Will the Great Barrier Reef survive?

It depends on who you speak to. Again it is alright providing a case for its growth or decline but if in state of decline, it comes back to what or who is to blame for rising sea temperatures?

Other conflicting stories suggest:

Anthropogenic causes must be at least considered until science is able to establish the real culprit. Unesco aren't too concerned but does that hold any weight?

 

I don't think there is only one culprit, it will be a number of things having a compounding effect. This is what makes it so difficult to pinpoint because there's no one exact cause for the damage...pesticide run off from farms, warming, fuels & other pollution.... it's all of the above and in varying degrees.

To me it's rather obvious the transformation of areas of where more coral grows and some bleaches, is caused by the shift in ocean temperatures.

 

I doubt it will survive.

To survive we must do all those things we won't do: Restrict pesticides & fertilizers, contribute and develop towards a complete renewable energy sector in order to get temperatures down, stop burning fossil fuel, stop selling coal abroad (it will be burnt there) and so on.....

I can't wait for electric cars becoming more affordable and able to travel bigger distances.

Sorry, as it seems we are doomed. Nothing to expect from Libs/Nationals/Labor.

Have a great weekend,
cheers

 

Not quite sure.
Firstly, I cannot see things happening, left or right of the fence line.
We just don't have the political landscape and willingness to really turn things around. That is the reason why I wasn't pointing to either left or right.
Secondly, with GM crop now being allowed in Western Australia you have to wonder, which fertilizers are being used hand in hand with GM crop and which ones are being mandated in the future.
Mother nature is just observing, but it is not being asked. We live the hard value of capitalism, everything creating a $ goes,
sorry mate

 

People need to eat. The more people we have, the more mouths that need feeding, and the more food that needs to be produced. There is no escaping the human stain.

In the past great plagues and great wars thinned the populations. Medicine wasn't what it is now, so life expectancy wasn't what it is now. If or when we find a cure for cancer then all hell will decend as population blow out will be absurd.

Food and water. this is what will end the world. Sortages of both will place so much pressure on the environment that it will finally crumble. It all comes back to one thing..... Too many people.

I find it ironic that our environmental party, the one you love Cats, doesn't have a sustainable population policy, considering that it is population that is the root cause of environmental impact.

Perhaps the Greens should just be called the socialist party. I remember once when Wilson Tuckey was asked about the Greens. He said something like... I will take them seriously when Brown rows a boat and rides a bicycle to parliament. While he takes a plane and drives a car, I find it hard to listen to him. He said it much more coloufully than that, as was Tuckey's way.

 

Hmm,
I love a bike ride and driving my car, but do it environmentally friendly, not hard on the throttle.
Yes you are right about the Greens, they do need to improve on some fronts.
However I do believe, their general course is right....
Have a great Sunday,
cats

 

I find it a bit hard to accept this underlying tone of *if you cannot or won't ride a bike, you are not a real Greene*.
Sorry, just crossed my mind.
If we all become a little bit of a Greene, I believe the world becomes a better place,
regards

 

I heard about this before it became news. An indigenous artist from the Torres. Not a lot of farm run off up there. And it is not confined to our Reef. This is happening across te globe

 

Keep the children alive and families shrink. But really I do believe we should shake certain churches until they start not just stopping condemnation of birth control but actively bloody encouraging it. However if this die off of the reefs across the world continues we will see famine on a scale that has not been seen for centuries


Remember many of the fishing stocks worldwide are already depleted http://www.fao.org/newsroom/common/ecg/1000505/en/stocks.pdf

 

I have had the "pleasure" of meeting hundreds of our farming folk, and where Ian Turnbull may be an extreme exception, there are a lot with similar views. His family were worth millions anyway, it's not like they needed the money, it's not money, it's the power that money brings.

 

Cats I think you missed the point.

That comment was said well over a decade ago, when Brown was leader and a true Green.

The shift in the Greens policy away from PURE environmentally based policies into more mainstream socialist policy has probably garnered them a new voting core. Namely highly educated young and wealthy individuals from the inner cities. Commonly referred to as the "Latte Set". These are individuals in my opinion that adopt a cause until it affects them. Then quick as lightning the cause is dropped and another takes it's place. It is called, " concern by proxy", or "a Claytons Cause". The true Greens are still there but their party has been railroaded by pretenders. Just my opinion.

