Disasters & Extreme Weather

Published on June 19th, 2013 | by James Ayre

8

Gulf Of Mexico Dead Zone 2013 — Record-Setting Deadzone Is Likely This Year

Buffer this pageShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInDigg thisEmail this to someone

June 19th, 2013 by

The 2013 Gulf of Mexico dead zone may very likely be the largest one ever, according to new predictions based on several different NOAA-supported forecast models. The hypoxic dead zone is forecast to cover somewhere between 7,286 and 8,561 square miles of the Gulf of Mexico. The largest dead zone on record was the 2002 one, which covered 8,481 square miles.

"Less oxygen dissolved in the water is often referred to as a 'dead zone' (in red above) because most marine life either dies, or, if they are mobile such as fish, leave the area. Habitats that would normally be teeming with life become, essentially, biological deserts." Image Credit: NOAA

“Less oxygen dissolved in the water is often referred to as a ‘dead zone’ (in red above) because most marine life either dies, or, if they are mobile such as fish, leave the area. Habitats that would normally be teeming with life become, essentially, biological deserts.”
Image Credit: NOAA

Dead zones — whether hypoxic (very low oxygen) or anoxic (no oxygen) — are caused primarily by high-levels of nutrient pollution. This nutrient pollution — mostly the fertilizers used in industrial agriculture — causes large algal blooms which use up all of the oxygen in a given environment. As a result, the environment becomes devoid of life — a “dead zone”. These deadzones have been increasing in frequency and scale since at least the 1970s. More than 1.7 million tons of potassium and nitrogen make their way into the Gulf of Mexico every year as a result of agricultural runoff — via the Mississippi river.

If the 2013 Gulf of Mexico dead zone becomes as large as is being predicted it will cover an area the size of New Jersey. The 2013 predictions were made by modelers at the University of Michigan, Louisiana State University, and the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium.


Something to note — “the Gulf estimate is based on the assumption of no significant tropical storms in the two weeks preceding or during the official measurement survey cruise scheduled from July 25-August 3 2013. If a storm does occur the size estimate could drop to a low of 5344 square miles, slightly smaller than the size of Connecticut.”

“This year’s prediction for the Gulf reflect flood conditions in the Midwest that caused large amounts of nutrients to be transported from the Mississippi watershed to the Gulf. Last year’s dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico was the fourth smallest on record due to drought conditions, covering an area of approximately 2,889 square miles, an area slightly larger than the state of Delaware. The overall average between 1995-2012 is 5,960 square miles, an area about the size of Connecticut,” as NOAA reports.

“During May 2013, stream flows in the Mississippi and Atchafalaya rivers were above normal resulting in more nutrients flowing into the Gulf. According to USGS estimates, 153,000 metric tons of nutrients flowed down the rivers to the northern Gulf of Mexico in May, an increase of 94,900 metric tons over last year’s 58,100 metric tons, when the region was suffering through drought. The 2013 input is an increase of 16% above the average nutrient load estimated over the past 34 years.”

“Coastal hypoxia is proliferating around the world,” said Donald Boesch, Ph.D., president of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. “It is important that we have excellent abilities to predict and control the largest dead zones in the United States. The whole world is watching.”

Keep up to date with all the most interesting green news on the planet by subscribing to our (free) Planetsave newsletter.




Buffer this pageShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInDigg thisEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


About the Author

's background is predominantly in geopolitics and history, but he has an obsessive interest in pretty much everything. After an early life spent in the Imperial Free City of Dortmund, James followed the river Ruhr to Cofbuokheim, where he attended the University of Astnide. And where he also briefly considered entering the coal mining business. He currently writes for a living, on a broad variety of subjects, ranging from science, to politics, to military history, to renewable energy. You can follow his work on Google+.



  • Susan Teixeira

    Me, I’m watching “New Madrid”!

  • Susan Teixeira

    Me, I’m watching “New Madrid”!

  • Susan Teixeira

    I’m curious… Has anybody done the correlation between the sink holes, unusual sound reports, various smells including sulfur, birds dropping from the sky, oily sheen on water in the gulf, and recent earthquake activity (May+ July 2013) in the gulf as well? Also, what is going on with FEMA and zone 3?

  • Susan Teixeira

    I’m curious… Has anybody done the correlation between the sink holes, unusual sound reports, various smells including sulfur, birds dropping from the sky, oily sheen on water in the gulf, and recent earthquake activity (May+ July 2013) in the gulf as well? Also, what is going on with FEMA and zone 3?

  • FishGeek

    First of al, the picture at the top of the article is fraudulent. It is a 2004 NASA map showing turbidity, not a 2013 dead zone prediction. See:http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.5366.p

    Second, NOAA’s actual 2013 measurements now show that the prediction of a record dead zone was wrong. The size of the measured hypoxic zone is smaller than it was in 2011 and 2008, nowhere near the previous record zone of 2002. See:http://service.ncddc.noaa.gov/rdn/www/media/hypoxi

    Third, nutrient loading from the Mississippi River actually greatly increases the biomass of fauna in the Gulf of Mexico, and increases the quantity of fish available for harvest. See:

    Courtney, J., Courtney, A., and Courtney, M. Nutrient Loading Increases Red Snapper Production in the Gulf of Mexico. Hypotheses in the Life Sciences (2013) 3(1):7-14.

    Grimes, C. B. Fishery production and the Mississippi River discharge. Fisheries (2001) 26(8), 17-26.

    If you dig a bit into the actual facts and background, you might not be fooled so easily.

  • FishGeek

    First of al, the picture at the top of the article is fraudulent. It is a 2004 NASA map showing turbidity, not a 2013 dead zone prediction. See:http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.5366.p

    Second, NOAA’s actual 2013 measurements now show that the prediction of a record dead zone was wrong. The size of the measured hypoxic zone is smaller than it was in 2011 and 2008, nowhere near the previous record zone of 2002. See:http://service.ncddc.noaa.gov/rdn/www/media/hypoxi

    Third, nutrient loading from the Mississippi River actually greatly increases the biomass of fauna in the Gulf of Mexico, and increases the quantity of fish available for harvest. See:

    Courtney, J., Courtney, A., and Courtney, M. Nutrient Loading Increases Red Snapper Production in the Gulf of Mexico. Hypotheses in the Life Sciences (2013) 3(1):7-14.

    Grimes, C. B. Fishery production and the Mississippi River discharge. Fisheries (2001) 26(8), 17-26.

    If you dig a bit into the actual facts and background, you might not be fooled so easily.

  • jooberdoober

    Gee it had nothing to do with all of that oil spilling in it though, sheesh!

  • jooberdoober

    Gee it had nothing to do with all of that oil spilling in it though, sheesh!

Back to Top ↑