stressful, so I appreciate your participation.
+ So I do believe climate change is real and global
+industrial development has been a contributing factor, but I
+also believe that the proposals that we've seen in the Green
+New Deal quite frankly would devastate my community. I'm from
+northeast Ohio, think steel country, a lot of manufacturing, a
+lot of agriculture, these kind of energy-intensive businesses
+if you will, and the proposals being presented would raise our
+energy cost to such a level that I can't help but think that
+our citizens, my constituents, would be making tradeoffs
+between things like fueling up their car or putting food on the
+table. And I think that is just fundamentally unsustainable.
+That makes no sense.
+ But, again, the problem is real, and I'm committed to
+finding a broad basket of market solutions to tackle the
+challenges of the present and future. What I believe is that we
+need to focus on technologies that are going to make consumers
+and industry essentially neutral when it comes to the energy
+source. And the only way we can do that is by making our energy
+sources affordable and reliable. We ignore the reliability part
+but--too often, but the Green New Deal and all those proposals
+kind of ignore it, and I think that's wrong. So I believe we
+need to focus on technology solutions that we can export abroad
+that are going to make energy cheap and reliable, bottom line.
+ And so I represent, as I mentioned, a non-coastal district
+located in northeast Ohio. We don't have an ocean reef or
+coastal beaches. So my first question will go to Dr. Frazer or
+anyone on the panel. But, you know, when I'm educating my
+constituents on why this challenge, specifically the one we're
+here to address today, affects them, what--you know, what would
+you say for somebody from my district?
+ Dr. Frazer. Well, I'm again going to speak about fisheries,
+right----
+ Mr. Gonzalez. Yes.
+ Dr. Frazer [continuing]. And there's--people tend to think
+of fisheries as being a coastal resource, but those fisheries
+products are--serve the Nation in its entirety, right? There is
+a supply chain there. There are businesses, retailers,
+wholesalers, restaurants, and I'm pretty sure that in Ohio
+people eat lots of seafood. And so, again, it's something
+that--it's not just a natural resource issue----
+ Mr. Gonzalez. Yes, right.
+ Dr. Frazer [continuing]. It's a food security issue as
+well, right? So that's why you should care.
+ Mr. Gonzalez. We have the best walleye in the world by the
+way.
+ Dr. Frazer. Excellent.
+ Mr. Gonzalez. So, again, Dr. Frazer, you discuss the
+importance of long-term investment in science and state good
+science can take a while to come to fruition. And again, that's
+kind of where I think we need to be headed is technological
+innovation that's going to bring cost down and reliability up.
+In this instance how do you suggest we as Congress
+differentiate between good science and bad science, and how do
+we make sure the science is robust enough?
+ Dr. Frazer. I think that Congress--well, let me step back a
+minute and say that we have organizations in the United States,
+the National Science Foundation, for example, and NOAA that are
+in the business of evaluating science in a peer-reviewed
+process. I think you would--should depend on that. The
+priorities can be established elsewhere, and they certainly
+involve tradeoffs. And I think that's something that's best in
+the hands of the policymakers.
+ Mr. Gonzalez. OK. And then where--and this is for anybody
+if anybody wants to jump in. Where are we seeing the most
+promise from a technological standpoint? Where is the research
+saying, hey, you know, if we could double down on this set of
+activities, I think we could really make some headway? Anybody,
+feel free.
+ Ms. Pilaro. One way in which I think--and I spoke to it
+earlier in Mr. Marshall's question is, in looking at how
+animals respond to these climate-related changes and what
+genetic traits they carry that make them more resistant to some
+of the stressors that they are experiencing. As things are
+changing, we need to better understand the physiology of the
+animal and what they have. Growing shellfish with native
+eelgrass is something that's been happening for a long time and
+is a symbiotic relationship for both of those species, but, as
+I mentioned earlier, with cattle and grain they've looked at
+those families and their genetic make-up which allows them to
+be more commercially viable under certain conditions. This
+approach for fisheries is fairly new and for shellfish it is
+very new; both of which would benefit from additional work. The
+Animal Research Service under the USDA (U.S. Department of
+Agriculture) is the most appropriate and would be a fabulous
+place to invest some----
+ Mr. Gonzalez. Great.
+ Ms. Pilaro [continuing]. Funds.
+ Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, and I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. I'll now recognize Mr.
