Global Climate Change as it Relates to Coral Reefs

[schminksbro]

The auto industry and coal industry, at least in the US, have become far more clean than they were at their inception.

These industries have only become as clean as regulations force them to be. The auto industry for example will increase mileage up to the mandate but not beyond. There are California emission standards that are much tighter than other states. The manufacturers apply the emission equipment to reach these standards only on vehicles sold in California. With the trend in deregulating and unlimited dollars being donated to political campaigns this type of behavior will only get worse.



In today's time, they would more likely seek to distort the evidence as you suggest. However I do believe that the current level of awareness in developed societies and nations is high enough that public outcry would be detrimental to a corporation's ability to profit if they knowingly abuse the environment with no attempt whatsoever to be clean. People who care, which should be all of us, would likely do what they can to not purchase from the abusing entity, IMO.

That is a good theory but consumers don't have a choice which oil or coal company they buy their product from. They don't even know where it comes from in nearly all cases. Without regulation forcing disclosure of or limiting of pollution the average consumer has no idea what these companies are doing.



I believe that if you search, you may find evidence of such behavior. Personally, I work for an organization that consumes a great deal of fossil fuel. In an effort to mitigate our impact to the environment, we use all commercially reasonable efforts to keep ourselves clean at the expense of profits. We pay more for fuel and use B20 bio-diesel in all of our equipment. Most of our company fleet cars are either hybrids or cars that exceed 25MPG. Is it in the news? Is it publicized for all to hear? No, but we are not a multi-billion dollar per year corporation and therefore out of the public eye. So, in this case a for profit corporation has, and will continue to police itself to be as gentle to the environment as possible.

I applaud your company for its' efforts. Now if we can get the other 99% on board.

[creefer]

Thanks, schmiksbro. I must say however that you appear to be an advocate of lots of regulation. Who pays for that? Certainly not the corporations regardless of their political fund donations.....more likely you and me. In my case, I'd rather hold my money and be a wise consumer than advocate more regulation that will ultimately cost more money. If it's my wise consumption that causes me to spend more on a product, so be it but I care not to pay for further regulations. But again, this may be out of the scope of this particular discussion considering its intent was to discuss reef health against "climate change".

[Wy Renegade]

To argue that climate change is not occuring is IMO akin to arguing that organisms do not adapt to their environment. It is my personal opinion that both the right and the left have reached consenses on the fact that it is occurring. Melting polar ice caps in the arctic, antarctic as well as melting glacial ice throughout the world is a bit difficult to argue with. Increased death rates in Polar bears as well as coral bleaching across the globe and impact on other organisms simply support the fact that it is occuring. IMHO, the question is no longer if climate change is occuring, but to what degree it is occuring, and to what degree we are responsible.

I agree that global warming cannot be considered in and of itself, pollution certainly plays a role as well. However we must keep in mind that we are by far and away not the only country involved to argue how clean industries in our country have become is truly of minimal significance in the face of countries like China and India leaping forward into their own industrial revolutions.

I would argue that some companies have policed themselves and done a good job of it, unfortunately they are in the minority. Government fines and penalties in this country as well as the world as a whole, are not nearly severe enough to detour multimillion dollars industries from polluting. When it is cheaper for a company like this to dump illegally and pay the fine when caught than it is to dispose of waste responsibly, the obvious result is illegal dumping on a grand scale.

Also, one must keep in mind that with issues like this, it is not within our ability as a country to impose our values and desires upon the world. This issue is one like whaling that has no clear boundaries or evidences to back it up, and so long as there are none, other countries as well as cooperations will debate the fact and prevent any significant effects to combat it from coming to fruition. Look at whaling as an example, look at the whaling industry. while most countries have agreed that many whale populations worldwide are in trouble and gotten on board with the agreement to suspend whaling operations there are still countries in which it is perfectly legal. And, as a country it is not within our abilities to impose our desires or our penalties upon these other countries. Many would prefer to believe that everyone agrees that our poor marine friends are in trouble and has accepted our decision that they are endangered and need to be protected. The truth of the matter is in fact far different.

[schminksbro]

These questions pertain to coral reefs because the Ph in the oceans is dropping. Most marine aquarists know that reduced Ph decreases calcification which is required for coral to grow. The drop in Ph is caused by green house gases and the biggest emitters of these gases are the burning of fossil fuels. Coral reefs are the home to most of the life in the ocean. Without them the oceanic ecosystem will collapse.

[creefer]

These questions pertain to coral reefs because the Ph in the oceans is dropping. Most marine aquarists know that reduced Ph decreases calcification which is required for coral to grow. The drop in Ph is caused by green house gases and the biggest emitters of these gases are the burning of fossil fuels. Coral reefs are the home to most of the life in the ocean. Without them the oceanic ecosystem will collapse.

There are other factors to greenhouse gasses. Fossil fuels are a large part however agriculture is as well. Wyrenegade brought up good points about ice caps melting. As a result, CO is being released at an alarming rate that was trapped in the ice actually making the situation worse. The US is only a minor part when you look at China and India as he accurately points out.

[schminksbro]

Thanks, schmiksbro. I must say however that you appear to be an advocate of lots of regulation. Who pays for that? Certainly not the corporations regardless of their political fund donations.....more likely you and me. In my case, I'd rather hold my money and be a wise consumer than advocate more regulation that will ultimately cost more money. If it's my wise consumption that causes me to spend more on a product, so be it but I care not to pay for further regulations. But again, this may be out of the scope of this particular discussion considering its intent was to discuss reef health against "climate change".

