Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumQuestions about Ocean Sensors destruction:
According to 'Occupy Democrats'
(Who some say has a sketchy reputation, I don't know.)
Congress funded it. Scientists built it. Trump is tearing it up anyway.
The Trump administration is sending ships out in June to physically remove more than 900 deep-sea instruments from the Atlantic and Pacific oceans that monitor things like ocean acidity and temperature dismantling a $368 million monitoring network that took a decade to build and was designed to operate for 25 years.
It will be gone in 15 months.
The Ocean Observatories Initiative is not redundant government bloat. It is the world's most advanced continuously operating ocean observation system monitoring greenhouse gas absorption, marine heat waves, commercial fisheries, coastal flooding along the East Coast, and most critically, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current, the massive global conveyor belt of water that some scientists fear is weakening due to climate change. A collapse of that current would trigger severe weather catastrophes across multiple continents.
The instruments measuring that current are anchored 9,200 feet below the surface of the Irminger Sea, between Greenland and Iceland, as part of an international scientific collaboration. They are now being pulled out of the water.
The Trump administration tried to cut the network's funding by 80 percent twice. Congress restored the money both times. So, the administration is simply dismantling it anyway.
The annual operating cost was $48 million. That's less than four days of the Iran war. It's a rounding error on the $1.776 billion slush fund Trump created for his January 6th allies. It's less than half what Trump is spending to gold-plate four horse statues near the Lincoln Memorial.
"By dismantling such a system, we push the United States back yet again into a rear seat in global scientific leadership," said Craig McLean, former acting chief scientist at NOAA.
Scientists warn that decades of institutional knowledge and engineering expertise will be lost the kind that can't be reconstructed from notes. Commercial fishing industries along the Pacific Northwest and East Coast will lose critical data. Coastal communities will lose flood prediction tools. The entire planet will lose visibility into one of the most consequential ocean systems on Earth.
The National Science Foundation called this decision "nimbler prioritization."
Scientists call it what it is: willful blindness to climate catastrophe, funded by your tax dollars and executed against the explicit wishes of Congress.
Please write your senators and representatives to urge them to stop the Trump administrations foolish and ignorant attacks on climate science, and please like and share this post everywhere to spread the news of this catastrophic assault on environmental information.
Can't there be an emergency injunction filed on this? Does anyone have any updates on it?
It's ridiculously horrible and stupid. But what else isn't, right? I just don't want us to get numb to the horror.
❤️pants
eppur_se_muova
(42,911 posts)Kind of a Potemkin in reverse. How's he going to know ?
LT Barclay
(3,230 posts)military. I know many of them climb the ranks by bootlicking, but so many have crossed the line and Trump won't last long enough to protect them.
The only thing that frightens me about that conclusion is that a lot of them must be extremely confident that the Republicans aren't going to lose the next (or hold?) the next election.
Zackzzzz
(421 posts)cynical_idealist
(563 posts)along with all the other life.
LT Barclay
(3,230 posts)including global warming, habitat destruction, population growth, etc. are real. AND they could be fixed. But that would require sharing, so they've decided that most of us need to go. It also explains the stoking of racial hatred, and trying to run up inflation high enough that people start starving and/or revolting.
eppur_se_muova
(42,911 posts)These sensors provide info that can be used for a variety of purposes, but especially for monitoring weather and currents around the oceans so that ships sailing into any given area can know what conditions -- and dangers -- they are likely to encounter. They're not just dual-use technology, but multiple-use. And you can bet that the full range of sensors carried by these devices is not discussed publicly. Before the US gov't would spend million$$$$ on this technology, it would have canvassed every Dept. and Office in the gov't to ask "is there anything you would like to add to these abilities, and how much would it cost ?". Intel services and the Pentagon would have come up with a long list -- hydrophones, seismometers, magnetometers, mass detectors (the latter two items as specifically directional and sensitive as practical), wireless network monitors, etc. Any passing ship, even if observing strict radio silence, could be detected with the right equipment, and results from a network of detectors could effectively follow the ship's progress, to within a certain degree of accuracy depending on the type of detector. You have to wonder -- how many Russian ships pass close enough to this region to be detected ? Did Daddy Vlady tell Trmp he doesn't like the US peeking at his ships ?
As long as it's described as a tool for studying climate change, Trmp will hate it. Let him know the Navy wants it and he'll TACO again. Of course, the inebriated white supremacist and overgrown frat boy currently running our military won't question anything Trmp says or does, so he needs to be court-martialed or just thrown out ASAP.
The currently *acting* SECNAV was appointed by the former SECNAV to oversee unclassified IT systems, among other things, so maybe he has a little better understanding of the need for this technology than his predecessor. And it has to be better than Trmp's.
littlemissmartypants
(35,500 posts)But is anyone outside our fucked up government doing anything? That's my question.
