4 ms·

I grew up in Queensland. During school in the late 90s, we were taught the same thing, except the reef was meant to already be gone by today. When I visited a f

I grew up in Queensland. During school in the late 90s, we were taught the same thing, except the reef was meant to already be gone by today. When I visited a few years ago, it was stunning. Hopefully this report won’t come true either, but it is hard to believe anyone predicting what Australia will be like in 2100. In any case, particularly on a forum like this, we should argue about what technological ideas we can use to radically transform this gloomy prediction of the future. Rather than just accepting it as fact.

jeffbee 6y ago
You would be “stunned” by 1% of the Great Barrier Reef and wouldn’t notice the missing 99%. This bias is the central topic of the book “The Once and Future World”.
- whymauri 6y ago
  See also: "David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet" which tackles similar themes w.r.t. conservation and nature.
- gkop 6y ago
  Would you clarify your point? I think you may be saying that the reef could already have been dead to a large extent at the time of parent commenter’s visit, but it’s not clear...
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    Yes, that’s what I’m saying. Just because you went to see some natural wonder and were amazed doesn’t imply that it hasn’t been radically degraded.
  - tedk-42 6y ago
    I agree with the rebbutal. We saw a few bits of the reef and some was stunningly beautiful. Other bits in comparison were heavily bleached and not looking healthy at all. It's a collective effort from the whole world we'll need to reverse the damage.
devtosales 6y ago
I dived a few different areas two months ago in QLD and I was very sad to see a belched dead reef. I’m sure there are healthy parts but there are a lot of dead or dying parts too. Australia is no longer my top country to dive - Indonesia and Philippines are far better.
autoconfig 6y ago
They weren't too far off. According to this BBC article _half_ of the reef is gone since 1995: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54533971 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54533971
cam_l 6y ago
I grew up in Queensland too. There have been massive changes to the reef, and the whole coast in my lifetime. Even now it is a shadow of it's former self. During that time the run off from farming, mining and development has increased markedly. The destruction of forests and mangroves and see grasses had increased. There was a time in the 00's when the rate of forest clearance in Queensland was the highest of anywhere in the developed world. Technological ideas will do sweet fuck all if the political will is not there. (Unless your technological idea is to change the political will). Not even if there is real money behind those ideas. Need i remind you the gov gave half a billion dollars to a few ex mining executives to 'protect the reef'. It seems previous little had been achieved so far. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/11/a-mockery-great-barrier-reef-foundation-raises-just-21m-of-357m-target https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/11/a-mocker...
NationalPark 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrier_Reef#Protection_and_preservation:_Reef_2050_plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrier_Reef#Protection_... suggests that quite a lot of effort went into improving the water quality and pollution/protection situation, so maybe the takeaway shouldn't be "scientists are lying about climate change" but "actions we take now actually can make a meaningful difference". I still think it's a little optimistic to suggest we won't ruin our planet through unaccounted-for externalities, but it gives me a little hope (and also doesn't, ya know, convey a tone that might encourage the science deniers as your comment might be accused of doing). On the other hand, while micro-scale interventions can affect pollution and acidification, global temperature rise may be an entirely different beast, and that's what the people in this article are worried about.
2muchcoffeeman 6y ago
I’ve visited a couple different parts in the last 3-4 years. Some parts are still stunning. Others had massive bleaching. The ship I was on had photos of the different sites we dives at. Huge difference in some areas.
thitcanh 6y ago
“My friends got covid and they’re fine” comes to mind: 1. Your anecdotal experience is meaningless. 2. I’d rather have scientists confidently say “we’ll all die if we don’t change” than “eh maybe it’ll be alright, let’s wait and see” while business continues as usual. Getting the population riled up about #realistic# scenarios is a good way to actually changing things.
somishere 6y ago
Also grew up in (far north) Qld in 80s and 90s. Spent much of my childhood camping on islands and snorkelling fringing reefs where my (clouded) memories are pretty great. Like most, attended state schools ... but we never visited the reef, and it was rarely, if ever, mentioned. Returned a few years ago to work in reef conservation. You should keep in mind that the sites zoned/selected for tourism make up less than 1% of the reef and tend to be chosen because of their natural beauty and resilience. You are not visiting a randomly selected site (not to mention that you tend to swim in an area the size of a couple of 50m pools, the reef is about the same size as Italy, as long as the west coast of the US .. or QLD). Unless you're talking a bed of dead coral (which could easily be caused by a storm) most signs of stress in the ecosystem are unrecognisable to the average eye. Much of the reef, including many of the tourist sites, have already been heavily affected by the mass bleaching events (most recently in 2019/2020). Many of the reefs recovered, some of them didn't and the boats visiting them stopped doing so. I have personally seen pristine reefs and decimated ones within a few kms of each other. It is a nuanced story. The main issue is that the heating events - that lead up to the bleaching - are occuring more frequently. Bleaching isn't the only outcome here. E.g. many species' reproductive cycles are effected by temperature. Add to this other effects of climate change, such as acidification (which doesn't just take a toll on corals but also hugely important sea grass populations). Plus seperate anthropogenic stressors, such as nutrient runoff which can lead to uncontrollable outbreaks of coral eating starfish. Absolutely agree that technology is a vital component, but without a major and rapid ideological shift (in Aus at least) the distopia painted by Ove, et al may be closer than you think. If you're interested, we collected ~14k images from across the reef between Oct and Dec last year. You can have a look (and help us analyse them) here: greatreefcensus.org/analysis
TomSwirly 6y ago
> When I visited a few years ago, it was stunning. Hopefully this report won’t come true either "A few years ago, the one part I visited was stunning, so there isn't an issue at all." But in fact half of the reef has died since then: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/since-2016-half-the-coral-in-the-great-barrier-reef-has-perished/558302/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/since-20... > we should argue about what technological ideas we can use to radically transform this gloomy prediction of the future The two issues are rising water temperatures due to global heating; and outflows of nutrients and to a lesser extent, effluent, due to industrial agriculture, mostly animal agriculture. For the first one, we need to give up fossil fuels which means cutting down our consumption; for the second, we need to cut down our consumption of resource-intensive, waste-intensive foods. There isn't going to be some magical "technological idea" where we can continue on much longer with our two centuries of unchecked exponential growth in consumption, and exponential growth in pollution, and not devastate our biosphere. People have been telling me for decades about such a solution and yet it never comes. Each new technology just spurs people on to new levels of obsessive consumption and waste.