+Casten for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Casten. Thank you, Chair--Chairwoman. The--I'd like to
+ask some questions of Dr. Horton, and I wanted to follow on--
+you described in your testimony a delay between CO2
+emissions and sea-level rise, and given how rapidly we are--on
+an unprecedented basis we're increasing CO2, you can
+appreciate that that makes me a little nervous. How far back in
+the geologic record do you have to go to find CO2--
+atmospheric CO2 levels of where they are right now?
+ Dr. Horton. Literally millions of years.
+ Mr. Casten. And if you look back in that time, do you have
+any sense of what the temperature was then relative to what it
+is now?
+ Dr. Horton. Well, our understanding is that, you know, as
+we look back at sort of the deep paleo climate, especially
+times when the planet was a little bit warmer, it--a couple
+things appear clear. One, sensitivity--temperature sensitivity
+to CO2 appears to be higher than it might seem if we
+just looked at the climate models of today. And furthermore,
+sea-level rise sensitivity over long timescales appears to be
+very sensitive to even, say, 1 degree of global warming. So I
+think consistent with your point, when we look at deeper
+history, we can find times when it was a degree or two warmer
+maybe, sea levels were tens of feet higher in some cases. And
+likewise, when it was a little bit cooler, times when sea level
+was far lower, not a little lower. So that suggests some of
+these kinds of powerful positive feedbacks.
+ Mr. Casten. So if we were to look at the--you know, the
+empirical data that we have and recognizing that the climate
+models get better and better but are still models, the--what is
+a reasonable assumption to make about where we might
+equilibrate on an empirical basis at current CO2
+levels with respect to both temperature and sea levels?
+ Dr. Horton. So I guess to be clear, equilibration we mean
+over the long timescale, multi-centuries, maybe even out to
+1,000 years potentially. Those numbers I think are
+disturbingly, disturbingly high. I mean, one key question is
+what carbon dioxide levels, concentrations would we assume as
+the equilibration? I mean, even if we could somehow turn off
+greenhouse gas emissions tomorrow, not reduce emissions but
+turn them off, we'd still be stuck with greenhouse gas
+concentrations close to the levels they're at now for decades
+to centuries. So even without future emissions, you know, as
+we're starting to get out into multiple centuries out, you see
+continued large amounts of sea-level rise. But of course we
+need to not have those greenhouse gas emissions so that we
+avert the risk of some of these tail responses, rapid change in
+the ice sheet----
+ Mr. Casten. So----
+ Dr. Horton [continuing]. But we don't know exactly where
+those thresholds are.
+ Mr. Casten. So when you talk about being--having, you know,
+potential risk of 8 feet of sea-level rise, am I understanding
+you correctly to say that it actually could be higher than that
+if we--if we're sitting at current sea levels and saying if we
+look at the historical record, where were those sea levels in
+prior periods?
+ Dr. Horton. It depends on the timescale. In my personal
+opinion sort of worst-case scenario for the year 2100 might be
+about 8 feet. I can't say if it's a low--a little lower or a
+little higher. That is not the most likely outcome. That's a
+low probability but extremely high-consequence outcome should
+it happen for society. So my personal opinion and also the
+opinion of the last National Climate Assessment is that 8 feet
+by 2100 is about the worst-case scenario with big uncertainties
+on both sides. There's much less uncertainty in that sort of
+lower end, 1-foot level that I highlighted and showed how even
+that would have such a big impact on coastal flooding.
+ Mr. Casten. And does the 8 feet assume that we actually
+take meaningful efforts to slow CO2 now or does that
+assume a business case as usual?
+ Dr. Horton. For the most part, it assumes continued
+greenhouse gas emissions at a relatively high level. The RCP
+(representative concentration pathway) 8.5 scenario, if you're
+familiar with that, high greenhouse gas emissions, but
+especially as those concentrations get up higher and higher, we
+run the risk that the ice sheets could give up a lot of ice
+even if we then were to reduce our emissions. But for the most
+part those 8-foot type scenarios do assume continued high
+increases in greenhouse gases.
+ Mr. Casten. OK. My final question, and, Dr. Cooley, you may
+have some thoughts on this as well. And I'm leaving this
+hearing to go question Jerome Powell about our--among other
+things, our housing policy. Talk to me about what housing in
+the United States looks like over the realm of 30-year
+mortgages in a world with 3- to 8-foot-level sea-level rise.
