Slashdot Mirror


Nuked Coral Reef Bounces Back

sm62704 writes "I found this New Scientist article interesting, as I was actually alive (albeit very small) when Bikini Atoll was H-bombed. The article says that the reason the reefs are now flourishing is because they are mostly undisturbed by humans, who are afraid of the radiation. Background levels there are now 'similar to that at any Australian city,' while nearby islands haven't been so lucky.'When I put the Geiger counter near a coconut, which accumulates radioactive material from the soil, it went berserk,' says Maria Beger of the University of Queensland in Australia."

37 of 332 comments (clear)

  1. Reality TV? by Barny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would sure as hell make survivor more interesting.

    "oh, and by the way, anything you eat is likely radioactive"

    Maybe make the first episode with reality TV execs on the island....

    Queue Gilligan's Island jokes too.

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
  2. Radiation induced changes to coconuts by Alain+Williams · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Were there lots/little/none ? Oh, come on - that would be one of the most interesting things to tell us. We are all so worried about ''nuclear power fading your genes'' - we now have a 60 year experiment that could tell us about long term effects but they are silent.

    1. Re:Radiation induced changes to coconuts by chuckymonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That is an interesting idea, to see the genetic divergence that radiation may have caused. You call always look at Chernobyl though for a glimpse as to what radiation has done to the wildlife there. As far as I know, it hasn't affected it all that much. There is a higher incidence of fatal mutation, but over all what I have read is that it hasn't had a huge impact. Another site that you could look at is Rocky Flats in Colorado. While us humans that contaminated the hell out of the place are trying to figure out how to warn future generations into the thousands of years about what we did there, the wildlife has reclaimed it as their own. It's a wildlife refuge now and as far as anyone can tell there hasn't been that much impact on the animals there. The problem is though that we're only seeing the first few generations of life since these places have been contaminated. We don't know if it will build up over time and cause radical genetic diversion or if life will adapt to it, it could take a very long time to see the effects of what we have done. Oh, and if you're curious about some of the other things that we have done check out a book called The World Without Us, fascinating read.

      --
      "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    2. Re:Radiation induced changes to coconuts by Psychotria · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am not sure that variations in genetic material gathered from the site has been studied yet. You are correct, however, that this is a very interesting thing to be studying. The fact that corals seem to have recolonised successfully (albeit with less diversity) is 'possibly' due to nearby atolls "seeding" the affected areas. The nearby atolls were obviously affected by radiation as well, and therefore subject to possible genetic mutations. Therefore, measuring the difference in genes between the nearby places and ground-zero might show no difference at all (because the mutated corals etc from nearby "seeded" the ground-zero area). I am not sure how this would be resolved, unless the baseline samples were taken from further away, where they were not irradiated... which leads to further problems (the genetic difference--if any is measured--may be caused by other factors)...

    3. Re:Radiation induced changes to coconuts by Super+Jamie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Look up what's going on around Chernobyl at the moment.

      Whilst humans can't go anywhere near it, or the town of Pripyat, many species of plant and animals have flourished in the 30-odd years since the infamous meltdown. These species display no visible deformations, and continue to breed and live undisturbed by humans.

      Almost as if they had just... evolved to cope with the massive doses of radiation they cop every day.

    4. Re:Radiation induced changes to coconuts by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Informative

      These species display no visible deformations, and continue to breed and live undisturbed by humans.

      Well, to be fair, I'll mention that one study involving birds found that the chicks of birds nesting in the sarcophagus had double the expected deformity rate over birds nesting outside of Chernobyl.

      Given that a number of the bird species are the ones where the chicks gradually push out the others such that only one survives out of a laying of 2-6 eggs, the effect of the extra deformities was essentially noise, statistically insignificant to the species.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    5. Re:Radiation induced changes to coconuts by Vexar · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Mr. Williams, kindly rethink your statement about silence regarding 60 years of nuclear power. There is no "they." It is not that anyone is silent, it is that you are not reading what is out there.

      If anyone wants to know where the #1 source of airborne, man-made radiation is, they need go no further than a lump of coal. Nuclear power plants require employees to wear film strips, much like those we see in cameras. The strips change chemistry and appearance with radiation. Ask a nuke worker how their rad levels are. They know. Oh, and if such a worker ever gets a medical treatment involving radioactive material, be it a barium enema (whee!) or chemotherapy, they would set off all the safety sensors in the facility if they went onsite, and trigger an immediate shutdown (unless you're from Soviet Russia, and you disabled the safety features because you wanted to try an exciting experiment in Chernobyl, which didn't work 4 months ago, because those safety triggers shut you down, but this time, you turned them off!).

