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."

54 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 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"
    2. 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*

    3. 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.
    4. Re:Nice! by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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".

      That's because we don't set the fines according to sane economic principles. We set them as a slap on the wrist, forgetting that in esscence, a corporation is a sociopath, so that we cannot appeal effectively to 'the right thing'. The fine is seen as nothing more than the low bidder on the disposal problem. Just bpart of the cost of doing business.

      The correct formula for the fine is Cr/p+Cc where Cr is the cost of proper disposal, p is the probability of being caught, and Cc is the ACTUAL cost of cleanup AND proper disposal. No exceptions even if we have to liquidate the company to do it. That way, doing the wrong thing will always average out to being at least twice as expensive as doing it right. Doing it right becomes the low bidder.

      Before the far right inevitably objects that liquidating the company is bad for the economy, think of the big boost it will be for the cleanup and disposal industries.

    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. Cyanide Fishing ?? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess I'll switch my usual Filet-O-Fish for a Big Mac.

    1. Re:Cyanide Fishing ?? by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Informative

      iirc they use them to get fish for to sell as pets(the fish will go out for a while or get dizzy).

      the fish need to be sold fast though, as catching them in this way isn't that healthy.

      it's a stupid way to fish for the extremely shortsighted or careless(or for people who don't know that they're just destroying their own long term livelihood doing it).

      i think tnt fishing is used more with fish you want to catch for eating(easier anyways).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Cyanide Fishing ?? by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I guess I'll switch my usual Filet-O-Fish for a Big Mac.

      Indeed. A few years back, I was working with an NGO out in Ghana, West Africa. One day, seeing all of the piles of dried fish for sale in the market, I asked one of my local friends how they caught so many fish. He replied "Oh, its simple. They pour DDT into a lake, all of the fish float to the surface".

      I was shocked; I asked him whether they knew that DDT was nasty stuff, and in particular a cumulative poison. He said "Yes", but pointed out that the economics of the situation, versus the fact that the poison wasn't concentrated enough in any given fish to kill someone outright, meant that DDT fishing was still commonly practiced.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    3. Re:Cyanide Fishing ?? by blackchiney · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, DDT isn't poisonous to humans (one of the reasons it was so widely used in the past in the US and other countries) but it is poisonous to a lot of other species. The reason it is banned in the US is the catastrophic effect it was having on the bald eagle (the National Bird). The UN still condones its usage in other parts of the world because it is cheap for 3rd world countries buy, and unfortunately the gains (growing foods in poor countries) outway the negatives (killing of species due to egg shell thinning).

    4. Re:Cyanide Fishing ?? by BluesConvert · · Score: 4, Informative

      The use of "cyanide fishing" is limited to collection of reef specimens for sale in the aquarium trade.

      Essentially, the collector carries what amounts to a small "box" of cyanide. Upon encountering a particularly attractive or desirable fish, he "pops" the box open, releasing a puff of cyanide around the fish. This stuns (to say the least) the fish, making it easy to capture.

      MAC (The Marine Aquarium Council) and others estimate that roughly 50% of the fish caught in this manner do not survive the process, and are dead by the time they're removed from the water, or do not survive the shipment to the local fish store. Of those that do "survive" to be sold to reef keepers, some estimates suggest that fully 80% of them die within 1 year in captivity.

      None of this even touches on the obvious damage done by "poofing" a few square meters of reef with a big cyanide cloud. While estimates of the damage done vary greatly, it's pretty certain that there aren't a whole lot of reef critters out there that enjoy the experience.

      Most of us who keep reef tanks built and grown by our own blood, sweat, and tears abhor the practice, and purchase captive raised animals ONLY, specifically to try to reduce the profit involved in such collection practices.

      In short, Save a reef...Grow your own.

  3. Reef bacteria changing by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, there was a recent article that discussed the fact that the symbiotic bacteria that made up corals was changing. So, though there's widespread bleaching of corals, it doesn't necessarily mean doom. The newer symbionts are much better adapted to warmer temperatures, so they should do better with the overall warming of the oceans.

    What's probably happening with this artificial corals is that they're being colonized by the "clade D" symbionts right off the bat, which makes it look like they're thriving.

