World's oceans in 'shocking' decline

[Infohawk]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13796479

IPSO's immediate recommendations include:

stopping exploitative fishing now, with special emphasis on the high seas where currently there is little effective regulation
mapping and then reducing the input of pollutants including plastics, agricultural fertilisers and human waste
making sharp reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Carbon dioxide levels are now so high, it says, that ways of pulling the gas out of the atmosphere need to be researched urgently - but not using techniques, such as iron fertilisation, that lead to more CO2 entering the oceans.

"We have to bring down CO2 emissions to zero within about 20 years," Professor Hoegh-Guldberg told BBC News.

"If we don't do that, we're going to see steady acidification of the seas, heat events that are wiping out things like kelp forests and coral reefs, and we'll see a very different ocean."

I hope these guys are wrong but they know more about oceans than I do...

 

[dmcowen674]

Things must die in order to be re-born

 

[SagaLore]

Carbon dioxide levels are now so high, it says, that ways of pulling the gas out of the atmosphere need to be researched urgently - but not using techniques, such as iron fertilisation, that lead to more CO2 entering the oceans.

"We have to bring down CO2 emissions to zero within about 20 years," Professor Hoegh-Guldberg told BBC News.

A lot of that CO2 is coming from fossil fuels, which came from plants; so at one point it was apart of the carbon chain. So what we really need to do is focus on keeping the plant count up, i.e. stop chopping away the rain-forests.

 

[Jaepheth]

Things must die in order to be extinct

ftfy

 

[Craig234]

A lot of that CO2 is coming from fossil fuels, which came from plants; so at one point it was apart of the carbon chain. So what we really need to do is focus on keeping the plant count up, i.e. stop chopping away the rain-forests.

Yup.

The Disappearing Rainforests

* We are losing Earth's greatest biological treasures just as we are beginning to appreciate their true value. Rainforests once covered 14% of the earth's land surface; now they cover a mere 6% and experts estimate that the last remaining rainforests could be consumed in less than 40 years.

* One and one-half acres of rainforest are lost every second with tragic consequences for both developing and industrial countries.

* Rainforests are being destroyed because the value of rainforest land is perceived as only the value of its timber by short-sighted governments, multi-national logging companies, and land owners.

* Nearly half of the world's species of plants, animals and microorganisms will be destroyed or severely threatened over the next quarter century due to rainforest deforestation.

* Experts estimates that we are losing 137 plant, animal and insect species every single day due to rainforest deforestation. That equates to 50,000 species a year. As the rainforest species disappear, so do many possible cures for life-threatening diseases. Currently, 121 prescription drugs sold worldwide come from plant-derived sources. While 25% of Western pharmaceuticals are derived from rainforest ingredients, less that 1% of these tropical trees and plants have been tested by scientists.

* Most rainforests are cleared by chainsaws, bulldozers and fires for its timber value and then are followed by farming and ranching operations, even by world giants like Mitsubishi Corporation, Georgia Pacific, Texaco and Unocal.

The Wealth of the Rainforests

* The Amazon Rainforest covers over a billion acres, encompassing areas in Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia and the Eastern Andean region of Ecuador and Peru. If Amazonia were a country, it would be the ninth largest in the world.

* The Amazon Rainforest has been described as the "Lungs of our Planet" because it provides the essential environmental world service of continuously recycling carbon dioxide into oxygen. More than 20 percent of the world oxygen is produced in the Amazon Rainforest.

* More than half of the world's estimated 10 million species of plants, animals and insects live in the tropical rainforests. One-fifth of the world's fresh water is in the Amazon Basin.

* One hectare (2.47 acres) may contain over 750 types of trees and 1500 species of higher plants.

* At least 80% of the developed world's diet originated in the tropical rainforest. Its bountiful gifts to the world include fruits like avocados, coconuts, figs, oranges, lemons, grapefruit, bananas, guavas, pineapples, mangos and tomatoes; vegetables including corn, potatoes, rice, winter squash and yams; spices like black pepper, cayenne, chocolate, cinnamon, cloves, ginger, sugar cane, tumeric, coffee and vanilla and nuts including Brazil nuts and cashews.

* At least 3000 fruits are found in the rainforests; of these only 200 are now in use in the Western World. The Indians of the rainforest use over 2,000.

* Rainforest plants are rich in secondary metabolites, particularly alkaloids. Biochemists believe alkaloids protect plants from disease and insect attacks. Many alkaloids from higher plants have proven to be of medicinal value and benefit.

* Currently, 121 prescription drugs currently sold worldwide come from plant-derived sources. And while 25% of Western pharmaceuticals are derived from rainforest ingredients, less than 1% of these tropical trees and plants have been tested by scientists.

