MEXICAN STANDOFF: Mexico is both a victim of higher temperatures, increased flooding and other impacts of climate change as well as a major emitter of the greenhouse gases causing it via runaway development in places like Cancun.
Image: Photo by Mike_fleming, courtesy Flickr
CANCUN, Mexico -- Clumps of black, straw-like seaweed dot the beach at Boca Paila on the Yucatan Peninsula. Gnats swarm the deposits. Clumps of grass add to the difficulty of sunbathing in comfort.
Marie Claire Paiz loves it.
"At one point, Cancun was like this," Paiz, a Guatemalan biologist who directs the Nature Conservancy's Southern Mexico program said, her arms spread wide.
Where tourists see nuisance, Paiz and local scientists see unspoiled nature doing its job. The seaweed and grass -- and absence of mega-resorts built atop the dunes -- allow sand to accumulate naturally. That, in turn, helps protect the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef, which stretches past four countries from the northern tip of Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula to the Bay Islands of Honduras.
But Boca Paila, part of the Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve about three hours south of Cancun that the Nature Conservancy helps manage, is an exception. Far more common, scientists here say, is the runaway development of the corridor between Cancun and Tulum, where in little over a decade, fishing villages have been transformed into traffic-clogged resorts, 18-hole golf courses and new housing developments.
The result already has been devastating to the coral reefs, scientists say. What they don't know is precisely what impact climate change will have on top of rampant development. But they have a pretty good guess: the utter destruction of the Mesoamerican fishing supply, and the eventual loss of Mexico's greatest tourist draw as sea levels rise.
"If we reach an agreement similar to the one that was proposed for Copenhagen, two degrees, that would be the end of the coral reef," said Roberto Iglesias Prieto, head of the Unidad Academia de Sistemas Arreficiales in Puerto Morelo, where the main work these days is studying the impact of climate change on coral reefs.
Cancun's goal may not be enough
The goal that world leaders came to at last year's climate summit in Copenhagen, Denmark -- not to let the world exceed a global average temperature rise of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels -- doesn't go far enough, Prieto said. A world in which atmospheric CO2 rises to 450 parts per million will look "very bad" for the corals and those who depend upon them, Prieto said.
"It's the basis for the tourist industry. It's the basis for food security, not only for people in Mesoamerica but also for 200 million people for whom the reef represents a major source of protein and sustenance. And on top of that, this is one of the most beautiful ecosystems on the planet. It's spectacular," he said. "If we lose corals, we lose services."
Paul Sanchez-Navarro, director of the nearby Akumal Ecological Center, put it in market terms.
"What's for sale here is nature," he said. "Nature is the product, and very little is being done to protect that product. If we were dairy farmers, we'd be the worst dairy farmers in the world."
As United Nations climate change treaty talks in Cancun enter their second week, Mexico is playing a unique roll. Both a victim of greenhouse gas emissions and a major producer of them, Mexico has done more than almost any country to throw off the label of "developed" and "developing" countries that have for years pigeon-holed nations.
The second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Latin America, Mexico accounts for about 1.5 percent of the world's emissions of greenhouse gases, according to the United Nations.
And while under the current 1997 Kyoto Protocol climate treaty, Mexico is not bound to make any move to reduce emissions without assistance from more industrialized nations, it made a splash two years ago as the first country to set itself unilateral emission targets.
"They were one of the first countries to explicitly recognize a framework, which is that they will take action while at the same time developed countries will take action. They were the first ones to articulate that vision," said Jake Schmidt, international policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Taking an 'aggressive' stand
"They're probably one of the most aggressive countries in terms of climate change," agreed Ned Helme, director of the Center for Clean Air Policy in Washington, D.C.
He described Mexico as a "unique developing country" that is not part of the Group of 77 negotiating block. But despite its membership in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, which covers 33 countries that are all committed to democracy and a market economy, it also is not quite considered a developed country either.
Mexico has pledged to reduce its emissions 30 percent below its business-as-usual rates in the next decade. Helme said achieving that would be the equivalent of almost as much reduction as the U.S. target, in terms of relative percentage reductions. Meanwhile, Mexico's mid-century goal of reducing greenhouse gases 50 percent below business as usual is "as big as any annex one country," Helme said.
"They're very aggressive in terms of their aspirational goals, and they've coupled it with a real effort to identify opportunities on the ground," he said. "They're really doing the work."
It's not without major challenges. Chief among them: Mexico's two major state-owned enterprises -- its Comision Federal de Electricidad (CFE) electricity sector and Pemex, the state oil monopoly -- are also the country's largest source of emissions.
"The dynamics of each of those is a big barrier for moving forward on policy," Schmidt said, noting that Pemex is a large source of the government's revenue, so any investments the company makes to upgrade its refineries compete against social needs.
A drive to use waste heat from refining as electricity generation, for example, has been stalled by the need for major early investments for which Pemex has been unable to get budget support, he said.
Developing wind, solar, geothermal ... and tourism
Meanwhile, a constitutional requirement restricting independent power producers from selling energy to the grid has caused some hiccups for the country's renewable energy potential -- but experts in the United States and Mexico said the country is starting to find solutions to the policy barriers and has made major investments in wind, solar, geothermal and other renewable energy projects. On transportation, Mexico also is close to passing a vehicle efficiency standard which Schmidt said is expected to include key controls for local air pollution.
Closer to Cancun much of the work being done is on deforestation, which Paiz said has decreased over the past eight years. But with 30 percent of the country's forest loss taking place in the Yucatan region, she said the country still needs better controls.
