Gulf Dead Zone The Size Of Massachusetts

NEW ORLEANS — Scientists say this year that the "dead zone" area that forms every summer in the Gulf of Mexico is one of the largest ever measured.

The large area of low oxygen that chokes marine life comes in addition to the massive BP oil spill.

Microbes that eat the oil can deplete oxygen in the water. But the researchers who measure the dead zone couldn't say there is a connection between the spill and the dead zone's size.

They say the dead zone is roughly the size of Massachusetts, or at least 7,722 square miles. The largest ever measured was just over 8,000 square miles in 2001.

The dead zone forms every year when bacteria feeds on algae blooms and uses up oxygen. The blooms are caused by the nutrient-rich waters from rivers that carry farm and urban runoff into the Gulf.

Comments

[Tao-Chan]

07:28 AM on 08/04/2010

Oh yeah, now let's get to dealing with the OTHER gulf spill. The one that's been going on for 100 years.
I call it the Mississewer River.

[Wisdom4U]

05:32 PM on 08/03/2010

The Gulf of Mexico has a microbe phenomena where there is a huge population of oil eating microbes probably caused by the 30,000 abandoned leaking wells but I digress. These microbes by themselves deplete the Gulf of oxygen contributing to these dead zones. Now if the dead zone is this large and the population of these microbes have not reached its apex can we expect the dead zone to get much worse as the microbes continue the oil feeding frenzy, increase microbe population thereby depleting more crucial Gulf oxygen? Is there anything that eats these microbes?

[OBroadhurst]

02:06 PM on 08/03/2010

It will get even larger yet.

[deanbob]

01:19 PM on 08/03/2010

Ed Wallace of Inside Automotive wrote (some time ago) about the significanty expansion of the deadzone following the expansion of corn growing for ethanol production.

[Red45]

03:58 PM on 08/05/2010

That was before the oil explosion and gusher, right?

[Kenz300]

01:12 PM on 08/03/2010

I think it is time to create buffer zones along streams and rivers so that
the run off from fertilizer is filtered before the water enters the river.

More cities and counties should buy land along rivers and create flood protection areas
that will reduce run off, sediment and chemical nutrients from entering the rivers.

This will also provide a flood control area where rising waters can be stored in the event
of heavy rainfall.

Flood insurance should only pay once for a property. After that it needs to be put
into a data base and bought for flood control and water storage.

[M Miles]

12:26 PM on 08/03/2010

I thought the dead zone was in Washington D.C. although the Washington D.C. zone is not on a season by season basis and may not be due to lack of oxygen.

The oil in the gulf does seem to have some effect on the Washington D.C. dead zone as it disrupts and or extends the vacation season.

View entity that may have a possible gripe about dead zones in the ocean as they relate to the dead zones in Washington D.C. . . .

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Strange-News/Shark-Video-Sand-Shark-Swims-Ashore-In-Seaside-Park-Area-Of-New-Jersey/Article/201008115675765?lpos=Strange_News_Second_World_News_Feature_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15675765_Shark_Video%3A_Sand_Shark_Swims_Ashore_In_Seaside_Park_Area_Of_New_Jersey

[getoffmedz]

10:51 AM on 08/03/2010

Relax everyone.

BP apologists get paid by the word and work from scripts.

[Egalitare]

08:35 AM on 08/03/2010

I suppose that this is so big that one of those geeky Geo Engineering ideas (aerating the zone as if it was a giant aquarium) is akin to shooting a charging elephant with a pellet gun.

[madisonhack]

07:15 AM on 08/03/2010

"...researchers who measure the dead zone couldn't say there is a connection between the spill and the dead zone's size."

I respect a statement like this when it comes from a group of scientists. Conversely, when someone - or a group of scientists - makes a claim such as "the dispersant is no more toxic than oil", that's when I'm skeptical.

[bbrecht]

07:46 AM on 08/03/2010

yes

[ChicagoBob]

01:59 AM on 08/03/2010

The search for intelligent life on earth continues.

Although we have many brilliant, insightful, long term thinkers, as a species we are frightfully stupid and short sighted. We will eventually damage our environment to the point where it can not support us and there will be an, at present, unimaginable die-off.

Some of many species will, of course, survive, but the quality of life for those who remain will be something akin to our original "cave man" days.

I could be wrong, but I do not think so.

[roninroshi]

11:32 PM on 08/02/2010

The Gulf of Mexico is one...there are more...all man made!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_zone_(ecology)

[roninroshi]

11:37 PM on 08/02/2010

If you click on the link...the top link (ecology) has the info.

