6 ms·

What can we do? Serious question.

flukus 10y ago
Immediately halt all carbon emissions in the world, that might be enough to save it. Reality is the time to act was 20 years (or more) ago.
- worldsayshi 10y ago
  As long as at least some coral survive it's not time to give up. If we can halt carbon emissions and turn our industrial complex towards proper sustainability the earth will probably heal. Perhaps it will take a thousand years for it to recover but as long as we reach sustainability that doesn't really matter.
  - flukus 10y ago
    It could probably heal, it might even do so if we burned every fossil fuel on earth, but the incredibly amount of biodiversity in the reefs would be gone and that will never come back.
    - worldsayshi 10y ago
      Never is a long time. I see what you mean but there isn't much point in being defeatist?
    - idanoeman 10y ago
      I think you mean "won't come back in 100s (1000s? 10000s?)" of years. We don't have the technology to actually eliminate life on earth.
- pier25 10y ago
  Even if we magically stopped all emissions today it would not be enough. The time to act was probably 50 years ago. 1) Climatic feedback systems such as arctic ice melting, or permafrost methane have already been triggered. This means their effect will continue for centuries if not millenia. 2) Climate lag. There are a few decades between emissions and consequences in the climate. 40 years on averge from what I've read. This means we are now only seeing the effects from the 70s emissions, and we have emitted more CO2 in the past decades than in the previous 150 years before that. 3) Cooling from sulfate aerosols produced by industrial activity. It's unclear how much these are cooling the atmosphere but even a small number such 0.2ºC would be considerable. Our only chance are very strong negative emissions.
Baeocystin 10y ago
Preserve what we can in aquariums around the world so that we'll have reef seed species available as areas become more habitable again. Identify areas that are become more hospitable, and work on establishing reefs there. Expand artificial reef building, to help make up for lost area. Cut carbon emissions, and work on finding ways to sequester what has already been released. No one thing will be the fix, but they all have a role to play.
- flukus 10y ago
  > Preserve what we can in aquariums around the world so that we'll have reef seed species available as areas become more habitable again. Can the worlds aquariums store a fraction of the biodiversity of the reef? > Expand artificial reef building, to help make up for lost area. It would take a massive engineering effort to make a dent in the area the Reef covers.
  - Baeocystin 10y ago
    1. Yes. Collection of reef material for transplantation into a controlled habitat involves moving living corals and substrate. Much of what lives in a reef comes along for the ride. Not everything. But (thankfully) more than you might think. 2. You don't need to replicate the entire area. You only need to make refugia. There is a lot of ocean shelf that is relatively barren, but could support a thriving reef, if only there was structure to build on. It's a subject that is being actively worked on. http://www.reefdesignlab.com/about/ http://www.reefdesignlab.com/about/ for one example. It doesn't have to be money spent just for reef creation, either. Changing how we construct jetties, piers, and other near-shore structures to be more welcoming to reef life would make a genuine impact. You've got to keep in mind that we're not 'fixing' the problem, here. We're punting, and trying to keep the ball in play as long as possible while we work out the truly long-term solutions our carbon problem presents.
jbverschoor 10y ago
There's a guy in Florida who is growing the florida coral reef at a much higher rate than usual.
- digitalzombie 10y ago
  http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/scientists-try-regrow-dying-coral-reef-25-times-faster-nature/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/scientists-try-regrow-dying-c... https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/423696/a-coral-reef-revival/ https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/423696/a-coral-reef-... Are you referring to this guy?
  - jbverschoor 10y ago
    Yep!
emmelaich 10y ago
I suspect not much, as far as climate change goes. We can do a LOT better in terms of pollution.
dingo_bat 10y ago
A better question would be: why should we care? I really don't see much value in spending a lot of effort and money into protecting a coral reef.
- kerbalspacepro 10y ago
  Coral reefs are like the rainforests of the sea: they hold an immense amount of biodiversity and life. They are also a carbon sink: >Coral reefs play a critical role in the carbon cycle of our planet, by taking calcium ions and dissolved carbon dioxide from the water and turning it into calcium carbonate forming their hard skeleton. http://www.reefrecovery.org/coral-reefs/ http://www.reefrecovery.org/coral-reefs/
- czechdeveloper 10y ago
  Because we, humans, are destroying planet we live on. You not seeing why we should even care makes me sad.
  - dingo_bat 10y ago
    We're not destroying, just changing. According to our needs, which are paramount, IMO.
- kakarot 10y ago
  Are you asking for evidence of environmental utility provided by reef systems? There are plenty and my sister post already mentioned some of them. But the metric of "does putting in all this money and effort to fix the problem we created give us something back in return?" is absolutely poisonous. It's that selfish "is preserving this environmental habitat that has been around for millions of years worth my time or money?" that allowed us to dig this grave in the first place.
  - dingo_bat 10y ago
    > that allowed us to dig this grave in the first place. What grave? Things are better than ever!
Diederich 10y ago
If I remember correctly, human CO2 emissions has been flat for the past couple of years. The reason CO2 is going up, at an increasing rate, is largely because the biosphere's ability to absorb CO2 is diminished. I believe the grim truth is this: the world's transformation would continue for a long time even if humans stopped producing CO2 tomorrow. Preparations for the inevitable should be our focus.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

