GVSU researcher: Climate change negatively impacting Great Lakes

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

MUSKEGON, Mich. — A researcher at Grand Valley State University says climate change is negatively impacting the Great Lakes and, “ignoring the problem is no longer a solution.”

The following is a press release from GVSU:

Climate change is having a direct negative effect on the Great Lakes, including impacts to recreational value, drinking water potential, and becoming more suited to invasive species and infectious pathogens, according to a Grand Valley State University researcher.

The impact of climate change on the Great Lakes, as well as other natural resources in the United States, was explored in the report “Science, Education, and Outreach Roadmap for Natural Resources,” recently released by the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. Kevin Strychar, an associate professor at Grand Valley’s Annis Water Resources Institute, co-authored one of the chapters.

Strychar researches climate change impacts on aquatic and marine ecosystems, and has studied climate change impacts on organisms for 16 years in countries from Australia and Palau to Canada and the United States.

Strychar spent the past year working with 35 other authors to compile the section on climate change. In the report, Strychar and his co-authors described the need to increase understanding of the impacts of climate change on ecosystems, water supplies, air quality, fire, disease transmission and species survival.

One of the many conclusions reached by the researchers was the need to develop technology that allows real-time monitoring and management of water systems.

“Climate change has occurred in the past, but this time, the frequency of change is too fast, not allowing animals enough time to adapt,” Strychar said. “Further complicating this issue is that we need not only study individual animals but their inter- and intra-dependencies on other animals and on the environment.

“Ignoring the problem is no longer a solution. Denying the plausibility of climate change is foolhardy. We need to accept the problem and now, find solutions — or at least minimize its impact on society and our planet as a whole.”

The full report focuses on six “grand challenges” that are facing the U.S. in the areas of climate change, water, sustainability, agriculture, energy and education.

To read the report, click here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


  • ReduceGHGs

    Too many members of the U.S. Congress are blocking legislation to reduce emissions. Either they cater to vested fossil fuel interests or some political agenda. Either way, they put future generations at risk. Join the efforts to confront them and have them removed. Our future generations are worth the effort.


    • TheFoundingFathers

      Unless you and your pathetic group of tree hugging assclowns are going to subsidize every single American due to your bullshit climate scam and reduced emissions bullshit, just STFU and sit the fuck down! Coal is the future for the next 2-4 generation like it or not! Unless you fools can prove that your way is cheaper then coal you have ZERO say in anything!

      • ReduceGHGs

        Scam? What tha? Try to find ONE respected scientific institution that agrees with you or even a credible study. You can’t because human-caused climate change is a fact. We’ve know about it for many decades. Where have you been? If you really think your belief has a foundation in reality then please, lets see what makes you believe that the world’s respected scientific bodies are all wrong.
        But yes, coal will be with us for many years but burning it for energy needs to stop. The atmosphere is not an endless waste disposal site. There are consequences for changing its composition and they’re not good. Read up.
        Google: NASA Climate Change Consensus

          • ReduceGHGs

            NASA, AGU, AAAS, NAS, MET, AIP and the other respected scientific institutions aren’t in the business of propaganda. But if you like that sort of thing see what the koch brothers and their heartland institute have been saying about climate change…. “CO2, they call it pollution. We call it life.” Drink you Kool-Aid!

      • ReduceGHGs

        And in case you needed more evidence, here is what a highly respected source has to say.

        American Chemical Society
        Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem. This sober conclusion has been recently reconfirmed by an in-depth set of studies focused on “America’s Climate Choices” (ACC) conducted by the U.S. National Academies (NRC, 2010a, b, c, d). The ACC studies, performed by independent and highly respected teams of scientists, engineers, and other skilled professionals, reached the same general conclusions that were published in the latest comprehensive assessment conducted by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007).

  • Sparky57

    It’s one thing to report on a hoax,but when the 6:00 pm news team sit their and make comments and agree with Strychar and this report,it’s not reporting.Its contributing to a worldwide scam.Do your research and follow the money trail and the facts.No doubt Strychar probably has his hands in the grant $money$ kitty.People are fed up with these lies and propaganda.Polls prove it.

    • ReduceGHGs

      Lies? Hoax?
      Didn’t I just quote the ACS? Want position statements from NASA, NAS, AAAS, AGU, AIP, MET, and others?
      I noticed you didn’t provide anything but a baseless opinion.
      Polls sample pubic opinion. They tell you noting about the state of the science.

      • TheFoundingFathers

        He doesn’t need any proof or articles stating his opinion, and unless reduceghgs is going to pay out of pocket for all of Americans power needs then his rant has ZERO value, how about this idea REDUCEGHGS, how do you propose to the American people that if we move away from coal by even a 13% move away from coal will bankrupt 90% of America, power will cost on average of 300% more for your home name one fucking person that can afford to turn on a light bulb in your home? How are the farmers going to farm, how are the supermarkets going to keep the food cold? And so on, and so on, and so on, you get the point yet buddy?

        • ReduceGHGs

          A bit hostile, buddy. Is that because you don’t have a reasoned argument?
          The unavoidable fact is that continued pumping waste into the atmosphere at anywhere near current rates is dangerous. It is irrational and self-destructive to continue a behavior that you know to be harmful. Of course we’ve become dependent on burning fossil fuels for energy. That’s a given. We’ll still use them for many years but the point is, buddy, to reduce global emissions, to live within the ability of the biosphere to sustain us. We aren’t doing that now. This is foundational, buddy.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.