The Everglades Foundation is turning Florida's algae crisis into a carnival sideshow.
Eric Eikenberg, CEO of the 501(c)(3) non-profit, announced Tuesday the Foundation is a week and a half away from offering a $10 million reward to anyone who can rid fresh water of phosphorus and "help us get rid of the toxic algae."
Why does this smack of a P.T. Barnum fool-all-of-the-people trick?
"The Foundation is calling on scientists, engineers and anyone who is interested to come up with breakthrough technology," says South Florida's WPTV.
"If the technique can be done in a cost-effective way, both in Florida and in Canada, $10 million is going to be awarded to the winner," the story reads. The Foundation will launch the worldwide contest July 21.
But, wait. Tiny little problem, as I see it.
Eikenberg, says the technology "must remove phosphorus from fresh water," but neither he nor WPTV mentions a word about nitrogen. Not one.
I'm going to take this so-called contest as a flashy show of the Foundation's muscle and a clever way to keep their faithful worshipping bad science and staging those lucrative fundraisers.
Eikenberg -- the same Eikenberg who was chief of staff for Gov. Charlie Crist, then Crist's Senate campaign manager -- will never have to pay out a dime. The Foundation's money is safe.
A $10 million reward for making toxic algae disappear by removing only phosphorus from fresh water? It's like the line from Macbeth -- "... a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
I know you've heard me say this before, but here I am again, chanting the same refrain -- particularly now with the "contest" on the horizon:
The days of limiting pollution to a single source are over.
True, I'm no scientist, but I can read. And increasingly, I'm finding evidence in science journals that toxic algae grows and prospers because of phosphorus and nitrogen in combination -- exactly as Harbor Branch Oceanographic's Brian Lapointe has said for decades, and as I've quoted during the past few years from a variety of sources. The need to control BOTH phosphorus and nitrogen is widely recognized in the 21st century.
Have a look at the 2009 article on phosphorus and nitrogen by Conley et al. -- "Controlling Eutrophication: Nitrogen and Phosphorus." The bottom line: "Alleviation of eutrophication in aquatic ecosystems along the land-ocean continuum requires a balanced and strategic approach to control both nutrients appropriately."
Better yet, read the June 30 article, "How Nitrogen Triggers Algal Blooms in Lakes." In 2013, the seasonal harmful algal blooms in Lake Erie grew so extreme they poisoned the water system in Toledo, Ohio, leaving nearly half a million residents without drinking water. The blue-green bloom (same organism currently blooming in Lake Okeechobee, Microcystis), which was originally thought to be controlled by phosphorus, was shown to be caused mostly by nitrogen loading from the Maumee River. “This study shows that Microcystis can thrive even when phosphorus is low, and that when it is saturated with nitrogen, it makes more toxins,” writes scientist and author C.J. Gobler.
At the University of Florida, IFAS Extension, Karl Havens and Thomas Frazer wrote a paper, "Rethinking the Role of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in the Eutrophication of Aquatic Ecosystems." They write, "For many years, environmental agencies have sought to improve the water quality of lakes and estuaries by reducing inputs of phosphorus. New research indicates that we must reduce both phosphorus and nitrogen to reverse eutrophication symptoms."
I would like to take the Foundation's contest seriously.
It seems to me much of the world -- not just South Florida -- could benefit from an honest campaign to develop technology that might rid all lakes and rivers of toxic algae.
But I have no faith in the Everglades Foundation's good faith. And I will be happy to tell you why.
-- The fact that the Foundation employs "scientists" who discredit nitrogen because much of it comes from urban runoff and fecal coliform rather than fertilizer from some sugar farm makes me distrust their objectivity.
-- The fact that these scientists STILL want to run "fresh" water instead of clean water -- water cleaned of nitrogen -- into Florida Bay makes me distrust them. Scientists have shown over and over again that increased freshwater flows and nitrogen loading to central and western Florida Bay are what caused the massive blue-green algae blooms that developed in the Bay during the 1990s and polished off 40 percent of the coral reef.
-- The fact that the Foundation misled hundreds of thousands of people on either side of Lake Okeechobee makes me distrust them. They conveniently failed to point out how much dirty water makes its way into the lake from the North, and that even though algae is blooming in Lake O, the sources of the nutrients aren't all from the lake.
-- Because of their bad science, I don't even trust the educational materials they put into the school systems in South Florida. Frankly, I wouldn't be able to look at them and keep a straight face.
-- I don't believe the Everglades Foundation is honest. I think theirs is a darker agenda than the mission they describe on their web page.
-- They make me fear for completion of the Central Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), particularly if they get their way. I believe the reservoir(s) they want to build south of the lake amount to a pointless land grab that will require massive replumbing and further delay to the CERP timetable.
I'm sorry. I hold out absolutely no hope any good will come from their kill-the-phosphorus contest. But the Foundation has a lot of money. And in the end, I expect they will do what they want.
Reach Nancy Smith at nsmith@sunshinestatenews.com or at 228-282-2423. Twitter: @NancyLBSmith
Download (318.21 KB)