      Back to the lump of coal. The average coal plant, say 1000 MW, produces 5.2 tons of uranium (6% fissile), and 12.8 tons of thorium. Where does it go? Up into the atmosphere, as soot. Where does it come from? It is a rock. It comes from a dark hole in the ground, maybe W. Virginia. Nuclear power plants are closed systems. They don't combust materials and breathe oxygen. Every once in a while, the control rods need to be replaced, along with some pipes and such. The equivalent nuclear plant to said coal plant produces one standard shipping container full of rad "waste" per year. All reactors designed in N. America and many in Europe and Japan are planned with storage space for the rad waste, on-site.

      One thing we could do, is once every 10 years, fill up a small freighter with the rad waste containers of the world's reactors, ship it to the Bikini Atoll, and drop the load 30 feet offshore. The metal will corrode eventually, but before that it will be covered with coral.

      You know, I don't care a hoot about carbon dioxide, it has never done me much harm. Ozone is produced en masse by lightning strikes in the troposphere, and nobody can beat the mess made by a single, violent volcanic eruption. I do want to see the end of combustive power systems, because we don't need competition for oxygen. Living where I do, I can vouch for my corner of the planet and say it ain't getting any warmer. I do care about airborne radioactive particulates (aka soot) and rad waste. The coconut trees and oceanic coral have proven their value to society, I think we should reward them with a higher status in our world culture by making them the guardians of rad waste. If a lone coconut should travel thousands of leagues, well, shoot, it's not going to hurt anyone more than a barium enema. At least it isn't in the air.

      Why did I put the waste of rad waste in quotes, you wonder? Well, from where do you think the barium and iodine and whatever ungodly stuff is in chemotherapy comes? A hole in the ground? No, that waste serves medical purposes. The rest of it could be put into a different reactor design, in accordance with the reactor families planned out in the 40's and 50's, but nobody has spent the research dollars to go far with them.

      Final note: I heard a rumor that the prescription drug "Lunesta" contains a coconut extract. Is that why they have glowing butterflies in their ads?

  3. obvious next step by evwah · · Score: 5, Funny

    now we just have to bomb the shit out of Australia so our scientists can proudly proclaim "these coral reefs are far LESS radioactive than any Australian city!"

    1. Re:obvious next step by Marbleless · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... and nuking them would be considered as major improvements to some of our cities ;)

      --
      --I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
    2. Re:obvious next step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      There's the Australian work ethic for you :P

  4. berserk? by polar+red · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I put the Geiger counter near a coconut, which accumulates radioactive material from the soil, it went berserk. How did You defend yourself from that coconut?
    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    1. Re:berserk? by zoogies · · Score: 5, Funny

      We gripped it by the husk. It's a simple matter of weight ratios, really.

    2. Re:berserk? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Luckily the coconut had panicked the turn before and dropped its weapon - and as everyone knows, nonhuman combatants are unable to pick up a weapon once they've dropped it. The researchers proceeded to use the Stun Rod on the coconut, but it later died because the base didn't have a Containment Unit.

      (Okay, so most /.ers are not going to get that one. Who cares?)

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  5. Sinister translation: by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    REAlly, I think it proves that after we screw things up royally on this planet to the point where we are no longer able to live on it, it won't take the earth too long to bounce back and thrive once more. Hopefully the next set of inhabitants on this planet will look after it better than we do.

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    1. Re:Sinister translation: by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      REAlly, I think it proves that after we screw things up royally on this planet to the point where we are no longer able to live on it, it won't take the earth too long to bounce back and thrive once more. Unfortunately, we're also great at building bunkers and other highly isolated environments. Even if we got hit with a dinosaur-killer i imagine we'd bounce back better than most animals. If we've killed ourself off, the world has to be really really well wiped.
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  6. Anthropologists As Well As Zoologists by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For those of you who are anthropologists as well as zoologists, it should be mentioned that there were native inhabitants of these islands that were forced to move before the tests.

    We did it to Native Americans on the continental United States as well but it really bears mentioning that there was a pretty gross injustice paid to these peaceful peoples in the name of atomic testing. I remember watching this footage on an ABC special as a kid and I luckily recorded it so I could watch it over and over again. When watching project Baker, I kept thinking "Wow, that's impressive, that was somebody's home."

    I suppose I'll be called a self-hating liberal but I believe we should never forget the price we pay for the weapons we hold. These weapons that were supposed to be the end of war aren't and any future horror developed to stop war won't be the end to war either.

    Just imagine what the look on your face would be if someone showed up and told you to evacuate your state because it was now going to be used for nuclear testing. You probably wouldn't be very happy to leave your home in the name of warfare.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Anthropologists As Well As Zoologists by Mantaar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's why I'm always saying Ahmadine-whatever should have his own atomic weapons.
      Seriously, Iran may be as islamistic as it gets, but they're humans after all and hopefully not stupid enough start a nuclear war.