+ Dr. Horton. So talk about sort of unanswerable questions,
+but I think the key point I'd say there is, is it really safe
+to assume that property values don't start to drop before the
+water arrives? You know, if people are sort of waiting on this
+assumption that we have enough time until the water actually
+gets there, given what we've been talking about how we're sort
+of locked into additional sea-level rise, you know, that's an
+assumption that could be questioned. And I think, you know, I
+can't tell you exactly when, but towards your point, I think
+there are a lot of assets potentially at risk, whether it's
+homes, whether it's the ability to fund--underwrite certain
+types of infrastructure. And if people start to move away from
+some of these communities, who gets left behind? What happens
+to the tax bases there? We're really opening Pandora's box the
+further we increase greenhouse gas emissions.
+ Mr. Casten. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. Thank you. The Chair will
+now recognize Mr. Weber for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Weber. Thank you, ma'am. Dr. Frazer, south Texas has
+some of the best fishing in the world. Pardon me. I was
+listening to your discussion with Dr. Babin, and you talked
+about getting more data to exploit more fishes. I thought that
+was an interesting choice of words, exploit. How about enjoy?
+Would that be better?
+ Dr. Frazer. Either one would work.
+ Mr. Weber. OK. Well, I'd like to request unanimous consent
+to change that word in the record. I--no, I just want to make
+sure that we have a lot of good fishing and that we do enjoy
+those, and we do protect those fisheries.
+ Dr. Frazer. Can I explain that further? Would that be all
+right?
+ Mr. Weber. I'm dying to hear.
+ Dr. Frazer. OK. So what happens is when we do a stock
+assessment, there's some uncertainty surrounding that
+assessment. And increased data collection allows us to increase
+the certainty, right? And when we increase the certainty, it's
+possible that we can adjust the quotas such that you can
+actually harvest or enjoy more fish. And so it's a case where
+increased data collection or an investment yield a positive
+economic benefit.
+ Mr. Weber. I get it. That's the most egregious word you
+could use to encourage that data collection. We're all adults
+here. And that's fine.
+ But I have a question for all the witnesses. I'm from the
+Gulf Coast of Texas. Galveston and Freeport, Texas are both
+cities in my district with economic ties to shipping
+industries. The ports located there are important to both our
+local and national economy. We move 95 percent of the Nation's
+LNG (liquified natural gas). We produce 65 percent of the
+Nation's jet fuel, 20 percent of the Nation's gasoline east of
+the Rockies. And that doesn't include the Port of Houston. So
+we're a huge energy district.
+ Now, some of my colleagues like the gentleman to my right,
+Mr. Posey in Florida, face a different challenge in adapting to
+this rise when compared to the ports and the tributaries I
+represent in some of our--in our areas, some of our district.
+Ports would actually benefit from increased water levels.
+ So I guess my question to each of the witnesses is, how
+could a more localized approach to mitigation help protect our
+economy and better prepare individual communities? Should there
+be a Federal role in helping communities prepare and address
+these issues, and if so, what is it? How can we better address
+local communities should there be a Federal role in doing this?
+And if so, what is it? And Dr. Cooley, I'll start with you.
+ Dr. Cooley. Well, I think we know beyond a shadow of a
+doubt that effects of climate change are regionally variable.
+And so there's no one-size-fits-all solution. As you noted,
+your region is going to have a different set of needs than
+Congressman Posey's district. There are best practices,
+however, that emerge from handling a particular issue, adapting
+to a particular issue, type of issue, for example. For example,
+we've learned quite a lot from the example of the shellfish
+growers in the Pacific Northwest. Those growers are now sharing
+their knowledge with growers in Maine, on the Gulf Coast so
+that American aquaculture can thrive and grow with the benefit
+of foresight. So I think that's one thing the Federal
+Government can absolutely facilitate.
+ Mr. Weber. Thank you for the short answer. Dr. Horton,
+you've got a hard act to follow.
+ Dr. Horton. Yes, I think a blend of scales, as we heard.