jeffbee 6y ago

You would be “stunned” by 1% of the Great Barrier Reef and wouldn’t notice the missing 99%. This bias is the central topic of the book “The Once and Future World”.

whymauri 6y ago
See also: "David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet" which tackles similar themes w.r.t. conservation and nature.
gkop 6y ago
Would you clarify your point? I think you may be saying that the reef could already have been dead to a large extent at the time of parent commenter’s visit, but it’s not clear...
- jeffbee 6y ago
  Yes, that’s what I’m saying. Just because you went to see some natural wonder and were amazed doesn’t imply that it hasn’t been radically degraded.
- tedk-42 6y ago
  I agree with the rebbutal. We saw a few bits of the reef and some was stunningly beautiful. Other bits in comparison were heavily bleached and not looking healthy at all. It's a collective effort from the whole world we'll need to reverse the damage.

devtosales 6y ago

I dived a few different areas two months ago in QLD and I was very sad to see a belched dead reef. I’m sure there are healthy parts but there are a lot of dead or dying parts too. Australia is no longer my top country to dive - Indonesia and Philippines are far better.

autoconfig 6y ago

They weren't too far off. According to this BBC article _half_ of the reef is gone since 1995: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54533971 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54533971

cam_l 6y ago

I grew up in Queensland too. There have been massive changes to the reef, and the whole coast in my lifetime. Even now it is a shadow of it's former self. During that time the run off from farming, mining and development has increased markedly. The destruction of forests and mangroves and see grasses had increased. There was a time in the 00's when the rate of forest clearance in Queensland was the highest of anywhere in the developed world. Technological ideas will do sweet fuck all if the political will is not there. (Unless your technological idea is to change the political will). Not even if there is real money behind those ideas. Need i remind you the gov gave half a billion dollars to a few ex mining executives to 'protect the reef'. It seems previous little had been achieved so far. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/11/a-mockery-great-barrier-reef-foundation-raises-just-21m-of-357m-target https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/11/a-mocker...