    That's not to say that corals don't face other issues - pollution and disease most notably - but the situation may not be as dire as suspected.

  4. Coral Can Adapt by minerat · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's pretty cool and might work in some places where the coral hasn't already adapted (admittedly a LOT of places). Coral has been adapting on its own to warming conditions though. Along the Panama coast, warm water caused extensive bleaching in corals that had formed a symbiotic relationship with one type of Symbiodinium algae, known as clade C. But corals that joined forces with another algae type, clade D, that can tolerate higher temperatures, did not become bleached. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns999 96275

    --
    ...and you've eaten your pen. simply stunning.
  5. 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 b-baggins · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And human greed is unnatural in precisely what way, exactly? You didn't answer the parents question, you simply passed a moral judgement that not killing an elephant is morally superior to you.

      Lions don't have to kill an elephant; they can kill a gazelle for survival.

      So, do the Tiger's animal rights take precedence over the Elephant's animal rights?

      The truth is, this whole argument basically boils down to various schools of thought on how mankind should manage the planet. Unfortunately, the hard-core environmental movement refuses to acknowledge this, instead preaching the mantra that any environmental policy other than theirs is destructive and harmful to the planet.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
  6. A Solution in Peril? by Njoyda+Sauce · · Score: 2, Funny

    I thought the solution was in peril. Damn those sneaky barnacles!

    --

    You can only be young once, but you can be immature forever.
    1. Re:A Solution in Peril? by jepaton · · Score: 2, Funny

      Of course it is. Install Reef::Coral from CPAN and execute the following perl script:

      #!/usr/bin/perl

      use Reef::Coral;
      Reef::Coral->save("all");

    2. Re:A Solution in Peril? by gibson_81 · · Score: 2, Funny

      No no no ... that's a solution in Perl, not a solution in Peril =)

  7. 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...

    --

    1. Re:This is great and all, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The coral can't survive unless we're zapping the rocks they adhere to.

      The impression I got from the novel exercise known as "reading the article" was that the electric current was used to accelerate the growth of the coral, not to keep it alive once it had grown. I dunno, maybe my reading comprehension is way off or something...

  8. Who was it? by SightlessMind · · Score: 5, Funny

    Reefs die for many reasons: rising water temperatures, sewage flows, eutrophication, disease, and negligence.

    OK, Billy. Explain to me again what you were doing last week when you should have been feeding the reef!!!

  9. I wonder if any of the advertising agencies... by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 5, Funny
    ...will get the idea to lay such cables in patterns designed to "grow" a company's logo? Imagine the irony of a series of coral reefs that spells out
    E X X O N
    Of course, Life magazine might get a circulation boost out of it.
    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  10. Just like.... by mishmash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't this just like sinking a ship to make a new reef, just that here instead of using an explosion to kick off decomposition, they're doing it electrically?? And with the sunken ships there's an "instant structure"....

  11. IT'S ALIVE! by CountBrass · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's all we need: Franken-Coral.

    --
    Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
  12. Underwater Habitat by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Interesting
    When I was about 10 or 11 (1985), my mom bought me a book with a title something like "The Future for Kids" or some other cheesy thing. It had all sorts of cool things that we could look forward to in our future. One of them was the construction of underwater habitats using low-voltage grids to let the sea build the walls for you. I remember thinking how cool this was, and fantasizing about building my own habitat in the back yard (I lived on a bay).

    Anyway, that pretty much sums up my pointless story. But it is very cool to see this 20+ year old idea actually used for something beneficial.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    1. Re:Underwater Habitat by glenmark · · Score: 5, Informative
      When I was about 10 or 11 (1985), my mom bought me a book with a title something like "The Future for Kids" or some other cheesy thing. It had all sorts of cool things that we could look forward to in our future. One of them was the construction of underwater habitats using low-voltage grids to let the sea build the walls for you. I remember thinking how cool this was, and fantasizing about building my own habitat in the back yard (I lived on a bay).
      One of the people behind this project, Wolf Hilbertz, is actually one of the pioneers of the "seacrete" idea for growing structures underwater using electrolosys-induced accretion.
      --
      *** Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams of Which Stuff is Made ***
  13. Re:cyanide fishing... by GigsVT · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good Lord - I've heard about this - cat juggling! Stop! Stop! Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! Good. Father, could there be a god that would let this happen?