+Each community is going to have unique solutions. But
+similarly, some solutions are going to need to operate at
+scales far beyond what a local community could afford, so I
+think we do need consistent policies in that regard. We also
+just more practically need to make sure that different
+adaptation strategies across, say, different agencies or
+different communities aren't operating at cross purposes,
+right? The sort of superficial example would be if one
+community, you know, builds a seawall, does that increase the
+flooding for the nearby community? That's sort of an
+oversimplified example, but I think it's emblematic of why we
+need coordination----
+ Mr. Weber. Let's jump to Dr. Frazer. He seems to be the
+fishing expert except for his one faux pas of exploit. And that
+would be--oystering is huge in my district, so CO2
+levels--and I read some of the testimony on the Japanese
+oysters that were brought over and how they've suffered some
+setbacks and stuff. So, Dr. Frazer, for you, for my Gulf Coast
+district in Texas, what needs to be specifically aimed at the
+Gulf Coast there?
+ Dr. Frazer. So I'm going to say that the Federal Government
+could invest in the science that's going to allow us to take
+some of these global-scale models and be able to downscale them
+so that we can make predictions about specific regional areas
+like yours. Those predictions would allow us perhaps to develop
+the infrastructure that we need to deal with increased
+flooding, for example, or other storm-related events.
+ Mr. Weber. Now, is it Pilaro? Is that how you say that? I'm
+a little over time, but you've got 30 seconds with the
+indulgence of the Chair, thank you.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Without objection.
+ Ms. Pilaro. Well, Texas oysters are great. We'd like to
+have them around for a long time because I think with anything,
+diversity in the market is wonderful. And the----
+ Mr. Weber. You can stop right there, you know.
+ Ms. Pilaro. I think I will. I'll yield the rest of my time.
+Thank you.
+ Mr. Weber. No, go ahead and say the rest of what you were
+going to say.
+ Ms. Pilaro. I think, and as Dr. Cooley said, some of the
+lessons learned from how shellfish are responding to these
+changes in the Northwest is applicable to what you might be
+seeing in Texas. And as people are seeing something that's
+different than what they've experienced, they should be
+encouraged to ask more questions to a broader audience because
+it might be just the variability of something localized or it
+might be something grander with some oceanographic element
+that's happening. So I think it's really important to look
+carefully and ask lots of questions about what might be
+happening there.
+ Mr. Weber. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Weber.
+ I will now recognize Mr. Posey for 5 minutes.
+ Mr. Posey. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to thank the
+Ranking Member and the Chair for inviting me to participate
+here today.
+ I live upon the Atlantic shores of the Florida peninsula.
+My constituents understand in a very deep way the economic and
+environmental importance of our oceans. We also have an
+estuary. It's one of those special places, as you all know,
+where the rivers meet the seas. And ours is named the Indian
+River Lagoon. And it has been identified as the most diverse
+estuary in the country. This is one of the important reasons
+that I co-founded a congressional Estuary Caucus with
+Chairwoman Bonamici, and we have re-chartered a caucus again
+for this session.
+ I also want to thank the panel obviously for showing up and
+say a special hello to Dr. Frazer from our University of
+Florida.
+ In addition, I want to acknowledge the work of the Florida
+Institute of Technology (FIT) on the ocean and estuary issues,
+and I have received a statement from Dr. Robert Weaver,
+Director of Indian River Lagoon research at FIT on matters
+we're discussing today, and I ask unanimous consent to that
+entered into the record.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Without objection.
+ Mr. Posey. Thank you. I'm also proud to be a co-sponsor of
+the National Estuary Acidification Research (NEAR) Act. The
+bill has the objective of focusing acidification research on
+the impacts of our estuaries as well.
+ I'm also pleased to be a co-sponsor of the Coastal and
+Ocean Acidification Stressors and Threats Research Act, and you
+all are familiar with that as well. I won't describe that for
+the record.
+ I just make those points leading up to the questions that
+are very vital to all of us in this Committee and everyone--
+single one of my constituents, and that is how we solve the
+problems that we have. And, you know, first and foremost, we
+talk about our estuary, and I've always said that the answer is
+very simple as two steps. One, stop putting bad stuff in it;
+and two, start removing the bad stuff that is already there.
+And a lot of people are offended by that, but that's the top
+line.
+ It only gets confusing when you start delving into the
+details of how to do that. There are so many different options
+to do it, and it's one of those cases where it seems everybody
+in the room knows how to make a baby stop crying except the
+person holding it. And it's very hard to get a consensus on the
+order and the way to do it. There are so many variable
+solutions, and I'm guessing there's over 100. We could probably
+list 100 different solutions. And I just wonder if there's ever
+been any research that would quantify all the different
+potential solutions for cleaning it up and, you know, the cost
+roughly per the benefit or the amount of clean water in each of
+those.