      Their opponents however, who are trying to do everything to prevent them from producing A-bombs in the first place, are not to be trusted that much, because they (America, Israel) are the ones that have started wars in the last couple of years (the latter only in "defense", but I think they/their PR may be able to produce one such "defense" case quickly).

      On the other hand, there shouldn't be yet another A-armed nation. But that's a vicious circle: how is a nation without A-bombs going to defend itself against, say, America? It's nearly impossible to defend yourself against America at all these days - if don't have that bomb, there's nothing you can do. If you do have it, however, it's likely you're not gonna be attacked in the first place.

      Maybe this is the reason we haven't seen a war in Iran yet. They are afraid. Uhm... on the other hand it's more likely to be due to the pain in the neck that is Iraq and the upcoming elections in America.

      I must admit that those are speculations I'm really just pulling out of my ass... but hey, that's what the comments threads are for, aren't they? Oh dear, I can se the "leftie"/"commie"/"antisemite"-responses rushing in... but please, in the name of whatever deity you believe in: a Semite may just as well be an Arab, so be correct and call me anti-Judaist. Which is not what I am, as I call some Jews my friends... btw: this article has not gotten the publicity it deserves.

      --
      I'm an infovore...
  7. You joke, but ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was rather stunned when, planning my trip to AU a few years ago, I realized that ONE nuclear sub could take out the whole country!
    Or at least send it to Mad Max-land.

    Physically AU is huge. Roughly the size of the US. Superimposing a map of one on the other gives fairly accurate driving times and distance calculations.
    Demographically it is very very small.

    I also figured out the real problem is water. While the US, EU, and CN have large navigable rivers running deep into their continents, AU has nothing to bring water to the center of the country (or more accurately there isn't enough rain in the center to drain and form navigable rivers).
    AU could be a super-power if it had enough water to support a population of 300 million. Instead it is so dry they are lucky to have 1/10 of that at about 22 million.

  8. Re:Really? by snkline · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or they could be rated AA-grade! Maybe the radiation pre-tenderizes them. Sorta like they have been cooking really really slowly their entire lives.

  9. Re:Radiation similar to that at any Australian cit by cheater512 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Its not too bad but it does cause some interesting side effects.

    What? You thought kangaroos were natural? :P

  10. what that tells you by nguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Animal life around Chernobyl is also doing well. That's not an indication that radiation is harmless (most animals are shorter lived than humans, so they can tolerate more radiation), it's an indication that human presence is even more harmful than radiation.

  11. Better article and detail by tick-tock-atona · · Score: 5, Informative
    More informative article here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080415101021.htm

    The full story is that although some of the corals have bounced back remarkably, the nuking has also resulted in the localised extinction of some more sensitive sensitive species

    However the research has also revealed a disturbingly high level of loss of coral species from the atoll. Compared with a famous study made before the atomic tests were carried out, the team established that 42 species were missing compared to the early 1950s. At least 28 of these species losses appear to be genuine local extinctions probably due to the 23 bombs that were exploded there from 1946-58, or the resulting radioactivity, increased nutrient levels and smothering from fine sediments. Article also has some good stats on the nuking itself:

    One of the most interesting aspects is that the team dived into the vast Bravo Crater left in 1954 by the most powerful American atom bomb ever exploded (15 megatonnes - a thousand times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb). The Bravo bomb vapourised three islands, raised water temperatures to 55,000 degrees, shook islands 200 kilometers away and left a crater 2km wide and 73m deep.
  12. Radiation and life by Knutsi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I once heard something fascinating. After the Chernobyk accident, the radioactive cloud that contaminated (mainly) the north of Norway caused allot of fear in people, and for people's health. The gouvernment continued to slaughter and burn massive amounts of raindeer and livestock.

    A friend later told me that the meat was actually fully usable, and that it's destruction may have been unnecessary. She suggested we should have fed it to the elderly population, which did not have time to develop cancer from the meat anyhow.

    There will be allot of talk in this discussion about the fear of radiation, and that is why this discussion is so good. Life does well with increased radiation! Humans don't however, by virtue of the way we look at human society and human worth. What it does say however, is that fear of nuclear energy, a power source that may have dramatically less consequence for life on this planet than most other energy sources, prevents us from progressing in the energy debate! (and maybe also in space exploration, given worries of launching nuclear-powered space craft)

    Check this news item for a similar case to the coral reef in the article.

    "People in the first world have convinced themselves that chemicals and radiation stand in the way of their personal immortality"
    - James Lovelock

  13. Coconuts migrate on their own... by quibbler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even without husk-gripping, coconuts move... they're supposed to, thats how they get from island to island...

