11 ms·
The comments here seems to be missing the point, yes the article is not technically clickbait, but it also explicitly mentions that while oxybenzone causes blea
by belval 4y ago
The comments here seems to be missing the point, yes the article is not technically clickbait, but it also explicitly mentions that while oxybenzone causes bleaching, it is not responsible for THE coral bleaching that we are seeing in most reefs around the world.
> The study lacks “ecological realism”, agrees Terry Hughes, a marine biologist at James Cook University in Townsville, Australia. Coral-bleaching events on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, for example, have been linked more closely to trends in water temperature than to shifts in tourist activity. “Mass bleaching happens regardless of where the tourists are,” Hughes says. “Even the most remote, most pristine reefs are bleaching because water temperatures are killing them.”
And this gem as a final note:
> Hughes emphasizes that the greatest threats to reefs remain rising temperatures, coastal pollution and overfishing. Changing sunscreens might not do much to protect coral reefs, Hughes says. “It’s ironic that people will change their sunscreens and fly from New York to Miami to go to the beach,” he says. “Most tourists are happy to use a different brand of sunscreen, but not to fly less and reduce carbon emissions.”
- pentae 4y agoIndeed. I imagine it would be pretty hard for people to enjoy swimming in these places without taking a commercial flight
- dymk 4y agoThis is why we need a net carbon tax. Behavior won’t change unless people start paying the real cost of emitting carbon.
- sfe22 4y agoMaybe we do indeed need that tax. My only request would be the decision to be democratic and making sure the revenue doesn’t go to to the monopoly that injected people with plutonium. Instead it can be used to reverse the damage and with any excess being returned to their rightful earners.
- belval 4y agoCarbon tax only works if everyone agrees which is the actual crux of the issue. If you enforce new legislation to tax carbon-emitting industries in the US, all you are doing is offshoring that manufacturing to some place where the tax does not exist. Not saying that it's inherently a bad idea, but there are no silver bullets on that issue. I'd like to see more work done on point source capture of carbon/methane. https://netl.doe.gov/carbon-management/carbon-capture https://netl.doe.gov/carbon-management/carbon-capture
- dymk 4y agoAir travel isn't something that can be offshored - if somebody in America wants to fly, they're getting on a plane in America, where an American carbon tax would apply. Sure, it doesn't fix industries which can offshore, but it's a good place to start. Commercial air is a major source of carbon emissions.
- TheSpiceIsLife 4y agoOr would in data claims air travel accounts for about 3.5% of carbon emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation
- dymk 4y agoWe agree that that’s a huge amount, right?
- TheSpiceIsLife 4y agoIn gross tonnage, yes sure. I don't agree that 3.5% is a huge fraction.
- Raidion 4y agoMy quick google says it's 2.5% of carbon emissions (for both passengers and cargo). If we add a carbon tax, do you consider the prime benefit to be the reduction in demand (if it means 20% less air travel, that's .5% total global carbon emissions reduction) Or do you feel like the prime benefit is to spur/incentivize more carbon neutral strategies (like electric aircraft?)? Or, do you feel like the primary benefit would be the "offsets" (like protecting trees, carbon capture technology, etc) I see a lot of talk about reducing carbon emissions, but it seems like there are a lot of things a "carbon tax" could change, and I feel like deciding on what one of those is the primary benefit is a harder problem than leveraging the tax in the first place.
- rgrieselhuber 4y agoBest way to do it would be to tax anyone flying on PJs. You could buy an annual private jet license and it would be very expensive.
- upsidesinclude 4y agoAbsolutely and utterly fictional. Carbon credit schemes are a way to push cost off and allow for corporations to pollute. Look at industrial pollutants and carbon is one of the least concerning. It's a political talking point why? Because lobbyists tell politicians they need it and hand them money. Investigate a little deeper. You will find that the entire world must agree to participate for something like carbon tax to work... the world is not on board with hobbling industry
- RRL 4y agoRef final note: Exactly. I have quite a few friends who regularly fly/travel to these scenic ocean/river systems, but will absolve themselves of concern because they're using some 'reef safe' sunscreen when they dip in to the water. Greenhouse gas emissions are always someone else's fault. Industry, diesel trucks, etc etc. They're also the same folks that attack Airbnb and gentrification at home, but are the first to jump on to the Airbnb moneyed expat lifestyle when traveling. At this point, it's not even worth the time to debate.
- pvaldes 4y agoEverybody is bad, except me of course, but in the end this is a little step in the right direction. So... Why is a problem that a few less anemones don't die?. Conservation is not like zapping a magic wand and all is good again. Even little steps helps and every little problem solved is one less problem that we have.
- jstanley 4y ago> the same folks that attack Airbnb and gentrification at home, but are the first to jump on to the Airbnb moneyed expat lifestyle when traveling. Are you sure they're the same people? It is a classic mistake to lump everyone you've ever disagreed with into a single group and then lampoon the group for its contradictions.
- RRL 4y agoThis (subset) of the people who attack Airbnb and gentrification at home.
- PuppyTailWags 4y agoI have certainly seen the very same people express concern about gentrification but then will also go out of their way to book airbnb or airbnb-style accommodations for travel because it feels more authentic than a hotel.
- gusgus01 4y agoThis feels like a corollary of the concept of "Voting with your wallet", which is a debatable concept at best. Individual actions in the face of corporations like airlines and airbnb won't affect the company. It's only going to negatively impact your life. Working on systemic change is the answer.
- cryptonector 4y agoall the private jet-set elites join the chat
- jay_kyburz 4y agoI just got back from a trip to Cairns and the reef is basically gone in the few locations I visited. 20 years ago it was like swimming in a Disney movie with Nemo. Now you might as well be swimming off the rocks at Batemans Bay. The 21/22 bleaching event has finally killed the reef I think. https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/ulmgcb/leaked_draft_map_of_bleaching_damage_to_the_great/ https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/ulmgcb/leaked_dr... Found this today too. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/10/devastating-90-of-reefs-surveyed-on-great-barrier-reef-affected-by-coral-bleaching-in-2022?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/10/devastat...
- titzer 4y agoThis is so depressing. I was never diver, and now it looks like that too is going to be a thing of the past.