Scientists speculate that some 10 million different species may inhabit the deep sea. Pictured: a ghostly grenadier on the Davidson Seamount, an undersea mountain 75 miles off the coast of Central California. The seamount is 7,480 feet tall, yet its summit is still 4,101 feet below the sea surface. (NOAA)

It may already be too late for some of the deep sea’s undiscovered life forms.

Advances in so-called “bottom trawling” technology in recent years has meant that fishing boats now have unprecedented access to deep ocean habitats and the sea floor itself where untold numbers of unknown species have been making a living for eons. Scientists speculate that upwards of 10 million different species may inhabit the deep sea. This is biodiversity comparable to the world’s richest tropical rainforests.

The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC), a group of more than 50 environmental and other groups dedicated to protecting cold-water corals and vulnerable deep-sea ecosystems, reports that trawlers today are capable of fishing deep sea canyons and rough seafloors that were once avoided for fear of damaging nets. “To capture one or two target commercial species, deep-sea bottom trawl fishing vessels drag huge nets armed with steel plates and heavy rollers across the seabed, plowing up and pulverizing everything in their path,” the coalition reports. In addition, adds DSCC, large quantities of coral and unwanted fish species are hauled up only to be thrown back dead or dying. Indeed, the result of a few hours of trawling can be the destruction of fragile deep-sea habitats, such as delicate coral and sponge communities, that may have taken centuries to grow and thrive.

Bottom trawling also stirs up the sediment at the bottom of the sea. The resulting undersea plumes of “suspended solids” can drift with the current for tens of miles from the source of the trawling, introducing turbidity throughout the water that inhibits the transfer of light down to the depths where it is needed for photosynthesis in plankton, sea kelp and other undersea plants that serve as the basis for the marine food chain. Also, ocean sediments serve as natural safe resting places for many persistent organic pollutants (such as DDT and PCBs). Dredging these sediments up effectively reintroduces such toxins into the water where they are unwittingly absorbed and consumed by the fish we eat and other marine life already trying to cope with otherwise compromised undersea habitats. The sediment plumes also reintroduce nutrient solids from agricultural and other practices, increasing demand for oxygen in the water (causing algae blooms) and contributing to the outbreak of ocean “dead zones” devoid of marine life.

What can be done? For its part, the United States has banned bottom trawling in its offshore jurisdictions, but the practice continues mostly unabated throughout Europe and out on the world’s high seas. DSCC has gotten upwards of 1,400 marine scientists from 69 different countries to sign onto a statement expressing profound concern “that human activities, particularly bottom trawling, are causing unprecedented damage to the deep-sea coral and sponge communities on continental plateaus and slopes, and on seamounts and mid-ocean ridges.” The statement calls on governments and the United Nations to adopt a short-term global moratorium on deep sea bottom trawling to try to provide immediate protection to the mostly undiscovered biodiversity of deep sea ecosystems while governments hash out longer term conservation and management regimes. In the meantime, bottom trawling continues unabated in sensitive areas of the North Atlantic and elsewhere, harvesting now for us what our grandchildren may never know.

Dear EarthTalk: With all the talk of rising seas, what could happen to the rivers that flow into the oceans? Will they reverse flow? Will rising seas back up into fresh water lakes? And what happens to our groundwater should saltwater flow backwards into it? – Sandy Smith, concerned Michigander

The intrusion of saltwater from the sea into rivers and groundwater is a serious issue, but the threat is not from a reversal of flow, and our far inland lakes and rivers are not expected to be directly affected by the salty water of our oceans. However, the sensitive areas around the edges of our continents, where fresh water meets salt water, are at risk, and greater efforts must be taken to protect them. Some 40 percent of world population lives less than 40 miles (60 kilometers) from the shoreline.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global average sea levels should rise eight to 34 inches by the year 2100, a much faster pace than the four to 10 inch increase of the past century. Seas rise because of higher global temperatures, melting mountain glaciers and polar ice caps, and other factors. Higher temperatures also cause thermal expansion of ocean water, intensifying the problem.

Rising sea levels cause major problems as they erode and flood coastlines and, yes, as they mix salt water with fresh. A November 2007 article in ScienceDaily posited that coastal communities could face significant losses in fresh water supplies as saltwater intrudes inland. And whereas it had been previously assumed that salty water could only intrude underground as far as it did above ground, new studies show that in some cases salt water can go 50 percent further inland underground than it does above ground.