    I think this is a note to self: do NOT eat coconuts that you find on the seashore. I wonder if anyone's realized that little issue...

    1. Re:Coconuts migrate on their own... by moosesocks · · Score: 4, Funny

      Even without husk-gripping, coconuts move... they're supposed to, thats how they get from island to island...

      I think this is a note to self: do NOT eat coconuts that you find on the seashore. I wonder if anyone's realized that little issue... This is only true if the island's swallow population is sufficiently large.
      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  14. Re:vacation by Knutsi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Would be interesting to look at how long expected development time for the cancers you could get from these coconuts would be. Maybe for people over 65-70, the food is perfectly safe to eat! (:

  15. Yeah but.. by PinkyDead · · Score: 5, Funny

    With the giant mutant anemones and sponges with teeth and the crushing and the laser eyes!

    To people of Japan, your cities are no longer safe. Run for your lives. The coral is back, and this time it's pissed .... and mutant.

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  16. Re:Nuke em all by pipatron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That has actually been a "jokingly serious" suggestion. Increasing the background radiation in an area so humans don't dare to use it or any products from that area. Works great with Chernobyl for example, the forest around the area has a lot more animal life now than before the incident.

    --
    c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
  17. It's cool by 2.7182 · · Score: 4, Funny

    that we totally defeat the Bikini Atoll in a nuclear war!! Woo go USA

    It was silly though, back when US sentiment was so against Bikini Atoll, that everyone decided to change the name "Bikini" to "Freedom suit."

  18. Re:vacation by mh1997 · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I put the Geiger counter near a coconut, which accumulates radioactive material from the soil, it went berserk,
    Seeing a coconut go berserk because a giger counter was near it would scare the crap out of me. No wonder nobody wants to go there. Would the coconuts act in a calm and mature manner if a tourist didn't bring a geiger counter?
  19. Re:vacation by frisket · · Score: 4, Funny
    Antecedent Object references the direct object (Geiger counter), not the indirect (coconut).

    A Giger counter presumably counts paintings.

  20. Swallows could make it worse by BiggerBadderBen · · Score: 5, Funny

    I imagine that a pair of swallows, either African or European, could take one of these coconuts quite far.

  21. Re:That may happen by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Yurk. Who would eat a coconut that floated for days on the sea ?


    I would. Coconuts have evolved in such a way that their thick, outer hull keeps it afloat should it happen to fall into water. Coconuts can float for hundreds (thousands?) of miles to distant beaches without incident. The tough, inner object that we find in stores is kept completely dry during this time. The white insides and milk are perfectly safe to eat.

    Except for the radiation.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  22. Re:That may happen by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Informative

    and the increased cancer risk that comes with eating it is minor, and irrelevant.

    This. One of the fun things back in HS was to take the radiation detector to various common items. Heck, Brazil Nuts, Lima Beans, and Bananas are radioactive. So aren't carrots and potatoes. Potassium, an essential nutrient is radioactive.

    An extra dose of radiation doesn't mean that somebody is going to die from cancer. It all depends on the dose.

    rather than lengthening the life expectancy of a few unlucky individuals by a matter of days on average.

    Unless the individual is making said radioactive coconuts a staple of their diet; I'd say minutes is more likely.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  23. Re:vacation by MikeyTheK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ha. Ha. Here's the deal on Bikini: 1) You can't live there. You can visit on a dive excursion. Everything is brought with you. There are bunks in the buildings, but that's all 2) The radiation is in the form of cesium, which is extremely water soluble. As a result, it is present above the waterline in the sand and soil (but not at the surface, as rainwater constantly washes it away). In addition, since cesium is SO soluble, all traces away from the shore are long gone. So it's safe to dive the wrecks, which are spectacular. 3) Previous attempts to get the cesium to bond to other elements, e.g. iodine, did not succeed as planned, and the vegetation continues to suck it up. 4) In 1946 there were around 150 residents that were relocated to Kili Island and to Ejit, so they'd like to get home some time, too. 5) If you ever get the chance, cough up the cash, learn how to dive, and GO. Most of the wrecks are deep, but the water in the lagoon is as clear as you are going to see, and the wrecks are pristine. I've done diving at a military-controlled atoll, where there is very little traffic, fewer tourists, and an active SCUBA community. It may be the best diving I have ever done.

    --
    Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
    Never forget: 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
  24. Re:That may happen by electrictroy · · Score: 4, Funny

    >>>"Background levels at Bikini Atoll are now 'similar to that at any Australian city,'"

    Note to self:
    Don't visit an Australian city.

    --
    The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
  25. Re:That may happen by batquux · · Score: 4, Funny

    Coconuts tend to be blown off of trees during storms. Then they float a LONG distance. Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?