The implications of the removal are definitely expansive, and replacement would be not just financially detrimental but time intensive.
Who ordered this nonsense? Do we actually have a king now? It sure seems like it!
NNadir
(38,878 posts)...but I suspect this is the case. Even if they are "removed" I doubt there will be people smashing them to pieces with hammers.
It will cost money to "destroy" the system and will require the participation of people who know where the system is installed, presumably well trained engineers.
I've been involved with the movement of advanced scientific instruments in my career from lab to lab. They require calibration and maintenance to be restored to their place, but the are generally serviceable.
I may be overoptimistic, since this moron is taking a chainsaw to science, but I don't think the damage will be irreversible. We'll lose data points to be sure, just as we did at the Mauna Loa CO2 Observatory, this winter and spring, losing two weekly data points for the first time since 1975, but again, we can recover some of the information, if nothing else, by interpolation.
littlemissmartypants
(35,500 posts)Don't ask me where I read it. But I did. I read So much. Voracious is the word. It flies through my mind.
NNadir
(38,878 posts)We are going certainly lose data points to be sure. It may howver be possible to reconstruct some of it. The ocean behaves as it does with or without measurement.
It seems we lost this year's maximum at the Mauna Loa CO2 Observatory. This was probably from poor instrument maintenance. It looks like the analysis was failing on precision from the graphic on the hourly readings. This never happened before the orange pedophile was installed.
That is of course irretrievable at this laboratory, but not fatal. I would imagine that other nations or academic labs are collecting data of these types. I don't know that but I'm guessing.
The guy is antiscience buffoon of and damage to science is increasingly outrageous. If he dies soon enough and if the elections go well, overall it will be a blip one hopes.
This will probably not be like the case observed in nuclear engineering in the United States where the knowledge base contracted over some decades because of the malign efforts of ignoramuses.
Science is now far more international, and the collapse of the United States, while regrettable, will not be the collapse of science itself I think.
littlemissmartypants
(35,500 posts)And I don't know if I care if I don't live to see it.
OKIsItJustMe
(22,418 posts)Maya Yang
Wed 3 Jun 2026 12.36 EDT
Hilary Palevsky, a professor focusing on marine biogeochemistry and oceanography at Boston College, pointed to the significance of the data that will be lost, particularly given the sophisticated engineering required to deploy and maintain the instruments.
She said: Over the more than 10 years that these things have been deployed, theyve just gotten better and better at it. And so the data return has also gotten better and better over time the scientific community was really just getting to the point of being able to capitalize on the data that had been collected so far Im really disappointed for the continuation of this important data set.
Palevsky also warned that rebuilding such a network in the future would be difficult, saying: If we want to put [the instruments] back out again, we need people who know how to do it and the team that knows how to do it is being dismantled along with the infrastructure program itself.
Were potentially at risk of having a gap in our ability to regain the expertise to do things that we had sort of just figured out how to pull off.
littlemissmartypants
(35,500 posts)OKIsItJustMe
(22,418 posts)In line with Project 2025s recommendations, over 900 advanced deep-sea sensors are being removed from the ocean floor, cutting off critical real-time data used by global researchers to track climate change.
The Trump administration is dismantling a $370 million ocean-floor observatory network installed a decade ago to collect critical climate data on coastal environments, marine ecosystems, and powerful global ocean currents.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) announced it will begin removing more than 900 deep-sea instruments this June. The decommissioning will pull monitoring hardware from the waters of Oregon, Washington State, Alaska, North Carolina, and a critical region between Greenland and Iceland known as the Irminger Sea.
The closure of this climate data network follows policy laid out by conservative strategist the Heritage Foundation. The shutdown was recommended in their Project 2025 Mandate for Leadership document a 900-page document designed specifically to act as a blueprint for the Trump presidency.
In 2024, Project 2025s authors explicitly targeted the network, claiming the OOI was the source of much of NOAAs climate alarmism and advising that the preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded.
(30 seconds effort gave the answer.)
littlemissmartypants
(35,500 posts)I appreciate your additions to this discussion.
OKIsItJustMe
(22,418 posts)JUNE 3, 2026
U.S. to Dismantle System Tracking Atlantic Currents That Are at Risk of Collapse
The Trump administration is moving to dismantle an ocean observation system consisting of more than 900 instruments in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Data supplied by the system has been used to study key Atlantic currents that increasingly appear in danger of collapse as the climate warms.
Just days after President Trump fired the independent board overseeing the National Science Foundation, the NSF announced the removal of all in-water infrastructure belonging to the Ocean Observatories Initiative at sites along the coasts of Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and North Carolina, and in the waters between Greenland and Iceland. Officials say the instruments will be recovered over the next 15 months.