Immediately halt all carbon emissions in the world, that might be enough to save it. Reality is the time to act was 20 years (or more) ago.

worldsayshi 10y ago
As long as at least some coral survive it's not time to give up. If we can halt carbon emissions and turn our industrial complex towards proper sustainability the earth will probably heal. Perhaps it will take a thousand years for it to recover but as long as we reach sustainability that doesn't really matter.
- flukus 10y ago
  It could probably heal, it might even do so if we burned every fossil fuel on earth, but the incredibly amount of biodiversity in the reefs would be gone and that will never come back.
  - worldsayshi 10y ago
    Never is a long time. I see what you mean but there isn't much point in being defeatist?
  - idanoeman 10y ago
    I think you mean "won't come back in 100s (1000s? 10000s?)" of years. We don't have the technology to actually eliminate life on earth.
pier25 10y ago
Even if we magically stopped all emissions today it would not be enough. The time to act was probably 50 years ago. 1) Climatic feedback systems such as arctic ice melting, or permafrost methane have already been triggered. This means their effect will continue for centuries if not millenia. 2) Climate lag. There are a few decades between emissions and consequences in the climate. 40 years on averge from what I've read. This means we are now only seeing the effects from the 70s emissions, and we have emitted more CO2 in the past decades than in the previous 150 years before that. 3) Cooling from sulfate aerosols produced by industrial activity. It's unclear how much these are cooling the atmosphere but even a small number such 0.2ºC would be considerable. Our only chance are very strong negative emissions.

Baeocystin 10y ago

Preserve what we can in aquariums around the world so that we'll have reef seed species available as areas become more habitable again. Identify areas that are become more hospitable, and work on establishing reefs there. Expand artificial reef building, to help make up for lost area. Cut carbon emissions, and work on finding ways to sequester what has already been released. No one thing will be the fix, but they all have a role to play.

flukus 10y ago
> Preserve what we can in aquariums around the world so that we'll have reef seed species available as areas become more habitable again. Can the worlds aquariums store a fraction of the biodiversity of the reef? > Expand artificial reef building, to help make up for lost area. It would take a massive engineering effort to make a dent in the area the Reef covers.
- Baeocystin 10y ago
  1. Yes. Collection of reef material for transplantation into a controlled habitat involves moving living corals and substrate. Much of what lives in a reef comes along for the ride. Not everything. But (thankfully) more than you might think. 2. You don't need to replicate the entire area. You only need to make refugia. There is a lot of ocean shelf that is relatively barren, but could support a thriving reef, if only there was structure to build on. It's a subject that is being actively worked on. http://www.reefdesignlab.com/about/ http://www.reefdesignlab.com/about/ for one example. It doesn't have to be money spent just for reef creation, either. Changing how we construct jetties, piers, and other near-shore structures to be more welcoming to reef life would make a genuine impact. You've got to keep in mind that we're not 'fixing' the problem, here. We're punting, and trying to keep the ball in play as long as possible while we work out the truly long-term solutions our carbon problem presents.

jbverschoor 10y ago

There's a guy in Florida who is growing the florida coral reef at a much higher rate than usual.

digitalzombie 10y ago
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/scientists-try-regrow-dying-coral-reef-25-times-faster-nature/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/scientists-try-regrow-dying-c... https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/423696/a-coral-reef-revival/ https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/423696/a-coral-reef-... Are you referring to this guy?
- jbverschoor 10y ago
  Yep!

emmelaich 10y ago

I suspect not much, as far as climate change goes. We can do a LOT better in terms of pollution.

dingo_bat 10y ago

A better question would be: why should we care? I really don't see much value in spending a lot of effort and money into protecting a coral reef.

kerbalspacepro 10y ago
Coral reefs are like the rainforests of the sea: they hold an immense amount of biodiversity and life. They are also a carbon sink: >Coral reefs play a critical role in the carbon cycle of our planet, by taking calcium ions and dissolved carbon dioxide from the water and turning it into calcium carbonate forming their hard skeleton. http://www.reefrecovery.org/coral-reefs/ http://www.reefrecovery.org/coral-reefs/
czechdeveloper 10y ago
Because we, humans, are destroying planet we live on. You not seeing why we should even care makes me sad.
- dingo_bat 10y ago
  We're not destroying, just changing. According to our needs, which are paramount, IMO.
kakarot 10y ago
Are you asking for evidence of environmental utility provided by reef systems? There are plenty and my sister post already mentioned some of them. But the metric of "does putting in all this money and effort to fix the problem we created give us something back in return?" is absolutely poisonous. It's that selfish "is preserving this environmental habitat that has been around for millions of years worth my time or money?" that allowed us to dig this grave in the first place.
- dingo_bat 10y ago
  > that allowed us to dig this grave in the first place. What grave? Things are better than ever!

Diederich 10y ago

If I remember correctly, human CO2 emissions has been flat for the past couple of years. The reason CO2 is going up, at an increasing rate, is largely because the biosphere's ability to absorb CO2 is diminished. I believe the grim truth is this: the world's transformation would continue for a long time even if humans stopped producing CO2 tomorrow. Preparations for the inevitable should be our focus.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]