Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Consider 'Cloud Brightening' To Preserve Australia's Great Barrier Reef (technologyreview.com)

An anonymous reader quotes MIT Technology Review: A group of Australian marine scientists believe that altering clouds might offer one of the best hopes for saving the Great Barrier Reef. For the last six months, researchers at the Sydney Institute of Marine Science and the University of Sydney School of Geosciences have been meeting regularly to explore the possibility of making low-lying clouds off the northeastern coast of Australia more reflective in order to cool the waters surrounding the world's biggest coral reef system...

Last year, as El Nino events cranked up ocean temperatures, at least 20% of the reef died and more than 90% of it was damaged. The Australian researchers took a hard look at a number of potential ways to preserve the reefs. But at this point, making clouds more reflective looks like the most feasible way to protect an ecosystem that stretches across more than 130,000 square miles, says Daniel Harrison, a postdoctoral research associate with the Ocean Technology Group at the University of Sydney. Cloud brightening is the only thing we've identified that's scalable, sensible, and relatively environmentally benign," he says... Next month, he plans to start computer climate modeling to explore whether cloud brightening could make a big enough temperature difference to help.

They're collaborating with Silicon Valley's Marine Cloud Brightening Project, which has spent the last seven years "developing a nozzle that they believe can spray salt particles of just the right size and quantity to alter the clouds. They're attempting to raise several million dollars to build full-scale sprayers." The article describes them as "one of several research groups that have started to explore whether cloud brightening, generally discussed as a potential tool to alter the climate as a whole, could be applied in more targeted ways."

17 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. What happens if this goes wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So what happens if this intervention accidentally goes wrong and utterly destroys the entire reef? Wouldn't it be something if those who claim to be helping the reef end up killing it?

    1. Re:What happens if this goes wrong? by godel_56 · · Score: 2

      So what happens if this intervention accidentally goes wrong and utterly destroys the entire reef? Wouldn't it be something if those who claim to be helping the reef end up killing it?

      If this kind of intervention has bad side effects you can simply turn it off, and everything quickly goes away.

    2. Re:What happens if this goes wrong? by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The living skin of the barrier reef has been destroyed many times, proof of this is in coral cores. The reef as we know it today, was a coastal formation several kilometres inland, not all that long ago in geologic terms. Basically environmental conditions at the reef are going outside of current coral polyp survival range, when conditions return so the coral polyp larvae that lands on the reef will thrive. Worrying about saving coral polyp housing is kind of stupid when we are going to be losing coastal human cities and the pollution from the run off from drowning cities will kill off a lot more than just coral. Fuck the reef, save our cities. You know what, by taking the right steps to prevent the rising sea levels, we can save both but lets focus on really serious shit we will be losing.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. What could possibly go wrong? by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps: Well the ocean temperature dropped enough, but turns out the local increase in salinity due to the cloud whitening machine spraying salt in to the air has killed off the entire Great Barrier Reef. Oops.

    1. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by SumDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously. Do you know why Australia has the largest invasive camel population in the world? Settlers brought camels to help build settlements, then just left them in the desert. Their populations grew to 800,000 at one point. The Saudi's often import camels from Australia to breed against because they have more desirable traits and better breeds.

      Salting the could seems like a terrible idea. Geoengineering is not going to reverse pollution, it's just going to create more of it. We need to stop buying as much stuff. We need upgradeable electronics and more durable hardware. We need to have fewer factories and consume less. Climate change isn't even a real issue. There are so many other forms of pollution that are so much worse that by focusing on carbon emissions we are only looking at a symptom and not the core problem that consumerism/consumption is depleting the planet of critical resources.

    2. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you think you are going to mitigate the effects of the current anthogenic forced warming by consuming less, you are going to be a sad panda.

      Governments might tolerate cost shifting, tax increases or other economic versions of rearranging the deck chairs, but slowing growth isn't going to fly. To the first approximation, the entire world economy is based on increase. Even stasis is bad.

      Since a constant increase is an exponential function, we've got a bit of a problem as exponential functions tend not to be long lived natural phenomena. There is a reason that economics is called the 'dismal science'.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      but turns out the local increase in salinity

      It's funny. A number one claim of climate science deniers is that a tiny increase in ppm in CO2 concentration can't make a difference, but now when a small change in salinity actually would be immeasurable (where do you think the salt comes from in the first place?) and even if it was measurable wouldn't make a difference given the wide variety of salinity in which coral thrives, ... now suddenly it's a problem.