Salty water invading groundwater can reach not only residential water supplies but intakes for agricultural irrigation and industrial uses, as well. Economic effects include loss of coastal fisheries and other industries, coastal protection costs, and the loss of once-valuable coastal property as people move inland.

Estuaries at the mouths of rivers have in the past handled rising ocean levels. Sediment that accumulates along the edge of an estuary can raise the level of the land as the sea levels rise. And mangrove swamps, which buffer many a coastal zone around the world, flourish in brackish conditions. But because of our preference for living in coastal areas, and our habit of re-engineering our surroundings accordingly, humans make matters worse by preventing natural processes from managing the change. On the coast, we build roads and buildings, and replace natural buffers like mangrove swamps with dikes and bulkheads to control flooding, which make the problem worse by preventing beach sediment from collecting. And as we dam rivers and create reservoirs, we trap the sediment that would naturally flow down to the sea.

In some places, changes are happening. Governments are beginning to restrict or prohibit building in setback zones along the coast where risk of erosion is the greatest. A newer policy of “rolling easements” is also being tried, where developers are allowed to build in restricted zones but will be required to remove the structures if and when they become threatened by erosion. The IPCC recommends more drastic actions, such as creating more marshes and wetlands as buffers against the rising level of the sea, and migrating populations and industry away from coastlines altogether.

CONTACTS: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, www.ipcc.ch.

Dear EarthTalk: Is it better to drive an older, well-maintained car that gets about 25 miles per gallon, or to buy a new car that gets about 35 miles per gallon? — Edward Peabody, via e-mail

It definitely makes more sense from a green perspective to keep your old car running and well-maintained as long as you can-especially if it’s getting such good mileage. There are significant environmental costs to both manufacturing a new automobile and adding your old car to the ever-growing collective junk heap.

A 2004 analysis by Toyota found that as much as 28 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions generated during the lifecycle of a typical gasoline-powered car can occur during its manufacture and its transportation to the dealer; the remaining emissions occur during driving once its new owner takes possession. An earlier study by Seikei University in Japan put the pre-purchase number at 12 percent.

Regardless of which conclusion is closer to the truth, your current car has already passed its manufacture and transport stage, so going forward the relevant comparison has only to do with its remaining footprint against that of a new car’s manufacture/transport and driver’s footprint-not to mention the environmental impact of either disposing of your old car or selling it to a new owner who will continue to drive it. There are environmental impacts, too, even if your old car is junked, dismantled and sold for parts.

And don’t forget that the new hybrids-despite lower emissions and better gas mileage-actually have a much larger environmental impact in their manufacture, compared to non-hybrids. The batteries that store energy for the drive train are no friend to the environment-and having two engines under one hood increases manufacturing emissions. And all-electric vehicles are only emission-free if the outlet providing the juice is connected to a renewable energy source, not a coal-burning power plant, as is more likely.

If you want to assess your current car’s fuel efficiency or emissions, there are many services available online. The government website FuelEconomy.gov provides fuel efficiency stats for hundreds of different vehicles dating back to 1985. Websites TrackYourGasMileage.com and MPGTune.com can help you track your mileage and provide ongoing tips to improve fuel efficiency for your specific make and model vehicle. MyMileMarker.com takes it a step further, making projections about annual mileage, fuel costs and fuel efficiency based on your driving habits. If you have an iPhone, you can keep track of your car’s carbon footprint with the new “Greenmeter App” from Hunter Research and Technologies. The program uses numerous variables to make its calculations on-the-go as you drive, including weather conditions, cost of fuel, vehicle weight, and more.

If you simply must change your vehicle, be it for fuel efficiency or any other reason, one option is to simply buy a used car that gets better gas mileage than your existing one. There’s much to be said, from many environmental vantage points, about postponing replacement purchases-of anything, not just cars-to keep what’s already made out of the waste stream and to delay the additional environmental costs of making something new.

CONTACTS: www.fueleconomy.gov; www.trackyourgasmileage.com; www.mpgtune.com; www.mymilemarker.com; Greenmeter App, www.hunter.pairsite.com/greenmeter.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.

The word “recycle” gets tossed around a lot in modern society, but one company has looked beyond the blue bin in your driveway to create a fabulous green fashion statement.

Sea Bags are an excellent example of the ways consumerism is changing. These accessories, which range from wine carriers to large over-the shoulder bags, are all made out of the material from actual previously used sails!

The sails are procured locally from boaters in the Portland, Maine area through purchase, donation or even trade. Sea Bags also offers the choice to donate material in exchange for a donation to the Sail Maine Scholarship Fund for children that are learning or wish to learn to sail.