* The U.S. National Cancer Institute has identified 3000 plants that are active against cancer cells. 70% of these plants are found in the rainforest. Twenty-five percent of the active ingredients in today's cancer-fighting drugs come from organisms found only in the rainforest.

* Vincristine, extracted from the rainforest plant, periwinkle, is one of the world's most powerful anticancer drugs. It has dramatically increased the survival rate for acute childhood leukemia since its discovery.

* In 1983, there were no U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturers involved in research programs to discover new drugs or cures from plants. Today, over 100 pharmaceutical companies and several branches of the US government, including giants like Merck and The National Cancer Institute, are engaged in plant research projects for possible drugs and cures for viruses, infections, cancer, and even AIDS.

Rainforest Action

* Experts agree that by leaving the rainforests intact and harvesting it's many nuts, fruits, oil-producing plants, and medicinal plants, the rainforest has more economic value than if they were cut down to make grazing land for cattle or for timber.

* The latest statistics show that rainforest land converted to cattle operations yields the land owner $60 per acre and if timber is harvested, the land is worth $400 per acre. However, if these renewable and sustainable resources are harvested, the land will yield the land owner $2,400 per acre.

* If managed properly, the rainforest can provide the world's need for these natural resources on a perpetual basis.

* Promoting the use of these sustainable and renewable sources could stop the destruction of the rainforests. By creating a new source of income harvesting the medicinal plants, fruits nuts, oil and other sustainable resources, the rainforests is be more valuable alive than cut and burned.

 

[JSt0rm]

Free market capitalism will solve this

 

[Pulsar]

Now all we need is one of those jackasses to jump in here and tell us that green roofs on buildings are stupid and pointless.

I've planted 102 trees on my property over the last 8 years. I look forward to them growing and shading my house, bringing the squirrels back (we're in the middle of a corn field) and giving the birds nesting places. Last night for the first time in forever I heard an owl calling outside my front door. That was pretty fricken cool.

Isn't it scary that I'm generally right leaning and an engineer to boot, yet I support the environment?

 

[werepossum]

The oceans have easily withstood higher temperatures, and possibly higher CO2 levels. But I don't know that the reefs now extant have ever seen such a combination of stressors - higher temperatures, higher CO2 acidification, persistent complex pollution, siltation and local runoff. And beyond the reefs, most desirable (and all desirable pelagic) commercial species are moderately to severely over-fished. Many of these species rely on huge schools for protection; below a certain level, the species may not be viable due to increasingly successful predation as school size declines.

Our oceans are indeed severely stressed. We really, really need to get a handle on CO2, pollution, and commercial fishing.

EDIT:

Now all we need is one of those jackasses to jump in here and tell us that green roofs on buildings are stupid and pointless.

I've planted 102 trees on my property over the last 8 years. I look forward to them growing and shading my house, bringing the squirrels back (we're in the middle of a corn field) and giving the birds nesting places. Last night for the first time in forever I heard an owl calling outside my front door. That was pretty fricken cool.

Isn't it scary that I'm generally right leaning and an engineer to boot, yet I support the environment?

Not scary at all, I'm the same way. The environment is one of the things the left does best, generally speaking, but it's vitally important that it be done well. The root of conservative means to conserve, after all, and conservation of the Earth is necessary if conservation of anything else is to have meaning.

Kudos for planting the trees. If we had any space that wasn't full of trees, I'd plant some more myself.

 

[a777pilot]

Free market capitalism will solve this

Actually it will.

The waste of any natural resource is anti-capitalism. Clean is better for sales than dirty.

"We have to bring down CO2 emissions to zero within about 20 years,"

Now that's just too funny......and stupid.

If all the earth's rainforests would be destroyed, it would be a great waste but it would have about zero effect the earth's oxygen supply. Can you guess where most of our oxygen is produced?

 

[ElFenix]

Actually it will.

The waste of any natural resource is anti-capitalism. Clean is better for sales than dirty.

if there's anything at all we know about chinese manufacturing it's that cheap beats clean every day of the week and twice on sundays.

If all the earth's rainforests would be destroyed, it would be a great waste but it would have about zero effect the earth's oxygen supply. Can you guess where most of our oxygen is produced?

from the oceans which are dying due to acidificication

OH WHAT DO I WIN!?!

 

[p0nd]

It is not an uncommon view, in scientific circles, that we live in the midst of a large scale extinction event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

If you ever want to see the Great Barrier Reef, I suggest not to delay for too long.

 

[bfdd]

Oh noes an extinction event... they have happened before.and will happen again. The strong survive, those that aren't die. Wah some cuddly animal that just shits in the rainforest might not exist any more. What good was it doing us anyways?


Not that I am for destroying the environment. I quite love our planet, but getinf all up in arms about species.going extinct is stupid.

 

[Craig234]

It is not an uncommon view, in scientific circles, that we live in the midst of a large scale extinction event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

If you ever want to see the Great Barrier Reef, I suggest not to delay for too long.