[SBrooksB]

01:11 AM on 08/03/2010

I enjoy your posts, roninroshi, and also like your avatar. Is it from The Oxherding Pictures?

[EthnicHeart]

11:46 PM on 08/02/2010

Correct, roninroshi. Fan #104

[RitaS]

11:28 PM on 08/02/2010

Since there doesn't seem to be a consensus as to what that toxic dispersant, all depending on who you believe, I highly doubt this is the TRUE size of the dead zone.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's double this report, given BP's & the Govt's love of lies....

[mjt218]

04:55 AM on 08/03/2010

I think this report is clearly talking about the dead zone that exists specifically due to bacterial blooms taking oxygen out of the water. Anything that may be occuring due to Corexit, would be different.

[madisonhack]

07:18 AM on 08/03/2010

The article said nearly what you claim, but the scientists wouldn't rule out the spill as a factor in an increased size to the "zone".

[Carol Green]

11:28 PM on 08/02/2010

there are posts here suggesting the dead zone is a "Naturally Occurring" event. Newsflash: dead zones are not "Naturally Occurring".

they occur from human overuse of chemical fertilizers on their lawns and farms, in addition to other chemicals used by humans which run off during rain into storm drains then out into the river and eventually out into the Gulf. Algae blooms unnaturally occur which depletes the oxygen in the water killing all marine life and also affecting seabirds like ducks and gulls who actually get chemical abrasions from the pollutants if it doesn't kill them.

The article suggests oil-eating bacteria depletes the water of oxygen. That would mean the water will now have its oxygen depleted by TWO sources: oil-eating bacteria and human runoff. None of this is "Natural".

[The last sane American]

06:46 AM on 08/03/2010

ONE source. The bacteria are anoxic - that is why they like and thrive by getting their carbon from hydrocarbons.

The spill is a disaster. The release of miss-information to the public goes on unabated.

[Moti]

10:52 PM on 08/02/2010

The posts here are absolutely incredible in that they so clearly indicate that so few HP posters have a clue about what is really going on!!! HP is complicit in the confused state of minds by posting headlines like this one BUT COME ON PEOPLE read the words below the headline!!! This is dead zone is a NATURALLY OCCURRING event EVERY YEAR!!! So many comments about corporate weasels, people crying because it's probably bigger than MA, etc, etc. What nudniks.

[Carol Green]

11:17 PM on 08/02/2010

this is NOT a naturally occurring event. The dead zone is caused by "farm and urban runoff into the Gulf". In many cases this is caused by chemical fertilizers people put on their lawns (when it rains these fertilizers run into the storm drains then out into the rivers and eventually get to the Gulf). The fertilizers cause "unnatural" algae to grow: the algae take all the oxygen out of the water: everything alive in the river-- all the fish and even other marine life die from no oxygen.

If you've ever been around a dead zone you would know it: the stench of dead fish and sealife makes you gag. As for the oil leak: the article states the oil-eating bacteria depletes the oxygen in the water: that means that the oxygen is being destroyed by TWO things now: oil-eating bacteria and fertilizers from human runoff. I feel so sorry for the people down there and especially for the marine life that are suffering cruel and needless death.

[EthnicHeart]

11:44 PM on 08/02/2010

Fan #16

[Moti]

12:18 AM on 08/03/2010

I stand corrected, not naturally occurring.

[JDShipley]

11:22 PM on 08/02/2010

Nothing about "naturally occurring" is stated in the article Moti. The fact is that chemical fertilizer runoff from the Mississippi basin feeds the algae that consumer the oxygen, the lack of which accounts for these waters being a dead zone. That is not a natural event in any environment. Also the article states clearly that no connection is made (yet) between the BP spill and the current size of the unnaturally occurring dead zone. Reading comprehension seems to be an issue.

[EthnicHeart]

11:44 PM on 08/02/2010

Fan #80

[Moti]

12:17 AM on 08/03/2010

I stand corrected, not naturally occurring.

[gino618]

10:43 PM on 08/02/2010

According to the article - the largest dead zone to date was in 2001....

Soooooooooooo.... without any statements directing otherwise, it isn't oil-spill related and has been larger than it currently is in a year when there WASN'T a massive spill in the gulf.

More HP red-meat tossing to bolster their views on big oil.

[madisonhack]

07:21 AM on 08/03/2010

You are certainly no rocket scientist - or a marine biologist, either.