      I get it. Scientists never have a clue about anything. Everyone else is smarter.

    4. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you really think environmental scientists trying to protect the reef won't bother to check that?

      Yes, but only because the range of coral survivability is high enough that if they manage to spray enough to matter then I would question how much global warming we would be causing by burning kerosene to get the stuff in the air in the first place.

    5. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by PJ6 · · Score: 2

      Perhaps: Well the ocean temperature dropped enough, but turns out the local increase in salinity due to the cloud whitening machine spraying salt in to the air has killed off the entire Great Barrier Reef. Oops.

      OK, I'm not Randall Monroe, but here we go -

      There is about 120 million tons of salt in a single cubic mile of seawater. A very conservative estimate of the volume of seawater around the Great Barrier Reef is 8,000 cubic miles.

      That's nearly a trillion tons of salt.

      If we dropped a BILLION TONS of salt over that area, it wouldn't change the water's salinity - by even a rounding error.

  3. Changes to the ecosys in Oz.. What could go wrong! by White_FC · · Score: 4, Informative

    We have a long list of hilariously bad attempts at introducing things for the ‘better’ in Australia, The Cane Toad, Gamba Grass and Mimosa Pigra just name a few biological examples. I hope this effort doesn’t get added to our list of failures!

  4. Re:Survival Of The Fittest by godel_56 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This reef needs to either adapt or die.

    This is just a waste of money. Trump would never allow such frivolous spending.

    Heh, the reef is worth about US$4.5 Billion a year in tourist income to Australia, not to mention it's value as a restocking nursery for surrounding commercial fisheries. Even the extreme right-wing climate change deniers might see some value in that.

  5. Re:Survival Of The Fittest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The extreme right-wing climate change deniers probably think Australia is some kind Liberal conspiracy and doesn't exist anyway. Let's just wait until the geography is settled on that one.

  6. Hubris Much? by mjr167 · · Score: 2

    On the one hand we complain about man interfering with natural processes and bemoan climate change caused by our greed and shortsightedness... on the other we propose deliberately altering the natural processes in order to cause climate change because we know better?

    And if it goes horribly wrong due to our shortsightedness and arrogance? I know several people who truly in the depths of their hearts believe that they know better, are brilliant, and can do no wrong. A little self doubt can do the world a lot of good.

    1. Re:Hubris Much? by Cyberpunk+Reality · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While geoengineering absolutely calls for a high standard of knowing what we're doing, equating it with global warming is like saying swords kill people so surgery is stupid.

      --
      Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
  7. Re:El nino would cool Great Barrier by Dantoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At the end of an El Nino the warm pool of water drifts across the Pacific just below the equator. El Nino usually breaks down during the southern hemisphere summer.

    There are times when the warmer surface water, ex El-Nino arrives at the back half of the Australian summer. The reef itself slows water movement from the north/south directions but it is fairly open to surface waters arriving from the east. This allows the warmer El Nino to start pooling inside the outer barrier.
    If the timing is right, this water is further heated and can trigger conditions where many coral species will "bleach". They eject their symbiotic algae. This does not kill the polyps. Usually the water cools enough so that the algae re-colonises and all continues as it was. Surface water temperature above 30 deg C is not uncommon in this area during summer in any normal year.

    Cooling usually happens through tidal flow and storm (including tropical revolving storms) activity. The end of December, start of January, brings spring tides that also effectively mix the water. The tides a month later are also effective. The main cooling effect comes from the south east trade winds that cool that surface waters and bring them over the reef. They also have a strong influence in reversing the East Australia Current. In El Nino conditions the trade winds are greatly reduced exacerbating the conditions.

    Making shinier clouds looks like complete and utter hokum. More chance of a benefit arising from having Trump building a wall across the equatorial pacific and having Hawaii pay for it.

  8. Re:El nino would cool Great Barrier by Namarrgon · · Score: 2

    Yes, you're wrong. The strong El Niño amplified sea surface temperatures for the Reef.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  9. Re:Survival Of The Fittest by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

    Oh, so that carrier group really was near North Korea after all!

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});