The system, which began operating in 2016, was designed to run for at least 25 years. After just a decade in operation, the loss of monitoring instruments will leave scientists without critical data on the state of oceans and marine life. That includes data on the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, or AMOC, a system of ocean currents that delivers warmth to northern Europe and shapes climate globally. Scientists are increasingly concerned the AMOC may be nearing a tipping point, after which it shuts down.
Without sustained ocean observations, we are effectively choosing to navigate an increasingly volatile ocean with diminishing visibility, said Helen Findlay, of the Plymouth Marine Laboratory in the U.K. Growing uncertainty around the future of the AMOC, she said, is precisely why long-term, consistent monitoring is more vital than ever.
OKIsItJustMe
(22,418 posts)May 21, 2026
The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) has initiated descoping of the Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) Major Facility.
This plan includes the removal of all in-water infrastructure from the Irminger Sea, Station Papa, Endurance and Pioneer Arrays, subject to ship scheduling and other operational constraints. All recovered equipment will be retained by the operating institution pending further guidance from NSF.
The OOI Regional Cabled Array will remain operational for the foreseeable future. NSF intends to ensure continuity of the Data Center capabilities in support of ongoing OOI operations.
We encourage the community to use the ten-plus years of OOI data by including it in proposals, publications, presentations, and conversations with colleagues. Continued engagement demonstrates the scientific impact and wide-ranging applications enabled by the OOI and its data, underscoring its importance as a resource for the oceanographic community.
An inquiring, scientific mind might ask, What is the 'OOI Regional Cabled Array?"
https://interactiveoceans.washington.edu/about/regional-cabled-array/

In 2014, NSFs Ocean Observatories Initiative Regional Cabled Array (RCA), operated by the University of Washington, became operational streaming real-time data to shore from a diverse array of 150 instruments. The network spans the Juan de Fuca tectonic plate, with two backbone cables extending from a Shore Station in Pacific City, Oregon. One branch extends ~480 km due west to Axial Seamount, the largest and most active volcano on the Juan de Fuca Ridge. The second branch extends 208 km southward along the base of the Cascadia Subduction Zone (2900 m) and then turns east extending 147 km to 80 m water depth offshore Newport, Oregon. The backbone cables connect the Shore Station to Primary Nodes, which are distribution centers for extension cables that provide direct access to the specific sites of scientific interest.
One might observe that it is in the Pacific Northwest (i.e. nowhere close to the AMOC - Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation".)
OKIsItJustMe
(22,418 posts)Zhu, Y., Cheng, L., Trenberth, K.E. et al. Critical dependence of global ocean heat monitoring on the ocean observing system. Nat. Clim. Chang. (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-026-02661-6
Received: 10 February 2026
Accepted: 29 April 2026
Published online: 22 May 2026
Ocean monitoring critically depends on the Global Ocean Observing System, which has provided upper-2,000-m temperatures with near-global coverage since around 2005 but is increasingly vulnerable to policy and economic pressures. Here we show that data reduction in the Global Ocean Observing System would substantially degrade its capability to monitor ocean heat content changes. We further highlight the shared responsibility of nations, through sustained international coordination and long-term national commitments, to maintain an adequate observing system.
To assess how the degradation of GOOS could affect climate monitoring, using OHC as an integrated metric, we conducted random data-removal experiments in which 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of the existing GOOS observations were removed to mimic plausible observing-system degradation. Removal was performed separately for different instrument types, accounting for their distinct deployment and sampling characteristics (see Methods for the details). Annual rates of change in OHC (dOHC/dt), calculated as centred differences of annual mean OHC, were derived from the full GOOS dataset (used as a reference and hereafter denoted REF) and from each degraded configuration (Fig. 2a)
These experiments show a pronounced degradation in the ability to resolve year-to-year variations in the ocean heating rate as observational coverage decreases (Fig. 2a). The relative error in annual ocean heating rate increases by 33 ± 6%, 57 ± 6%, 79 ± 6% and 97 ± 20% for 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% data removal, respectively (Fig. 2b; uncertainties denote ±1 standard deviation across ten realizations). A relative error of 97% corresponds to a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 0.34 W m⁻² in the global dOHC/dt time series, comparable to the actual interannual variability of dOHC/dt in REF (0.35 W m⁻²); this renders the global ocean heating signal difficult to distinguish from noise.
In addition to interannual variability, the observed increase in the rate of ocean warming implies that Earths heat accumulation is accelerating, with important implications for climate adaptation and mitigation15. Our experiments reveal that estimates of this accelera-tion are also impacted by the degradation of the observing system: acceleration biases reach 7 ± 4%, 11 ± 7%, 15 ± 10% and 17 ± 10% for 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% data removal, respectively (Fig. 2c). A 20% relative error corresponds to an RMSE of 0.1 W m⁻² dec⁻¹.
littlemissmartypants
(35,500 posts)I'm more sensitive about this than others. It's an enormous travesty.