Slashdot Mirror


A Solution for Coral Reefs in Peril

Alien54 writes "At the recent Coral Reef Symposium in Bali, Indonesia, scientists concluded that most of the world's ocean reefs have been killed or severely damaged with the remainder in certain jeopardy. Disastrous reverses in reef health threaten marine biodiversity, tourism, fisheries and shore protection worldwide. Reefs die for many reasons: rising water temperatures, sewage flows, eutrophication, disease, and negligence. A reef ecosystem that took hundreds of years to grow can be destroyed in a single afternoon by dredging, dynamite or cyanide fishing. But there is a solution. In pilot installations in Mexico, Panama, Indonesia, Maldives, Thailand, and Papua New Guinea, artificial reefs have been built where corals grow rapidly even in stressed environments. Applying a low voltage electrical current (completely safe for swimmers and marine life) to a submerged conductive structure causes dissolved mineral crystals in seawater to preciptate and adhere to that structure. Surviving coral fragments are mechanically attached, and end up doing very well indeed. During the 1998 warming, fewer than 5% of the natural reef corals survived. But on the artificial reefs, 80% of corals not only survived, they flourished. Corals from these reefs are now recolonizing the surrounding natural habitats."

14 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. Nice! by oneiron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the kind of technology our species needs to invest more time into. Bringing this planet back to life. Not that we should abandon our adventures into more efficient living for ourselves, but we owe it to our planet to keep it alive if we have the ability to do so.

    In the distant future, when we venture beyond this rock, do we really want to leave behind a giant ball of toxic tar orbiting the sun? It seems like we're on the verge of doing just that...if we even make it that far.

    1. Re:Nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      We don't have to keep the planet alive. The planet will keep itself alive. If we cause too many problems, we will die off, not the planet.


      I can't believe how arrogant some people are. Your post has to be one of the stupidest things I've read here in a while.

    2. Re:Nice! by danharan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nitpick...

      There doesn't need to be an opposition between doing what's good for humans and doing work like this.

      Corals are good carbon sinks. They are essential as breakwaters- pretty essential if you live by the coast line. As fish nurseries, wherever they are being rebuilt harvests could increase. Corals could also be a good source of income for many coastal people through tourism and sustainable harvesting - and we benefit from their beauty both directly and in our aquariums.

      This is a lot like just about every environmental issue I've looked at: the benefits to humans of acting in a responsible way are so enormous that it is absurd to oppose the care of our environment and the care of our habitat. We owe it to *ourselves* to take care of our habitat- our planet will do just fine, even after we're gone.

      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    3. Re:Nice! by LinuxTard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I may just be a tad cynical in my old age, but I don't see the corporations of America revitalizing the planet until there is a clear profit in doing so. Even the general "slap on the wrist" fines that offenders receive for polluting hardly stem the tide when costs for ridding themselves of waste properly are "too high".

      OK, off of my soapbox, bank to the cynicism.

      If there was a new planet to colonize -and- it had natural resources to exploit I could see the corps pulling up stakes on Earth and running roughshod on New Terra.

      *dons flameproof suit*

    4. Re:Nice! by kmhebert · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is a pretty farfetched statement. Better to last a few BILLION more years on our home planet by taking good care of it than to watch massive and irreversible extinctions of plant and animal life over the course of a few hundred years due to apathy and greed. I liked this article quite a bit and I think that if we have the means to repair our oceans, of course we should do so. I feel that we should be smart enough to both enjoy the benefits of industrial society as well as ensure that the side effects of industry do not destroy our environment. There is no downside to clean air and water, industry should support these goals as well even if it trims their bottom line somewhat.

      --
      Regular Meta Moderators are not more likely to get mod points.
    5. Re:Nice! by teromajusa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And here's yet another nitpik:

      In a few billion years the universe itself will cool down to uniform starless waste. So it seems the goal of spreading life from earth is as irrelevant as any other. Now that we've established that its all going to come to naught, I think fixing up the planet is a more appealing activity than being spores.