First, you get best named poster for the thread.

Second, it's not 'not an uncommon view' like there's controversy, it's an accepted view that we're in the middle of the 6th mass extinction in world history, the 5th was dinosaurs.

There are controversies about various issues with it, but not that it's going on.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020171454.htm

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Oh noes an extinction event... they have happened before.and will happen again. The strong survive, those that aren't die. Wah some cuddly animal that just shits in the rainforest might not exist any more. What good was it doing us anyways?


Not that I am for destroying the environment. I quite love our planet, but getinf all up in arms about species.going extinct is stupid.

You have no idea what an extinction event is.

 

[p0nd]

Second, it's not 'not an uncommon view' like there's controversy, it's an accepted view that we're in the middle of the 6th mass extinction in world history, the 5th was dinosaurs.

There are controversies about various issues with it, but not that it's going on.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020171454.htm

Ah, i was making an intentional understatement. Something i have a habit of doing, don't know why!

Though that is rather funny wrt scientific literature or articles such as the one you linked, which discuss these catastrophic events with such matter of fact calmness that it almost makes the subject matter seem mundane (at least to me, who has been reading it all for years). In my opinion that is part of a great challenge to Science in the 21st century - to remain unbiased and critical, while promoting scientific literacy to a broad audience and effectively communicating its findings.

 

[Lemon law]

Scientists can't possibly know anything, all we need is one person to scream eco freak to advance all human knowledge. What me worry, Alfred E. Neuman for President.

 

[Infohawk]

Wah some cuddly animal that just shits in the rainforest might not exist any more. What good was it doing us anyways?

Why have any green space at all? Maybe we can have a concrete-covered planet with solar panels that create oxygen and water for us artificially? Most people think there is intrinsic value to animal life and nature. Most people like eating fish.

 

[ShawnD1]

A lot of that CO2 is coming from fossil fuels, which came from plants; so at one point it was apart of the carbon chain. So what we really need to do is focus on keeping the plant count up, i.e. stop chopping away the rain-forests.

What you said about it being part of the carbon cycle at one time is correct, but that doesn't mean it was held by trees. Much of it wasn't really held at all, so it was up in the air and warming the planet. Historically, earth's CO2 levels have been much higher than they are right now, and humans did not exist at that time. It's questionable whether or not current life can quickly adapt to the CO2 changes or if we'll just go extinct. Either way it doesn't matter. I'll be dead before then

Growing trees is not a viable solution. The amount of trees it would take to offset a single coal power plant is unbelievable.

The only real way to reverse stuff is to put carbon back into the ground somehow. One way nature does this is by creating carbonate rocks. Carbonate mountains actually.

 

[ElFenix]

Why have any green space at all? Maybe we can have a concrete-covered planet with solar panels that create oxygen and water for us artificially? Most people think there is intrinsic value to animal life and nature. Most people like eating fish.

i'll be driving my hypercar under a chromed moon while the rest of you toil as pitslaves :sneaky:

 

[God Mode]

Free market capitalism will solve this

I'm willing to screw and underbid the 'already got mine' fatass sitting comfortably with the capital to do things properly with my cheap and dirty as hell startup. If I get shut down, there are millions of others willing to continue with my method except some of them might be a bit more crazy.

 

[soccerballtux]

Good to hear. I was getting bored with stories about Global Warming.

 

[JSt0rm]

Oh noes an extinction event... they have happened before.and will happen again. The strong survive, those that aren't die. Wah some cuddly animal that just shits in the rainforest might not exist any more. What good was it doing us anyways?


Not that I am for destroying the environment. I quite love our planet, but getinf all up in arms about species.going extinct is stupid.

So much ignorance.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Wah some cuddly animal that just shits in the rainforest might not exist any more. What good was it doing us anyways?

 

[bfdd]

Why have any green space at all? Maybe we can have a concrete-covered planet with solar panels that create oxygen and water for us artificially? Most people think there is intrinsic value to animal life and nature. Most people like eating fish.

Nature has its value, but why do you assume what we do is unnatural? It's perfectly natural for a beaver to build a dam. So why is it any more unnatural for man to create? It's our nature to do so. If we could build a better life sustaining system than is currently offered to us by the great mother Earth, we would.

I am all for keeping nature around and preserving what must be preserved, but we will consume this planet eventually.

 

[Doppel]

Actually it will.

The waste of any natural resource is anti-capitalism. Clean is better for sales than dirty.

You can't be serious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China

A 2006 review of existing data suggested that one-third of Chinese children suffer from elevated blood lead levels. [2] This lead comes mostly from manufacturing of lead-acid batteries for cars and electric bikes. Only 1 percent of the country’s 560 million city inhabitants (2007) breathe air deemed safe by the European Union.