http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/ ... click=true

Too late to save the reef
By Melissa Fyfe
Environment reporter
February 12, 2005



The Great Barrier Reef's coral could disappear in as little as 20 years as sea temperatures rise faster than expected, a world expert on coral and climate change has warned.

Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, director of the Centre for Marine Studies at the University of Queensland, says bleaching will occur and coral will die regardless of what happens in the battle against global warming.

"It is shocking to wake up and realise we really are in a desperate time," he said. "We may see a complete devastation of coral communities on the reef and a major change to the pristine values, which at the moment are our pride and joy.

"We are likely to see corals rapidly disappear from great parts of the Barrier Reef, as it has already from large parts of the Caribbean."

The warning comes as The Age begins a three-part series on the Kyoto Protocol, which becomes international law on Wednesday.

Marine scientists are closely watching the coral, hoping the widespread bleaching of 1998 and 2002 are not repeated. In 1998, 16 per cent of the world's coral died after rising sea temperatures caused mass bleaching on almost every reef.

"We now have less time left," said Professor Hoegh-Guldberg. "Across the globe we should be rallying around as though we are facing a confrontation like a world war."

Coral has a small tolerance for rises in sea temperatures. A rise of one degree means that the tiny algae that live in the coral polyps are expelled, leaving coral white or "bleached". If this happens repeatedly, or for long periods, the coral dies.

Most scientists now agree that greenhouse gases from industry, electricity use and cars have caused the planet to warm 0.6 degrees in the past century. Because the gases can live in the atmosphere for 50 to 200 years, another increase in warming is already locked in, regardless of action on cutting back pollution.

The latest figures from NASA say this warming - if we stopped all emissions as of today - will be an extra 0.6 degrees by 2030, bringing the global average rise to at least 1.2 degrees. Many scientists are discussing how greenhouse gases may be stabilised to halt warming at two degrees above the long-term average. The most pessimistic scenario from the United Nations sees a warming of 5.8 degrees by the century's end.

"There are impacts in the pipeline, due to the inertia of the climate system. In 20 years' time, bleaching is highly likely to be annual and that will cause shallow-water corals to be in decline," said Professor Hoegh-Guldberg, who is leading a $20 million study into coral bleaching mostly funded by the World Bank.
Boats on the Great Barrier Reef moor around a pontoon which has an adjoining five-metre by five-metre shadecloth placed on the surface of the ocean to reduce light which exacerbates heat stress on coral.

"We need to start working out how we can help people who rely on it for their income. It's really quite a stunning fact."

Modelling by marine scientists shows that coral regularly bleaches when global temperatures rise between one and two degrees, but it may recover in some summers when bleaching does not occur. At two degrees and above, coral bleaches every year - with most dying off. If a remnant population managed to survive and carbon dioxide was stabilised in the atmosphere, "we will get our beautiful coral reefs back in a couple of hundred years", Professor Hoegh-Guldberg said.

The marine scientist said the reef was the "canary in the coalmine" of global climate change. "We have this big canary off our coast and it is starting to show signs it is about to drop off the perch," he said.

Controversially, the professor said Australia should revisit the debate about nuclear power, which produces only a tiny amount of greenhouse gases compared with coal-fired plants. Environment groups are against nuclear power because of its toxic waste and insist that cuts in emissions can be achieved without resorting to nuclear power.

But Professor Hoegh-Guldberg disagrees. "I am afraid we are looking at a nuclear rescue. It may be the only way we can find the energy to keep society running while we seek other solutions," he said.

Less than a week before the Kyoto Protocol becomes international law, Professor Hoegh-Guldberg called for leadership on the global warming issue.

His ground-breaking work in 1999 revealed that reefs have only a 50-year window before damage from climate change sets in. His latest warning revises that down to 20 years.

The threat of climate change is now being taken seriously by snorkel tour operators. Quicksilver Connections, which operates from Port Douglas, is working with scientists from the University of Queensland to study coral.

In an Australian-first, three five-metre by five-metre floating shadecloths have been placed near the company's pontoon at Agincourt reef. It is designed to reduce light on the coral, which exacerbates heat stress.

Researcher Eric Strom hopes it may help the coral recover. "This is never going to be a large-scale thing," said the University of Queensland marine studies student. "You can't put a roof over the reef. But it makes sense at an industry scale."

Quicksilver Connections marine biologist Phil Laycock said: "We can't control the big-picture global warming issues but we can look at ways to protect corals in the event of some of the dire predictions."

A conference of international climate change scientists last week heard other bad news for the world's reefs. Researchers from Britain's Plymouth Marine Laboratory warned that oceans were turning acidic after absorbing about half the 800 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide humans have put in the atmosphere. "The whole composition of life in the oceans will change," said Carol Turley, the laboratory's head of science.

When people say that global warming is occurring, they are only looking at recent history. Earth is billions of years old. It has fluctuated in temperature over that time, even more than the 1.2 degrees stated in the article. Earth is simply in a warming trend.

A warming trend, yes, but one in which we are speeding up the otherwise natural process.

Finally somebody gets it.......

You can't really prove that. Sure, the last 50 years the Earth has been getting warmer. Sure, humans might be putting out more pollutants than the dinosaurs. But you can't say humans are THE cause. A 50 year period is nothing compared to how old the Earth is. The Earth has had warmer trends that has last for long periods of time. The Earth is pretty resilient.

You can't prove your statement either.

Geography 101

Taken it. Doesn't make your statement any stronger.

I heck of did a project on this in the 7th grade

Chaos theory. Because we're doing things that otherwise would have not had happened on this planet we're causing effects that are totally different from what would have happened otherwise.

For all we know the planet could just continue to try and balance the equation with progressively more and more violent storms. All storms do, by the way, is transfer heat from the tropics to the poles, in the grand scale. The more you upset that balance the more violent things must become to level it out.

Not in this kind of a time scale it hasn't.

Vacate, you're only 20, which, by the way, is the prime "I'll buy any loony liberal theory they throw against the wall" age (I was 20 once).

Assignment:
Play devil's advocate with yourself; assume, for a minute, that human-induced global warming is a myth. Become familiar with every source that supports your "new" position. Report back here in 6 months.

I didn't buy many "loony liberal theories" when I was 20.

We already had a GW debate over here, might as well direct it back there.

http://www.theskyiscrape.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6894