The comment from Tuckey came on the back of Brown flexing his first real advantage in the senate and it was a jibe at his perceived righteousness.

 

So,
should the Greens remain a party for environmental issues only?
Wouldn't it be better and makes them stronger to also tackle other issues?
I think the Greens need to stay focused on nature and environment, but also on human rights, refugees crises and other similar matters, like gays and lesbians for example.
But can't or shouldn't they voice their opinion when it comes to domestic violence, the subject on Abos, mistreatment of prisoners and so on?
I believe it would be best for them to become a complete party, but stay firm on their party values and ethics.
Regards

 

Carbon pricing would have driven innovation in numerous areas. Unfortunately while ever there is black gold/Texas tea and the obvious mountains of money associated we won't see technological advances introduced in particular industries. Well that seems to be the popular and logical thought.

The upside is that Melbourne may end up being the custodian of the Great Barrier Reef within next century!

 

tv,
I hope you are right.
Normally you would expect a government to drive a nation, in our case we have to move forward ourselves.....
As long our government is so entrenched to keep dirty goal kicking, we will move further and further backwards.
I say bring it on, the carbon tax, and move forward.
Australia has more to offer than this past mindset of our current federal government,
cheers

 

I believe the answer for the Barrier Reef and the environment in general lie in future technologies.

I have high hopes for graphene and what it means for our environment in the future. Graphene has already been applied to improve not only the environmental impact of many technologies but also the technology itself becomes more efficient, the latest is converting CO2 into liquid fuels.

Graphene quantum dots can convert CO2 into liquid fuels
http://newatlas.com/graphene-quantum-dots-convert-co2-fuel/47009/

 

No Cats, I think they were right in becoming more mainstream, if only for survival. BUT they must now identify themselves. By that I mean they need to identify themselves to themselves. Trying to play the guardians of the environment but not having a detrimental piece of policy that is directly associated with the environment is making them look a little silly and confused. Every other environmental party has a policy on human population sustainability. The problem with our Greens is that this particular piece of policy flies in the face of other policy, such as refugee intake for one.

You see they have quickly identified their core supporters, and that is the well to do inner city young libertarians( certainly not to be confused with Liberals), who are hungry for ideals but still naïve enough to be whimsical about the world( a trait I do admire, as I am quickly losing my whimsical). They love the environment, well at least the idea of it, and they love the idea of sacrifice, but only if it is for others or there is selfie opportunity. The hard old environmentalists that spawned this party are slowly being replaced by a younger more energetic, but much less values driven follower, ready to fight the good fight, but only after a skinny decaf latte and never before 10am.

Poor old Bob, no wonder he left when he did. He just ran out of relevance.

I believe the time is right for them to remove the old mask and wear the new Socialist mask with pride. Let's face it, we need options as the other two mainstream parties stink like Bob Browns boots after the Franklin fight.

 

Cyclone Debbie damages non-bleached area of Great Barrier Reef...

Cyclone Strikes Healthiest Part of Great Barrier Reef
April 09, 2017 — A cyclone that left a trail of destruction in northeast Australia and New Zealand has also damaged one of the few healthy sections of the Great Barrier Reef to have escaped large-scale bleaching, scientists said on Monday.

 

Well according to at least one climate denier on this board the reef is dying because we Aussies are blowing too much hot air over the top of it. I cannot lie I read the post with my own eyes

So, listen everyone we will just have to stop our habit of lining up along Cape York to fart in the direction of America

 

Hey, at least it'll still be a great barrier. A big old barrier.

As much as I like to pontificate, we could kill every person on the mainland, bomb all factories, and end the country entirely. Whether or not climate change wrecks the reef is still entirely dependent on external factors.

You're best off talking to the UN, China, India, and the US.

 

We did it is called the Paris Agreemnet and it was signed by 196 countries and has now been ratified by over 140 countries

 

Well good for you. Problem solved.

 

Well that is if Trump the idiot does not try to pull America back out of it

 

Of course he will.

 

I said he was an idiot