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  14. Reef Teach by rleyton · · Score: 5, Informative
    A bit of a plug this, from somebody who knew next to nothing about Coral biospheres until very recently. If, like me, you find yourself visiting Cairns, and planning on a visit to the Great Barrier Reef, you'd do very well to pay a visit to Reef Teach the night before.

    Superb, extremely interesting and enjoyable overview of coral reef biodiversity, and very good at providing an overview of the threats faced by the reef, both manmade and natural. Cheap too, and free biscuits :-)

    As their blurb states, "through understanding comes appreciation". Snorkling around the reef was one of the best parts of my recent world trip - apart from the sunburn I picked up by being too quick into the water. It was a huge shame the tour boat didn't much of a job of advising people of the threat we pose to the environment when out on the reef. If you fancy yourself as a eco-friendly geek, like me, you certainly would do well to visit Reef Teach.

    --
    ooooooh! What does this button do? - DeeDee, Dexters Lab.
  15. 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.

  16. FTA... by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Healthy corals grow quickly--up to ten times faster than normal when exposed to the Biorock Process, even in poor water conditions.

    Could this possibly be used in aquariums? It would be interesting to grow corals in an accellerated rate in an aquarium.

    1. Re:FTA... by camelreef · · Score: 5, Informative

      Those works on electricity and coral growth are originally fromm Tom Goreau.

      I have a friend who worked with Goreau and implemented the system for use in aquariums, but most importantly for his coral farm.

      Once thing not mentionned: corals growing that fast that way are quite brittle, as the critaline structure of their skeletton does not have time to be strong enough. Once electricity is not used anymore, the skeletton acquires normal solidity rapidly.

      Some pictures of a home setup:
      http://rdo.homelinux.org/gallery/saintvulbas2000/M VC_209X
      http://rdo.homelinux.org/gallery/saintvulbas2000/M VC_210X

      Do not ask what the grids are made of, this is the biggest part of the initial research...

      Nico

    2. Re:FTA... by Maltheus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why bother? Saltwater aquariums grow quite out of control on their own. After scraping coraline algae off of everything once or twice a month, you'll be glad just to have things grow slow. Or try trimming back the explosive growth of Anathelia. All of my coral quickly got too big for my tank (when I had one).

      Plus, you probably don't have enough dissovled minerals in your tank to do this without throwing off the balance of other things. It might work if you do frequent water changes, but I don't think that's too healthy for an established tank either.

  17. 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.

  18. Maybe by CiXeL · · Score: 3, Interesting

    the slowing of reef growth has something to do with earth's waning magnetic field and this occurs naturally right before a pole flip?

    Maybe the reason tank raised corals grow so well in home aquariums but dont propagate as easily in the wild is because with all those corals in proximity to each other in such a small water space they exchange the symbiotic bacteria quicker that allows them to tolerate more difficult conditions. i see some of my corals releasing them every night as brown stringy waste but to see them reuptaked into other corals you would need a microscope.

    Maybe its the fratellis.

    Maybe chunk found the police!

  19. Undersea domes by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had this "Future Technologies" book when I was a kid, and it explained how we could create pressure-safe undersea domes using this exact technology. Steel grid dome, apply electricity, wait for the minerals, then wait for the coral, eventually you'd have a water-tight, hollow dome. I think this book also talked about a nuclear reactor in every home, so maybe it wasn't 100% accurate. Still, nice to see some technologies actually being applied.

    Nicer still, if the philosophical evil which teaches people that causality is merely an arbitrary construct could be abolished. Then maybe these cyanide and dynamite fishers would learn that you cannot both have and eat your cake.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  20. 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
  21. Iron is the essential ingredient? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since artificial reefs are usually sunken wrecks I wonder if the iron constantly leaching out of these wrecks is the key element to the reefs vigor. I know oceanographers have found that sea water is generally very iron poor and that experiments with iron "seeding" have produced phytoplankton blooms.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  22. Re:Stop this by julesh · · Score: 2, Funny

    Coral is my girlfriend and this thread keeps getting weirder.

