Second, the lack of

transparency in highly complex and diffuse wild seafood supply chains allows illegal and unreported catches to be easily laundered and mixed into legitimate supplies entering international trade. Third, very few tools currently exist to monitor and interdict illegal catches entering the United States through seafood imports. Fourth, significant quantities of illegal fish enter the USA. In 2011, an estimated 20–32% of the wild-caught marine imports into the USA (by weight) were from illegal and unreported catches, with a value between $1.3 billion and $2.1 billion. These findings are consistent with many other studies that show the prevalence of illegal fishing around the world and clearly reveal that consumers in the United States today face a high risk of unintentionally purchasing illegal seafood. The work reported here suggests that the United States funds significant

selleck screening library profits from illegal fishing activities by providing major opportunities for marketing illegally caught fish, and this has three implications for the USA seafood trade. First, the USA is one of the world’s biggest seafood markets, whose purchasing power has a significant impact on patterns of fishing and trade. Second, preventing the infiltration of illegal fish products into legitimate markets is inherently difficult as a result of the diffuse, complex, and opaque nature of seafood supply chains. LBH589 manufacturer Third, current regulations and border inspection practices Amisulpride in the USA are not effectively oriented towards the prevention or interdiction of trade in illegal fish products. This work has relied upon information supplied by over 150 key individuals who are warmly thanked for their collaboration: the wishes of those who wished to remain anonymous are respected. A full list of all source material is given in the supplementary

online material. Dr. Mimi E. Lam is thanked for her comments on the draft. Research underlying this paper and its submission for publication was supported in part by a grant from the World Wildlife FundPD03(WWF); however, the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, findings and views expressed in this paper are wholly those of the authors. “
“Offshore CO2 storage’ refers to the injection of liquefied CO2 into deep geological formations beneath the seabed (e.g. depleted oil and gas reservoirs, and saline aquifers) for the purpose of storing it there on a permanent basis [1]. The storage in this manner of captured CO2 emissions from industrial installations and power plants has attracted considerable scientific and technical interest as a potential mitigation response to climate change [2]. Carbon capture, transport and storage (CCS) is politically well-favoured in several countries and is a prominent feature of several national, regional and international climate-related policy strategies [3].