NationalPark 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrier_Reef#Protection_and_preservation:_Reef_2050_plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrier_Reef#Protection_... suggests that quite a lot of effort went into improving the water quality and pollution/protection situation, so maybe the takeaway shouldn't be "scientists are lying about climate change" but "actions we take now actually can make a meaningful difference". I still think it's a little optimistic to suggest we won't ruin our planet through unaccounted-for externalities, but it gives me a little hope (and also doesn't, ya know, convey a tone that might encourage the science deniers as your comment might be accused of doing). On the other hand, while micro-scale interventions can affect pollution and acidification, global temperature rise may be an entirely different beast, and that's what the people in this article are worried about.

2muchcoffeeman 6y ago

I’ve visited a couple different parts in the last 3-4 years. Some parts are still stunning. Others had massive bleaching. The ship I was on had photos of the different sites we dives at. Huge difference in some areas.

thitcanh 6y ago

“My friends got covid and they’re fine” comes to mind: 1. Your anecdotal experience is meaningless. 2. I’d rather have scientists confidently say “we’ll all die if we don’t change” than “eh maybe it’ll be alright, let’s wait and see” while business continues as usual. Getting the population riled up about #realistic# scenarios is a good way to actually changing things.

somishere 6y ago

Also grew up in (far north) Qld in 80s and 90s. Spent much of my childhood camping on islands and snorkelling fringing reefs where my (clouded) memories are pretty great. Like most, attended state schools ... but we never visited the reef, and it was rarely, if ever, mentioned. Returned a few years ago to work in reef conservation. You should keep in mind that the sites zoned/selected for tourism make up less than 1% of the reef and tend to be chosen because of their natural beauty and resilience. You are not visiting a randomly selected site (not to mention that you tend to swim in an area the size of a couple of 50m pools, the reef is about the same size as Italy, as long as the west coast of the US .. or QLD). Unless you're talking a bed of dead coral (which could easily be caused by a storm) most signs of stress in the ecosystem are unrecognisable to the average eye. Much of the reef, including many of the tourist sites, have already been heavily affected by the mass bleaching events (most recently in 2019/2020). Many of the reefs recovered, some of them didn't and the boats visiting them stopped doing so. I have personally seen pristine reefs and decimated ones within a few kms of each other. It is a nuanced story. The main issue is that the heating events - that lead up to the bleaching - are occuring more frequently. Bleaching isn't the only outcome here. E.g. many species' reproductive cycles are effected by temperature. Add to this other effects of climate change, such as acidification (which doesn't just take a toll on corals but also hugely important sea grass populations). Plus seperate anthropogenic stressors, such as nutrient runoff which can lead to uncontrollable outbreaks of coral eating starfish. Absolutely agree that technology is a vital component, but without a major and rapid ideological shift (in Aus at least) the distopia painted by Ove, et al may be closer than you think. If you're interested, we collected ~14k images from across the reef between Oct and Dec last year. You can have a look (and help us analyse them) here: greatreefcensus.org/analysis

TomSwirly 6y ago

> When I visited a few years ago, it was stunning. Hopefully this report won’t come true either "A few years ago, the one part I visited was stunning, so there isn't an issue at all." But in fact half of the reef has died since then: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/since-2016-half-the-coral-in-the-great-barrier-reef-has-perished/558302/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/since-20... > we should argue about what technological ideas we can use to radically transform this gloomy prediction of the future The two issues are rising water temperatures due to global heating; and outflows of nutrients and to a lesser extent, effluent, due to industrial agriculture, mostly animal agriculture. For the first one, we need to give up fossil fuels which means cutting down our consumption; for the second, we need to cut down our consumption of resource-intensive, waste-intensive foods. There isn't going to be some magical "technological idea" where we can continue on much longer with our two centuries of unchecked exponential growth in consumption, and exponential growth in pollution, and not devastate our biosphere. People have been telling me for decades about such a solution and yet it never comes. Each new technology just spurs people on to new levels of obsessive consumption and waste.