Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 204 posts

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#41

Post by TeMPOraL »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #39
vacri wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The humans that survive such an event will not be the smartphone engineers, but the subsistence farmers.

You don't need smartphone engineers just repair techs. We already have billions of smartphones, millions of which will last a century with proper care. There are palm pilots that still work today. But also as the world collapses a thousand motivated people could and would relocate a basic computer fab to a safe location. Guaranteed.

> millions of which will last a century with proper care

I strongly doubt that. Electronics are not designed to last that long; components age. Also, planned obsolescence is king these days.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#43

Post by enraged_camel »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #28
Red_Tarsius wrote: post #25

This is what keeps me up at night. If we don't find an efficient way to extract CO2 and methane from the atmosphere, I fear that mankind might go extinct.

Mankind is absurdly resilient. We are like rats or cockroaches but a hundred times more adaptable. Billions of people could die. We might lose 99% of species. But human extinction is out of the question. We could live in bubbles of air under the ocean huddled around nuclear reactors if we needed to. Roaches couldn't do that (without our help).

I believe the adaptability of humans is greatly exaggerated, mostly thanks to our hubris. We believe we will be able to use our intelligence to figure a way out of pretty much any problem. However, the fact of the matter is that our species has never been through any extinction-level events that would truly test our adaptability. Sure, we can adapt to localized or short-term problems extremely well, but how would we fare in an event the level of, say, the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event?

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#45

Post by enraged_camel »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #39
vacri wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The humans that survive such an event will not be the smartphone engineers, but the subsistence farmers.

You don't need smartphone engineers just repair techs. We already have billions of smartphones, millions of which will last a century with proper care. There are palm pilots that still work today. But also as the world collapses a thousand motivated people could and would relocate a basic computer fab to a safe location. Guaranteed.

How are you going to charge those devices reliably and consistently? What knowledge-bases will you be able to connect to with no Internet?

Our technology stack is like a house of cards. Smartphones are at the top. There's no way they will be of any use in the event that the foundation and the walls collapse.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#46

Post by Arizhel »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #37
Arizhel wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly right about maintaining this level of technology. Looking around at most people I know and am surrounded by, there's just no way we could keep the technology level we have now without such a large population: most people are just too inept. Kill off 99% and there won't be enough people to even keep the stuff we have working, let alone come up with anything new. Don't bet on governments having anything…

You don't need to keep all of it working. Most of it can fall apart. During the decline, important things will retract, move around, be protected. Look at what happened in the Holocaust. European Jewish culture wasn't wiped out. It was dealt a massive blow. Many important things were lost. But the community closed ranks and certain assets were protected too. This apocalyptic thinking is something you only do if you'r…

"European Jewish culture" is not a technology. It doesn't take a huge population base for a group of people to remember their roots and culture and save a lot of it. But most people are not technologists. Sure, there's a few smart people in a million, but that's not enough to maintain things: medical technology, transportation technology, computer technology, etc.

Want a historical example? Look at the fall of the Roman Empire (and also older empires before them). They knew how to make concrete, huge buildings, aquaducts, plumbing, etc. It was all lost when the society collapsed, and that didn't involve killing off most of them, only having them give up on it and move away, and give up on the idea of specialization of labor. It took 1000 years or more to regain the level of technology they had, and really they never did figure out how to make concrete that good until modern times.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#47

Post by crawrey »

I grew up on the coast of the Great Barrier Reef in North Queensland and I can say that the current state of the reef is almost unrecognisable to what it was 20-odd years ago.

While a large part of this damage has been caused by rising sea temperatures, another large component is due to the run-off from agriculture, refineries and mining. The latter being a directly contributed by the local population.

The region is currently in a economic recession and many of the mines and refineries have either slowed or ceased operation. Anecdotally, the sentiment of the population affected by (un)employment by these industries are either unaware or ignorant towards the damage that the industries are having on this sensitive ecosystem. Instead they are consumed by how they are going to make ends meet.

In this environment, it is unthinkable to allow Adani expand their Carmichael mine to further exacerbate the situation. Add to this, that a former Adani board member is appointed to evaluate the environmental impacts of the expansion. Adani is the biggest direct threat to Australia, both environmentally and economically and they are in talks with the government to be provided with a $1 billion tax-payer funded railway line. Adani and the Carmichael mine expansion are rifled with corruption.

The issue of the reef and climate-change in general is a fairly untouched issue in Australian politics. I'm not sure that we are going to get anywhere without foreign intervention.

If you are interested, I do urge you to read some material on Adani and the Carmichael coal mine expansion and perhaps donate to a "StopAdani" cause.

Wish us luck.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#48

Post by jozzas »

There are some excellent scientists and programs attempting to improve water quality (particularly catchments that flow into the reef) and the crown of thorns starfish.

Unfortunately these are badly underfunded, not coordinated at a national level as they should be, and do not address the biggest threat - climate change. The reef is doomed unless something is done about CO2 emissions. It's probably already too late.

The loss of the GBR will see a collapse of tourism industries, and entire ecosystems will die off. There are going to be huge impacts in the next 15-20 years to come out of this.

A lot of low lying countries in the pacific will get the triple whammy of increased cyclone activity, rising sea levels and a loss of reefs and the fish populations that they subsist on. There are huge humanitarian disasters ahead.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#49

Post by jozzas »

crawrey wrote: post #47

I grew up on the coast of the Great Barrier Reef in North Queensland and I can say that the current state of the reef is almost unrecognisable to what it was 20-odd years ago. While a large part of this damage has been caused by rising sea temperatures, another large component is due to the run-off from agriculture, refineries and mining. The latter being a directly contributed by the local population. The region is…

The QLD government is doing some good work on water quality - particularly engaging with farmers, reducing pesticide and fertiliser runoffs, and reducing erosion. But it's all underfunded and therefore not coordinated or widespread enough.

The federal government has ignored these issues for decades while we've been burning coal for power and digging it up and exporting it to the biggest polluters.

It's disgusting, really.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#50

Post by nojvek »

jozzas wrote: post #49
crawrey wrote: post #47

I grew up on the coast of the Great Barrier Reef in North Queensland and I can say that the current state of the reef is almost unrecognisable to what it was 20-odd years ago. While a large part of this damage has been caused by rising sea temperatures, another large component is due to the run-off from agriculture, refineries and mining. The latter being a directly contributed by the local population. The region is…

The QLD government is doing some good work on water quality - particularly engaging with farmers, reducing pesticide and fertiliser runoffs, and reducing erosion. But it's all underfunded and therefore not coordinated or widespread enough. The federal government has ignored these issues for decades while we've been burning coal for power and digging it up and exporting it to the biggest polluters. It's disgusting, re…

I lived in Australia for 10 years and got a chance to visit great barrier reef multiple times. It's what started my love for water.

Its not the same now. If by the time I have kids and they don't get to have the experience of lush underwater life, I will definitely believe we humans are cancer for the planet.

Australia is a rich and educated country. If they can't fix the mess they created I don't have much hopes for the other parts of the world.

Post reply on HN