You are correct the tax payers would have to pay for the regulations. However who pays the price for a collapsed oceanic ecosystem? Those same tax payers do only the price is much higher. If as a wise consumer you had the choice of which companies you supported then the free market works. However in terms of fossil fuels there is no free market. I guess it comes down to whether you believe Exxon's profits are more important than your environment.

I am sure murder for hire is profitable for some but as a society we find it to be intolerable so we pass laws to protect our citizens. Why should industry be held to a different standard?

[schminksbro]

To argue that climate change is not occuring is IMO akin to arguing that organisms do not adapt to their environment. It is my personal opinion that both the right and the left have reached consenses on the fact that it is occurring. Melting polar ice caps in the arctic, antarctic as well as melting glacial ice throughout the world is a bit difficult to argue with. Increased death rates in Polar bears as well as coral bleaching across the globe and impact on other organisms simply support the fact that it is occuring. IMHO, the question is no longer if climate change is occuring, but to what degree it is occuring, and to what degree we are responsible.

I agree that global warming cannot be considered in and of itself, pollution certainly plays a role as well. However we must keep in mind that we are by far and away not the only country involved to argue how clean industries in our country have become is truly of minimal significance in the face of countries like China and India leaping forward into their own industrial revolutions.

I would argue that some companies have policed themselves and done a good job of it, unfortunately they are in the minority. Government fines and penalties in this country as well as the world as a whole, are not nearly severe enough to detour multimillion dollars industries from polluting. When it is cheaper for a company like this to dump illegally and pay the fine when caught than it is to dispose of waste responsibly, the obvious result is illegal dumping on a grand scale.

Also, one must keep in mind that with issues like this, it is not within our ability as a country to impose our values and desires upon the world. This issue is one like whaling that has no clear boundaries or evidences to back it up, and so long as there are none, other countries as well as cooperations will debate the fact and prevent any significant effects to combat it from coming to fruition. Look at whaling as an example, look at the whaling industry. while most countries have agreed that many whale populations worldwide are in trouble and gotten on board with the agreement to suspend whaling operations there are still countries in which it is perfectly legal. And, as a country it is not within our abilities to impose our desires or our penalties upon these other countries. Many would prefer to believe that everyone agrees that our poor marine friends are in trouble and has accepted our decision that they are endangered and need to be protected. The truth of the matter is in fact far different.

Well said Randy,

It is interesting that you bring up whaling. At one point Denmark was the top whale oil producer in the world. At that time Denmark was quite the world empire. As the whale population decreased they chose to expand their hunting grounds in search of more whales. This increased the cost of procuring the oil that they harvested from the whales. Instead of seeking a new fuel to maintain their empire they continued to expand their search further and further therefore increasing the costs more and more. At this point Great Britain began to mine coal and use it as their new primary energy source. The same thing happened. As they mined and burned all the coal in Britain the had to search further and further to keep supply. Instead of seeking a new energy source they kept chasing coal even at the expense of invading other countries and expanding their empire. Then comes the US with its' plentiful supply of oil. We are doing the same thing. Those empires collapsed because they failed to evolve and it collapsed their economy's and their empires. If we don't decide to be the developers of the next big energy source we will suffer the same fate. The investment in clean energy is an economic imperative as well as an ecological one. Being that we are the largest consumers of fossil fuels we can make a difference regardless of what other countries do.

[Werdlone]

@creefer..it is a breath of fresh air to hear a common voice in this argument. I couldn't agree with you more on all of your points. Corporations are the core of this country that create products, JOBS and the majority of the tax base that takes care of those that do not take part in the workforce. There is no evil leader of the "so called" corporation that says "we must mask our pollution that kills the planet with bribes and diversion!" muwaahaahaa!. People in this country are too informed and know better. Most corporations know that the best marketing is running clean. Most people in this country with a 401k or pension fund have their future dependent on the success of these companies. We should all be careful to make the corporation the enemy.

Pollution is a problem...address the issue, not the generality of the "corporation" being the bad guy. If you think corporations are bad..let the government take control...hmmm lets look back in history on this one...democracy->socialism->communism. I'll take freedom, land ownership, private corporations and the choice to not buy a product from a company that pollutes.

[schminksbro]

@creefer..it is a breath of fresh air to hear a common voice in this argument. I couldn't agree with you more on all of your points. Corporations are the core of this country that create products, JOBS and the majority of the tax base that takes care of those that do not take part in the workforce. There is no evil leader of the "so called" corporation that says "we must mask our pollution that kills the planet with bribes and diversion!" muwaahaahaa!. People in this country are too informed and know better. Most corporations know that the best marketing is running clean. Most people in this country with a 401k or pension fund have their future dependent on the success of these companies. We should all be careful to make the corporation the enemy.

Pollution is a problem...address the issue, not the generality of the "corporation" being the bad guy. If you think corporations are bad..let the government take control...hmmm lets look back in history on this one...democracy->socialism->communism. I'll take freedom, land ownership, private corporations and the choice to not buy a product from a company that pollutes.

Love Canal

[Wy Renegade]

The investment in clean energy is an economic imperative as well as an ecological one. Being that we are the largest consumers of fossil fuels we can make a difference regardless of what other countries do.

Indeed Andy, please don't take my previous post to imply that I feel that we should be doing nothing. Research has in fact shown that the environmental impact from a single family in the U.S. is almost 100 times greater than those of a family in a less developed country such as india. Our carbon footprint so to speak is significantly larger