+ If any of you are aware of any research on that or a
+source, I would really like to have your comments on it
+generally speaking. Start with Dr. Cooley.
+ Dr. Cooley. Thank you. And thank you for your leadership on
+the NEAR Act as well. That is--that solution--or assessment of
+the solutions that we have is critically needed. I--having been
+participating in the National Climate Assessment, I'm a big
+believer in the process of scientific assessment where all of
+the information is gathered and assessed as one to look at
+risks and likelihoods. We have much fewer research studies
+looking at the impacts of solutions partly because they take a
+long time to apply----
+ Mr. Posey. Yes.
+ Dr. Cooley [continuing]. And then even longer to measure
+how well they're doing. But I think that is a key knowledge gap
+that this Committee can turn to and begin to address.
+ Dr. Horton. Very quickly, I'd second that. Evaluating
+adaptation strategies but all--in the context of a changing
+climate, but also the nuts and bolts of implementation, right,
+working with the existing agencies, existing funding cycles,
+bringing all that together to come up with solutions that work
+for all.
+ Mr. Posey. Dr. Frazer?
+ Dr. Frazer. Thank you. I would agree with you. The problem
+is complex, right, and there are certainly lots of issues that
+we have to consider simultaneously. With regard to the issue in
+your own backyard, I would point you to the TMDL process and
+what that is is the total maximum daily loads, and that
+incorporates input from all of the stakeholders and people that
+might be involved in the way to identify what are the sources
+of pollutants into the estuary and how can they collectively
+reduce those inputs.
+ Ms. Pilaro. I agree we need to be working toward a
+solution, and in the process of doing that, we need to really
+keep this communication and collaboration open and engaged and
+robust. We've learned quite a bit from our experience in the
+Northwest. We have valuable information to exchange, and one of
+the things that is happening that I think is most important,
+and perhaps most exciting, is that we've got nonscientists
+thinking about science and we've got nonfarmers thinking about
+farming. In that, there is a wonderful opportunity for all of
+us.
+ Mr. Posey. Right. Another moment? You know----
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Sure.
+ Mr. Posey [continuing]. If somewhere there could just be
+just, say, given a certain level of pollution, you know, or
+certain measurements that you've taken, and here is a list of
+every single thing from oyster beds to oxygenating to on down
+the list, and then, you know, here's the cost of cleaning up 10
+gallons of that water with this method and that method just as
+a baseline so that, you know, there's just not such a food
+fight over evaluating the different methods, that somewhere
+there's a legitimate method of determining an economic return
+or priority, which of these is most effective.
+ So anyway, I hope somebody will start that research
+sometime. I'd be glad to help you pursue it and beat on doors
+and raise money or whatever it takes. Thank you.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Posey.
+ Mr. Posey. Thank you, Madam Chair.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. I'll now recognize Mr. Beyer for 5
+minutes.
+ Mr. Beyer. Madam Chair, thank you very much. Let me just
+begin. Since entering Congress, I've been working with Senator
+Sheldon Whitehouse from Rhode Island on building up our ocean
+resilience capacity. Following my dear friend, Congresswoman
+Suzanne Bonamici, who's been leading ocean acidification for
+years and years, the concern about it. And we've been working
+both through the Regional Coastal Resilience Grants and with
+the National Ocean and Coastal Security Fund, which have now
+been combined into the National Coastal Resilience Fund. It's
+obvious with climate change we need much more resilient
+communities with increasing storms, incessant flooding worsened
+by continued sea-level rise. I think Northrop Grumman has a
+chart that shows Norfolk and Portsmouth, Virginia will be
+underwater 50 percent of the year by 2050.
+ This means ensuring that our fisheries are healthy, that
+we're adapting as those fisheries adapt to changing ocean
+conditions, and it certainly means taking advantage of the
+offshore wind potentials, which Virginia is moving forward on
+right now.
+ Dr. Cooley, the Washington Post recently reported that the
+White House is planning to create its own panel to, quote,
+``reassess the government's analysis of climate science and
+counter conclusions that the continued burning of fossil fuels
+is harming the planet.'' Apparently, the President had not read
+the Fourth National Climate Assessment before it came out.