  2. Natural? by Davak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wire laced with electrical current to simulate a reef? What's so natural about that? Maybe the reefs are supposed to die down to 5% every once in a while.

    Remember the problems we have from preventing forest fires?

    Davak

    1. Re:Natural? by FlipmodePlaya · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I often here praising the 'natural'. People who think 'natural' pills are better than ones not marketed as such, for example. People who think it's crucial that we preserve nature are the worst, though. They talk about how we need to 'give back to our planet' by protecting species and leaving nature's wonders untouched... I don't understand, are we not natural? Something a tree or a lion does is natural, but our actions are not? If the Lion were to kill an endangered species of Elephant (or whatever), it's natural. If we do it it's murder of the worst kind? Is it a religeous belief, that God created the planet for us? It seems like such 'naturalists' aren't religeous...

      I'm not trying to flame such people, as I honestly feel I don't understand them. Maybe if I were better educated on the subject I could pass better judgement...

    2. Re:Natural? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Are you retarded? You must realize we can't survive if we kill off the rest of the biosphere. Right?

  3. This is great and all, but... by keiferb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What happens when our entire ecosystem becomes "artificial"? The coral can't survive unless we're zapping the rocks they adhere to. I shudder to think how we're going to keep the elephants around...

    --

  4. Plurals. by irn_bru · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Plural of Coral is Coral. This might seem silly - I don't make the rules - but that's how it is.

    You have it wrong in the title and wrong in the last line or article.

  5. Re:In other news... by Vexler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does the phrase "Wipe After Yourself" mean anything to you? The human species, more than any other, has been directly responsible for vast amounts of pollutants spewed into the environment. So, yeah, it is our problem to solve because we are the ones who caused it.

  6. Lazy thinking by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Plants and animals die every day, and have for millions of years. All of a sudden it's a problem we need to solve?"

    They have but we are the equivalent of a massive meteor strike. We accomplish in one generation what used to happen in a million years. Since we supposedly have the power to think and claim to be capable of moral choices I'd say just throwing our hands up in the air is a pretty lame and lazy excuse.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  7. The delusion of the conclusion by ErikTheRed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course, any time you see an article that begins along the lines of "scientists have concluded" or "scientists agree" you can pretty much bet that it's a reprinted press release of some group, there's an agenda attached, and your bullshit detector should go into high gear. That's not to say that there's a nonzero probability of truth, just that you should be extremely cautious.

    There aren't many "conclusions" in science - even in the areas that lend themselves to the most concrete of measurements (such as physics), refinements and changes never seem to stop. In areas like biology and climatology where the relationships between the data sources and even the data itself are extremely complex and difficult to understand and interpret, it's pretty safe to call bullshit on anyone who claims to have an answer so perfect that we can "conclude" inquiry into the area.

    Unfortunately (for serious environmentalists), many of these bullshit artists are found in the environmental movement where they are perfectly safe because the mere act of questioning them is treated as heresy. One can even speculate that the environmental movement has merely taken over the "the world is ending; you must follow us to be saved - and by the way, if any of you goddamned heathens question us, we'll burn your heretecal ass at the stake" meme from organized religion. This is also often phrased along the lines of "the situation is too serious for debate [or more research]! We must act [spend / offer up tithes to the goddess Giaa] now!" There has always been (and probably always will be) a large group of people whom, for some bizzare reason, want to believe the world is about to end and that they (the annointed / enlightened ones) must Act Now to save it. Organized religion has exploited this for centuries, and now the bulk of the environmental movement has jumped on the bandwagon.

    Serious environmental research and debate is crucial for us having a nice place to exist and that's important (and worth protecting, spending money on, etc), but watching a bunch of sheep run around bleating about the end of the world (or the crucial coral reefs) makes me nausious. That being said, I'm all for reducing pollution and keeping an eye on things, but not under the auspices of alarmist sensationalism.

    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana