Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth Science

Hottest Ocean Temperatures in 400 years an 'Existential Threat' To the Great Barrier Reef, Report Finds 69

Ocean temperatures in the Great Barrier Reef are now the hottest in at least 400 years and are an "existential threat" to the planet's unique natural wonder , according to new scientific research. From a report: Scientists analysed long-lived corals in and around the reef that keep a record of temperature hidden in their skeleton and matched them to modern observations. The research, published in the journal Nature, used climate models to find the extreme temperatures of recent decades could not have happened without the extra greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused mostly by burning fossil fuels.

The "existential threat" to the reef from the climate crisis was "now realised," the scientists wrote, and without ambitious and rapid cuts to greenhouse gas emissions "we will likely be witness to the demise of one of the Earth's natural wonders." The research comes two weeks after the World Heritage committee decided not to place the reef, which covers an area larger than Italy, on its list of sites "in danger," saying it would consider the question again in 2026.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hottest Ocean Temperatures in 400 years an 'Existential Threat' To the Great Barrier Reef, Report Finds

Comments Filter:
  • I thought there were other threats to the Great Barrier Reef? I mean, I thought it was in danger from sediment runoff?
    • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2024 @03:24PM (#64688568)
      There are multiple crises going on and because folks thinking tends to be lateral and simplistic you take advantage of that by suggesting that there can only be one risk factor that needs to be taken into account.

      I see this with climate change but I also see it with tons and tons of regulatory scenarios especially around things like water and food safety.

      It's a variation of the argument that we can do away with the regulations that solve problems because those problems aren't happening anymore kind of sort of ignoring the reason those problems aren't happening is because we passed laws and made regulations to prevent those problems...

      The moral of the story is the civilization you enjoy every day is surprisingly fragile and there are a bunch of people out there trying to break it for their own ends.
      • I was not, "... you take advantage of that by suggesting that there can only be one risk factor that needs to be taken into account." at all, instead i was asking if there were other risks to the Great Barriere Reef, as I had watched some documentary or other some time ago, and seemed to recall them listing several threats. And I recalled that one threat that seems to be a big one all over the world, is sediment runoff.

        These things are complex systems, there are probably complex reasons for the problems w

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        The moral of the story is the civilization you enjoy every day is surprisingly fragile and there are a bunch of people out there trying to break it for their own ends.

        Pretty much.

      • Usually that makes sense, but coral is one of those things where it truly doesn't really feel like anyone knows what they're talking about when it comes to what an existential threat is. Case in point are the coral reefs around Bikini Atoll that got nuked with a hydrogen bomb (!) but still seem to be thriving today.

        Citation: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbn... [nbcnews.com], https://www.newscientist.com/a... [newscientist.com]
      • Yep. Vaccines are the best example I can make. We don't have polio epidemics anymore for a damned reason. But hey, lets stop things because what does science really know anyway. When you solve a problem so completely it no longer happens, it's much easier for people to fall into observation bias and listen to cranks saying bad things about the good things.

        The Reef though? it's dead or will be. Sad, but the oceans are going to be big pools of algae and little else in 50 years. Temps are bad but th

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • by Budenny ( 888916 )

        Runoff is a significant issue. Rising temps may be a main problem too, but they are certainly not the only one.

    • by Budenny ( 888916 )

      Yes, runoff is a significant issue.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2024 @03:12PM (#64688542)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 )
      As long as it doesn't cause problems for billionaires or old farts there isn't a lot we can do about it. For at least the next 6 to 8 years they're the only ones who get much of a say in anything and all the rest of us can do is try and limit their damage and then try and pick up the pieces.

      One of the things I really hate about listening to old people go on about kids these days is how you freaking old people have literally been in charge for the last 30 or 40 years and you made everything the way it is
      • by rossdee ( 243626 )

        "As long as it doesn't cause problems for billionaires or old farts there isn't a lot we can do about it. For at least the next 6 to 8 years they're the only ones who get much of a say in anything and all the rest of us can do is try and limit their damage and then try and pick up the pieces."

        You could always vote for someone younger than 78.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • And I know damn well the old farts on this forum although they won't admit it are all going to vote for Trump. There's a reason why Harris has to fight tooth and nail to prevent Trump from winning and installing himself is a dictator. There's a shitload of weird old men and women, mostly men on this forum, who are just bitter and angry and are looking for somebody to give them permission to be the worst fucking weirdos they could possibly be.

          Not that any of them will admit it. Seriously I challenge anyo
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • >Waterworld. Snowpiercer. *pfft*, you wish! Think 'Dune' - if we're lucky!.

      Dune's about 700 million years off. Right now, we're looking at increasingly violent and frequent storms, loss of shoreline (which is where we've built most of our cities), human migration triggering wars, and climate zones shifting faster than evolution can keep up causing mass extinctions.

      Life will be less comfortable, we may see a modest population decrease. It's not the end of the world as we know it, but for the last 10K ye

  • by CAIMLAS ( 41445 )

    Pretty crazy how this specific issue (the barrier reefs) keep being the locus of disaster focus, despite what's often contrary information.

    They just recently reported the highest levels of coral cover across two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) in over 36 years.

    https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/is-the-great-barrier-reef-making-a-comeback/

    It's always "climate change" (or global warming, or...), and lately, always CO2 (because it's the only thing they can consistently harass you about, because it's l

    • From the Wikipedia article on the Little Ice Age,

      "The NASA Earth Observatory notes three particularly cold intervals. One began about 1650, another about 1770, and the last in 1850, all of which were separated by intervals of slight warming.[7]L

      So the warmest since the Little Ice Age is entirely accurate. So how does the present compare to the Medieval Warm Period? And what was the reef doing during that time?

      • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

        So how does the present compare to the Medieval Warm Period? And what was the reef doing during that time?

        We surpassed the Medieval Warm Period temperatures twenty-five years ago.

        Today, a year with MWP temperatures would be considered unusually cold.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Pretty crazy how this specific issue (the barrier reefs) keep being the locus of disaster focus, despite what's often contrary information.

      They just recently reported the highest levels of coral cover across two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) in over 36 years.

      Yeah, but that "recently" was 2 years ago. Last year "recovery has paused" IOW small decrease. And this year?

      AIMS’ Annual Summary Report on Coral Reef Condition for 2023/24 (published 7th August 2024) found that hard coral cover has increased in all three regions (Northern, Central and Southern), and is at regional highs in two of the three regions.

      But most of the underwater surveys were conducted before and during the recent mass bleaching event, one of the most extensive and serious on record. As such, results don’t reflect how many corals survived or died following the bleaching.

      That "recent" is a few months ago (Australian summer).

      Scientists don't do surveys so you can ignore the results you don't like.

  • Not just the GBR (Score:5, Interesting)

    by vell0cet ( 1055494 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2024 @05:14PM (#64688862)
    Anyone who has been scuba diving for a long time knows from personal experience that coral reefs have pretty much all gone brown all over the world.
    Look up any pictures of reefs from ten years ago to today. It's reefs everywhere. I used to dive regularly all over the place. They've all been devastated.
    • Look up any pictures of reefs from ten years ago to today. It's reefs everywhere. I used to dive regularly all over the place. They've all been devastated.

      Note quite all. There are still some reefs 'near' Indonesia that are in fantastic shape. We need to try harder if we are going to get ALL of them. Or, we could just wait a few more years...

  • The GBR is at the cooler limit of what corals like, ones nearer the equator thrive quite happily in much warmer water, including an enclosed bay in Hawaii.

  • Say the Earth is actually the estimated 4.5 BILLION years old that would be but a blink of an eye in the age of the Earth.
  • Corals are several hundred million years old, they survived the comet which killed of the dinosaurs 67 million years ago, they survived the 300-400-500 foot sea level rise 10-15,000 years ago. They've survived continents splitting, merging, and shifting.

    And they're going to die off from a 2-3 temperature rise?

    Yeah, right. Pull the other one, Wilbur.

    Anyone who believes this crap is a negative information voter.

  • (1) Do we really have firm evidence of local ocean temperatures going back 400 years?

    (2) What about temperature fluctuations before that? Were there any, how big were they, what effects did they have?

    Its yet another recycled piece from the Guardian by the way. Curious that Slashdot never recycles pieces from other UK publications, say the Spectator or the Telegraph. They have lots of pieces on climate and net zero, but they never make a reference. Wonder why.

    • Of course not from uncalibrated mercury thermometers dipped into the ocean by Captain Cook and associates, but by analyzing isotope distributions directly in the coral.

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Working...