7 days ago
Federal cuts may hurt Maine's ability to meet climate goals, scientists say
Jun. 9—Scientists and fishermen are eager to learn more about a sudden cooling in the deep waters of the Gulf of Maine, a new mystery in a body of water as well known in global science circles for its rapid warming as it is among foodies for its lobsters, oysters and scallops.
That will be hard to do under a proposed federal budget that cuts funds for a national ocean monitoring system.
"People are talking (about the cooling). Is this a reset?" asked Susie Arnold, a marine scientist with the Island Institute in Rockland. "Well, what do you use to find that out? You look at the buoys. Those are one of the primary tools that we use to understand oceanography in the Gulf of Maine."
Arnold was referring to a network of floating research stations that monitor currents, temperature and other data points used by scientists to track changes in the gulf.
She is one of about 40 scientists who advise the Maine Climate Council, the state-appointed commission that develops the state climate action plan, Maine Won't Wait. The scientists provide the raw science behind the plan, documenting the effects of climate change and projecting future sea level rise and warming.
And these scientists are worried, both about the coming changes in climate and their ability to study them. And they believe recent federal budget and staffing cuts may prevent Maine from achieving its climate goals, including those set in the November update to Maine Won't Wait but also those already codified in state law.
Federal grant cuts might mean they won't even have the tools to know if Maine is meeting its goals.
Maine has written four greenhouse gas goals into state law to compel the government to do its part to curb climate change and prevent the earth from overheating: cut emissions 10% from 1990 levels by 2020, 45% by 2030, 80% by 2050, and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.
Last year, the Department of Environmental Protection announced Maine had met its easiest emissions goal — a 10% reduction by 2020 — and was 91% of the way toward meeting its carbon neutrality goal by 2045. It has a long way to go for its next goal — 17.3 million tons, or a 45% cut — and only six years to do it.
Maine relies on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's state inventory and projection tool as a starting point to estimate its gross greenhouse gas inventory. DEP is "cautiously optimistic" that annual updates to this tool will continue, but it won't know for sure until November, when the EPA's next data release is scheduled.
Members of the council's scientific and technical subcommittee, which Arnold co-chairs, met Thursday to talk about writing a new report on both the evolving science, including the Gulf of Maine's new deep water cooling trend, and the changed political landscape. They decided to write an update to last year's plan by April.
They cited more than a dozen at-risk or eliminated federally run or funded scientific programs, ranging from an environmental justice screening tool that Maine uses to help identify socially vulnerable communities to coastal zone management grants that help communities prepare and bounce back from climate challenges like flooding.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control climate and health program is targeted for elimination in Trump's proposed budget, and most of its staff has been fired. Without this funding, Maine will probably have to scrap its statewide pollen monitoring network before it fully starts and suspend plans to help counties develop extreme heat plans.
The scientists tried to maintain political neutrality while ticking off the disappearing federal climate data sources.
"We're not the Union of Concerned Scientists," said co-chair Ivan Fernandez of the University of Maine's Climate Change Institute, referring to a group of scientists who advocate for aggressive action against climate change. "That said, the kind of information that we've seen in the inventory clearly impacts how we think about the research that's being done in critical questions, monitoring, and data sets."
That clearly hinders the work of scientists, the subcommittee and the Maine Climate Council as a whole, he said.
In some cases, the state could turn to private climate data sources, but that could raise concerns over objectivity, such as who is funding that data collection. Scientists noted it could also drive up the costs of accessing that data after the private companies have the market to themselves.
Copy the Story Link