    That's because its all a bizarre dream. I mean, really. You have nothing better to do than post amusing comments on slashdot. You don't _really_ have a girlfriend! ;)

  23. In australia by CiXeL · · Score: 4, Informative

    they found specific insecticides in the great barrier reef that were killing coral. The scientists located the companies that produced them, found the farmers that purchased them in specific quantities and then had to go far inland to tell them they were killing off the great barrier reef.

    They had since gotten that situation under control but the fact remains that the farmers in north dakota are killing off all the corals in the caribbean and noone is doing anything about it. But its going to turn the water green and kill the tourism industry in the caribbean eventually. Apparently the water near the florida keys is already changing from its blue color to a greenish. The sad thing is that even if we stopped today, there is so much insecticide and fertilizers draining through the land between north dakota and the gulf that it would take decades to completely filter out. The way the reefs die is that the insecticides are weakening the coral which allows algae to gain a foothold. one the algae starts it gets fertilized by the fertilizer and takes over.

  24. You dont want by CiXeL · · Score: 3, Informative

    phytoplankton blooms in a reef. Its what turns water green and blocks out the light. Iron seeding promotes algal growth. You typically want to use that in temperate regions instead of tropical. I've talked with some of the world's foremost coral experts and they said though that they thought it could be successfully used to pull greenhouse gasses out of the atmosphere though.

  25. 5% not correct for worldwide reefs, only Maldive by Creepy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Being a diver, the 5% number by the poster was suspect to me immediately since no location I've been at (Hawaii, Aruba, Cozumel, Florida) has seen numbers close to that. Yes, a large percentage of reefs are threatened, but certainly not 95% wiped out.

    The 5% number is, according to the article, referring to the Maldive islands, a chain to the west-to-southwest of India, not worldwide.

  26. Time to sink more old ships? by MtViewGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, I'm not kidding about this.

    There has been a practice to sink the cleaned-up remains of old ships to use them to create artificial reefs. I believe that has been done off the coast of Florida with great success, and other parts of the world are doing this also.

    1. Re:Time to sink more old ships? by White+Roses · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No just ships. New Jersey used/is using decommissioned subway cars to build an artificial reef.

      --
      Do not touch -Willie
  27. Or better by CiXeL · · Score: 2, Interesting

    turn people into reefs.

    http://www.eternalreefs.com/

  28. Finally, I can dump my toxins again! by desertfish · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've been storing hundreds of gallons of polychlorinated biphenyls in the back of my shop for years. Now maybe I can dump them into the big drink again without suffering the wrath of that damned coral-hugging MIT hippie in his little Zodiac.

  29. Re:cyanide fishing... by Creepy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Potassium Cyanide fishing is a technique used to "stun" fish rather than killing them so they can be caught live and either used in aquariums or served fresh from live tanks (popular in Asia). Potassium cyanide kills the reef where it is applied, but not the fish (the level absorbed by fish is non-fatal to them).

    Dynamiting is used to stun fish (by the concussion), so it mainly kills reef by breaking it and stirring up sediment that suffocates the reef. I've always heard of this as grenade fishing, but I suppose it depends on what you're using as the explosive.

    I'm surprised shrimp and lobster trawling wasn't mentioned - trawling kills more reef every year than any other method I know of (something like 2-3x the area of the United States yearly, or between 6 and 10 million square nautical miles, depending on source). Maybe those numbers are down, or else maybe the Cyanide/Dynamite numbers are way up and they want people to take notice. I think the cyanide numbers were only about 300000 square nautical miles last year (it was something like 330000, but the marine awareness and presevation class I attended was way back in February).

  30. One Bit of Good News by 4of12 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Now if only someone could figure out a way to replenish the stocks of large ocean fish that have been reduced by 90% since 1950.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  31. biorock is expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I coached high school debaters on their ocean topic last year, and artificial coral reefs were a popular point of contention. I won't really go into detail here, but don't rely on that website as your source of information. The Coral Reef Taskforce is nothing more than a front for the creators of BioRock. The whole webpage is a large advertisement. Other makers of artificial reefs and many professional scuba diving organizations also don't really care for BioRock because it is ugly, expensive, and potentially dangerous (I guess there's a risk of shock).

    In any case, I'd love to see solutions put in place to save coral reefs, but I'm not so desperately enthusiastic that I'll heed the words of a website infomercial that proclaim BioRock to be the best solution.