Each bag created from these sails has distinctive markings from the expected wear and scratches such material collects from the nature of its previous function on the sea. Customers can also choose a type of design for their bag, including additions like stripes, large identification numbers or logos which can be found on each individual sail. This guarantees that each bag is absolutely one of a kind.

Also unique are the company’s beliefs. “We make bags out of recycled sails and each bag represents everything we are as a company,” said company owners Hannah Kubiak and Beth Shissler. The company stands on chathe philosophy that every person, just like their sails, deserves a second chance — a perfect stance for a company that revolves around recycling.

To put this idea into action the company has a close working relationship with the Maine Correctional Institute for Women. Sea Bags also developed a line of bags devoted to aiding the fight against Breast cancer which sported the well-recognized pink ribbon. Half of all the proceeds gained from the sail of these bags — $15,000 — went directly to the Maine Cancer Foundation.

This multi-faceted involvement with the community helps the company stick with one of its final goals, to stay local while growing into a global company. “We are proud to have a global business in Portland, Maine where all of our products are made and we are passionate about keeping it that way,” said the owners.

The possibilities for recycled fashion are endless. In fact, right now I am using a beautiful piece of a used billboard for a wallet and part of a retired circus tent for a purse.

Creativity can help save our earth, one accessory at a time.

So after months of camping out in front of stores in the freezing cold, you finally got your Wii. Like an eager child, you quickly opened the box and played through the little quirky system’s top titles. You’ve developed tennis elbow from your marathon Wii Sports sessions; you’ve battled from one end of Hyrule to the other in Twilight Princess — hell, you’ve even collected all the stars the cosmos could offer in Super Mario Galaxy. Now you’re looking for that next title to warrant your $250 white box.

Sea Monsters: A Prehistoric Adventure is not that title.

In fact, it’s not close. Sea Monsters has almost no redeeming qualities and puts up a good fight for worst game on the system — and that’s saying something.

Sea Monsters is based on an ambitious and interesting CGI documentary produced last year by National Geographic, which showed what many believe the lives of these giant sea creatures were like. DSI games has chosen to forgo all of this and make a game with little to no direction which consists merely of eating, breathing and awkward swimming.

Yeah, that’s the whole game.

The game revolves around guiding your sea monster through the murky depths of the ocean, competing in challenges and collecting fossils. Why prehistoric beasts are collecting fossils is beyond me, but most of the action — and the game’s, uh, progression — revolves around your obtaining them.

It’s through these fossils that new creatures (each with it’s own unique abilities) and challenges are unlocked, but you’ll be hard pressed to make it through the challenges through the force of sheer boredom alone.

Most of the challenges revolve around eating creatures smaller than yours against no time limit or oppressing factor. While this may sound easy, the game’s utterly horrible control system makes even the smallest tasks incredibly difficult and frustrating. Pressing A causes your creature to swim, while the combination of the nunchuck and moving the Wiimote navigates.

Let’s do a simple math equation shall we? Slow moving, lethargic sea monsters plus overly sensitive Wiimote controls equals what? If your answer included anything about frustration or annoyance, you’d be correct. The camera moves too quickly for any of the monsters to keep up, causing you to get turned around and lost in an already confusing map. What’s worse is the fact that when your monsters hits the ocean walls or floor, creatures have a tendency to merge with the walls and get stuck. When this happens there seems to be no other option than to move the Wiimote around like crazy, hoping that some sudden movement will free the creature.

You know a game looks bad when the best compliment you can give is “Well, the load screens don’t look half bad.” While the load screens (merely a picture of a Sea Monster) aren’t that bad, Sea Monsters looks like a first generation N64 game. It’s blocky, pixilated and bland. More often than not, you’ll have trouble distinguishing your character from the others on screen. Yeah, it’s that bad.

Perhaps my biggest pet peeve with Sea Monsters is that it could be so much more. Sure, it was never destined to be a AAA title, but with the inspired source material it could have at least been a decent and game that actually served to educate kids at the same time. Instead, we get a game that no one, should ever play. Ever.

Quick hits:

Publisher: DSI Games
Developer: DSI Games
Platform: Wii (reviewed), PS2, DS
Genre: Is crap a genre? Uh, Adventure?
Players: 1-2
Launch Date: December 27, 2007

Playability: 1 out of 5 stars
Learning Curve: 1 out of 5 stars
Sound: 0 out of 5 stars
Graphics: 1 out of 5 stars
Overall: 1 out of 5 stars