This week Mexican President Felipe Calderon will announce Mexico's vision for avoiding deforestation, and today three governors will make a joint declaration on climate change.
But local scientists who work close to the sprawling resorts of Cancun say there needs to be more education at a local level.
Development is only expected to increase. Sanchez-Navarro -- who works with local hotels to encourage them to improve wastewater treatment plants and other measures -- said it's still a struggle to convince local authorities that rising sea levels and deforestation pose a threat to the local economy. He noted that between Akumal and Tulum about 8,000 hectares of deforestation is planned, carrying an impact that has not even been calculated.
Meanwhile, the more development that occurs means the more waste that will go into the groundwater, making it difficult for corals to calcify and slowly killing off the coral reefs so many come here to see.
Many are concentrating on what they can control -- local watershed management that, he said, might be able to protect the reefs until nations take global action on climate change.
"The question is, can corals adapt as fast as climate change?" Sanchez-Navarro said. Scientists don't know the answer yet. They say they are working against the clock.
"Even if today we have an agreement and stop producing CO2, we are already committed to a 1.5 degree rise [over pre-industrial temperatures]. That is bad for the reefs, but they will rebuild," Prieto said.
Cleaning the local waters could give the reefs another 70 healthy years, Prieto said, adding, "You can buy time, and if you buy enough time we will probably reach an agreement."
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. www.eenews.net, 202-628-6500
See what we're tweeting about
9 Comments
Add CommentAre there any corar reefs anywhere that are dying from warming for certain? Everytime I hear about a coral reef dying it seems that they are located within' relatively close proximity to some kind of human activity such as eco-resorts, or over-fishing, or the beaches adjacent to fields or lawns where humans have been blythely behaving as if what happens on land stays on land. And then, there will be reefs dying and yet other pristine reefs that arent. Why arent the reefs at the Palmyra Islands of the central tropical Pacific dying...you'd figure those would be subjected to some warmth and yet I am seeing that researchers are studying them and presenting them as the way an undegraded reef should be like...really, the middle of the tropical Pacific and yet they arent dying of warmth? Something is fishy, and I suspect it's not due to CO2.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKeep grasping at straws. Of course it can't be the trillion tons of human-created CO2 that's causing the problem...right? Must be sunspots...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@Doug,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Are there any corar reefs anywhere that are dying from warming for certain?"
This issue has been studied in the peer reviewed literature and a definite link exists between warming and coral mortality.
Here see what Google Scholar has to say:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22coral%2Bthermal+stress&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2001
You may also be interest in this peer reviewed survey of 704 different coral species. It found that 33% were at risk of extinction.
One-Third of Reef-Building Corals Face Elevated Extinction Risk from Climate Change and Local Impacts
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/321/5888/560.abstract?sid=51a6a25c-590a-471e-819e-23d760759db6
Abstract:
" Declines in abundance are associated with bleaching and diseases driven by elevated sea surface temperatures, with extinction risk further exacerbated by local-scale anthropogenic disturbances. The proportion of corals threatened with extinction has increased dramatically in recent decades and exceeds that of most terrestrial groups. The Caribbean has the largest proportion of corals in high extinction risk categories, whereas the Coral Triangle (western Pacific) has the highest proportion of species in all categories of elevated extinction risk."
Note that the survey was world wide and found coral in the western Pacific had the highest proportional risk of extinction.
Thank you, Trent1492.Very informative on first perusal and worth looking into at greater depth, I'm sure.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@Doug,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI do not want to overwhelm you with links but I thought you might be interest in the following three:
1. NOAA: Current Operational Coral Bleaching HotSpots for the year 2010
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/ml/ocean/cb/hotspots.html
2. Is general interests article on the health of the world's corals by a leading coral biologist.
Is the End in Sight for
The World’s Coral Reefs?
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/is_the_end_in_sight_for_the_worlds_coral_reefs_/2347/
3. The next one is a video by another coral biologist who gives a description of the state of the world's oceans:
Jeremy Jackson: How we wrecked the Ocean
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0VHC1-DO_8
Thanks Trent1492. I'm not overwhelmed, though I must say I'm not reading these as thoroughly as a scientist might, nor am I convinced by what I've read so far that they support the degree of concerns nor the degree of certainty that some espouse. That doesn't mean that I'm not concerned about the condition of the environment. I am very concerned which is why I read as broadly as I can and attempt to extend my understanding to the biggest picture possible. I also am an ardent supporter and advocate of continued research and discussion. Cheers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPS, Trent, I'd watched Jeremy Jackson's presentation on a TEDtalk a while back. Very interesting and as do the majority of these reports, they point to the multiplicity of impacts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistimjwilson @#2. Well, it could be but it hasn't been shown conclusively, but what has been shown conclusively to bleach and kill coral reefs are such activities as building golf courses and eco-resorts and other human activities adjacent to shorelines that support habitat for coral colonies as the silt and nitrate rich run-off enter the local waters and have serious impacts, as do unsustainable and unwise fishing practices, local mining practices (sometimes actually mining old coral reefs for building materials), and even careless or excessive behaviors by those diving on these reefs. I've yet to hear of isolated coral reefs that are remote from the impacts of human activities, such as the reefs around the tropical Pacific's Palmyra Island. Let's hope they keep it remote from the kinds of human impacts we know unequivocably cause harm to these truly pristine and utterly remarkable coral communities.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCheers.
just a pet pev(sp)...a hector is 100 meters by 100 meters or 1/100 of a square km...so the 8000 hectors mention is 80 square km....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this