    1. Re:biorock is expensive by budgenator · · Score: 2, Informative
      No modding needed here so I'll post instead.

      I've taken a pretty comprehensive look at the website and noticed that Hilbertz, invented the mineral accretion process to create structures in seawater, in 1977, and because the website was so heavy in words like patent, trademark, intelectual property ect. I decided to look a little deeper.
      A quick GOOGLE brought up Stanford's website which give us patent numbers and other interesting information such as;
      • Patent - 4,246,075, Hilbertz, W.H., Mineral accretion of large surface structures, building components and elements, Jan. 20, 1981.
        (22 years ago so it's expired i believe the period is 17yrs. IANAL)
      • Patent - 4,440,605, Hilbertz, W.H., Repair of reinforced concrete structures by mineral accretion, Apr. 3, 1984 - expired Apr. 5, 1992 due
        to failure to pay maintenance fees.
      • Patent - 4,461,684, Hilbertz, W.H., Accretion coating and mineralization of materials for protection against biodegradation, Jul.
        24, 1984 - expired July 26, 1992 due to failure to pay maintenance fees.
      • Patent - 5,543,034, Hilbertz, W.H. and Goreau, T.J., Method of enhancing the growth of aquatic organisms, and structures created thereby, Aug. 6, 1996. (7 yrs should be still good)
      • Patent - 4,623,433, Streichenberger, A.O., Process for orienting and accelerating the formation of concretions in a marine environment,
        Nov. 18, 1986 - expired Nov. 23, 1994 due to failure to pay maintenance fees.
      • Patent 4,539,078, Wingfield, W.R., Method of and Apparatus for Making a Synthetic Breakwater, Sep. 3, 1985. (18 Yrs.)
      • Patent 4,507,177, Duckworth, R. et al., Method of Stabilization of Particulate Material, Mar. 26, 1985. (18 Yrs.)
      • Patent - 4,927,504, Scala, C.R., Sculpture process, May 22, 1990 (13 yrs)
      So the basic technology is not under patent pretection, only it's application in constructing coral reefs and scuptures are.
      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  32. But why does it work? by Colonel+Panic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The article doesn't really explain why the growth was better on the artificial reefs. Is it due to the electric current somehow stimulating coral growth?

    Or perhaps it's due to the fact that these structures are very open and allow a lot of water flow throughout the structure of the reef (thus allowing greater nutrient flow to the corals).

    The attachement argument alone doesn't seem to be the only explanation: I use super-glue to attach corals in my aquarium and that works very quickly.

    Perhaps similar effects could be acheived by slight electrical stimulation of already existing reefs? More experimentation needs to be done.

    I hope that they're right, however, in their observations. It would be great if we could save some reefs. Coral reefs are among the most beautiful and diverse eco systems on the planet. It would be a shame to lose them because of our carelessness.

  33. 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
  34. Astroturf/sockpuppet alert by lairdb · · Score: 2, Informative

    Does it strike anyone else as... interesting... that the Director of the "Global Coral Reef Alliance" is also the registrant of, and one of the pricipals of, the commercial organization they're proposing as the solution?

    Hmmm.

    --
    "...and to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys."
  35. The problem with electro-accretion by patrissimo · · Score: 3, Informative
    Various people above mentioned other uses for electro-accretion, like building floating cities ala Marshall Savage. Unfortunately his energy numbers are off by a factor of 42 - he didn't integrate power over time, just used power as his energy number. It turns out to be just too inefficient to be useful for much except coral restoration. The main problem is that the accreting seament doesn't conduct, so it dissipates more and more energy as it builds up. So its way more expensive that just shipping cement from land (unless you are doing something tricky like restoring reefs).

    Details and references here. (I replied with some comments about this, but I didn't have an account so they have 0-ratings, so I got an account to post this. Hope its not too bad form to comment in multiple places.)

  36. growing concrete by aggiefalcon01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember reading in my college Chemistry book about a similar process in which one could literally "grow" concrete slabs by submerging an electrically-charged mesh into a calcium/mineral-rich solution (a.k.a. ocean water).

    Anyone else hear of this more recently?

    --
    Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.