Scientific American Review -- The Dead Zones

Image by Scientific American

"Scientific American: Reviving Dead Zones written by Laurence Mee;"  has me of two minds in regards to his article. The science and nature bare the fruit of discovery and truth. However, the author of this article has dog in his presentation, and apparently he wants everybody to know it. His last name serves him well as he pontificates what should be done with world’s coastal areas and estuaries.

The tone of the article was one of not only informing but of one that seem to state that I told you so. Mee bias appears to come from the certainty that his research, along with others, as he graciously included them has borne fruit. He imparts that the intensive agriculture and by products thereof have an immense impact on the environment by creating dead zones among the coastal shores and bounded coastal areas.

Mee first defines what the dead zones are by giving it name called eutrophication and lays out quite expertly what this process does to coastal shore. He specifically uses the Black Sea as the prime example of his case study and throughout the article. Mee explains how the human element massively contributes to the contamination of the environment.

In many ways, the article condescends to the reader. Mee overly explains what the issues are, and how the effect of eutrophication has hurt the ecosystem. Simply, it is the reduction of accessible oxygen for the environment or sea to be viablely used by the inhabitants (sea life). Mee proffers once the oversaturated nutrients of nitrogen, from fertilizers and other byproducts are reduced by the elimination of central planning by communist states, and the break up of them, along European environmental consciousness that reviving of the dead zone Black Sea has started to comeback.

There other elements as well that has played a factor, such nature’s resiliency, and ability to adapt. His scientific method seems sound, the explanation more than plausible; it is the tonal quality to which his last two pages embark—the tone of lecturing-that was annoying. His evidence was compelling—I just felt that last bit of hawkish behavior was not needed.