+ And with Dr. Horton, you are contributing authors of
+previous National Climate Assessments. How much concern do you
+have that Dr. Professor William Happer is going to lead this,
+one of the very few scientists who believes that most of the
+warming is due to national--natural causes, that he disagrees
+with the scientific consensus that--he wrote a paper called,
+``In Defense of Carbon Dioxide,'' that it's a boon to planet
+life.
+ Dr. Cooley. Well, what's interesting about the National
+Climate Assessment is that it qualifies as a federally defined
+highly influential scientific assessment. And so, as such, it
+is required to go through a thorough review process. And it
+needs to meet the standards of the Information Quality Act.
+These rules have been in place for nearly 20 years to ensure
+scientific accuracy, and so really review and assessment--
+review of this assessment has been baked in all throughout its
+creation. There were stakeholder engagement conversations,
+there were expert reviewers at every step, there were Federal
+agencies reviewing this report. And so really any reassessment
+of this report with a small panel is bound to be narrower than
+what it's been through already.
+ And, you know, I think it's just--it's not going to be as
+transparent because we know that process is not subject to the
+same reporting rules that the NCA has already been subject to.
+ Mr. Beyer. Thank you very much. Dr. Horton. In Dr. Cooley's
+testimony, she wrote something I had not really focused on
+before, that the oxygen loss from the ocean will affect the
+global nitrogen cycle and that since nitrous oxide production
+is actually a worse greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, a lot
+of the predictions we've been making we're underestimating. And
+this ties in with your comment about tipping points, about
+something James Hansen has warned us about for years and years
+at NASA. Can you talk about what some of the surprises are?
+ And I say this having just come back from the Northern
+Triangle of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador where they say one
+of the big reasons why they're moving from Guatemala to our
+southern border is because of the extreme drought, extreme
+heat, and climate change, one of those surprises.
+ Dr. Horton. Absolutely right. I think there are really
+three types of surprises. There's climate change happening
+faster than we thought, right, so a greater sensitivity to
+greenhouse gases than we thought. Then there's society being
+more vulnerable to a given amount of warming than we thought,
+which you just alluded to. And then hopefully maybe some
+potential for surprises where we as a society move quickly to
+deal with this problem.
+ In terms of physical hazards, some of the tipping points
+that are getting so much attention, marine ice cliff
+instability, this idea that perhaps paradoxically as you move
+inland in parts of Antarctica the land actually slopes downward
+due to the incredible weight of all that accumulated ice. If
+you start that process of water beginning to make its way down
+due to warming and melting, over long timescales it can be a
+runaway. That's one tipping point.
+ Arctic sea ice, we've lost more than 50 percent of the
+volume of late summer sea ice in the last 35 years or so,
+another possible tipping point because there's a feedback
+there, right, where you remove that white surface, dark surface
+that absorbs more sunlight and causes more warming. Those are
+just a couple of them that we worry about.
+ But I like how you highlighted the sort of impact side,
+too. You know, what if we're underestimating how sensitive our
+crops might be to real extreme temperatures, our vulnerable
+populations to combinations of heat and humidity, the potential
+for conflict around the world as sea levels rise. Could we lose
+control of this narrative, the ability to even deal with the
+problem in a collective way? That's another risk the further we
+push the system I think.
+ There are also these possibilities for tipping points on
+the solution side, too. I think, you know, we have to keep hope
+because we can't rule out the extent to which, for example,
+young people may really sort of rise up and demand that their
+institutions address these hazards. And they pick the companies
+they want to work for ultimately, the businesses they want to
+invest their money in. They may be looking to see which
+companies are disclosing their vulnerability to the risks and
+the extent to which they are contributing to some of these
+problems, too.
+ Mr. Beyer. Great. Thank you very much.
+ Madam Chair, I yield back.
+ Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Beyer.
+ And before we bring the hearing to a close, I want to thank
+all of my colleagues for their questions, their thoughtful
+questions, and especially Ranking Member Marshall for his
+opening the hearing with our shared value that we all want to
+leave the world better than we found it. And I think we all
+agree on that, and we have a lot of work ahead of us.
+ So I appreciate the witnesses coming today to testify
+before the Committee and also for submitting their written
+testimony.
+ The record will remain open for 2 weeks for additional
+statements from the Members and for any additional questions
+the Committee may ask of the witnesses.
+ So I thank you all for your time here today, for your
+valuable contributions and look forward to working with the
+entire Committee and with you as we move forward. The witnesses
+are excused, and the hearing is now adjourned.
+ [Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
+
+[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
+
+ [all]
+