Couple of eye-opening Tweets today, from a bloke who knows his shit.

RCP6 is pretty much the default position of IPCC5. It is based on the continuation of the type of efforts that are currently being made (three fifths of SFA!). To avoid that type of increase their modelling requires "stringent mitigation", which has not happened, is not happening and seems unlikely to happen any time soon. But we live in hope!

not really. Hope seems obscene at the moment.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graveyard_spiral

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613343/lessons-from-a-genocide-can-p…

Yeah it's tough to maintain any kind of hope. The enormity of change required, and the little time we have to do it, isn't exactly fun reading. All things going well personal health wise, I'll let ya'll know from 40 years in the future how it panned out and whether all the bickering was worth it...

You look back at certain sliding doors moments and can see just how different things would be. Abbott's railing against Rudd/Gillards carbon price and Turnbull's support for a CPRS (though the Greens certainly have something to answer for too). George W. Bush getting the US presidency in 2000 over Al Gore...

Good link Freeride.

But to get back to Indo-Dreaming's original post/thread title.

I think I mentioned this before, but I'm working (albeit, too slowly for my mate's patience) on a doco on the impacts of climate change on high profile surf spots.

There's essentially two things that'll be going on. Sea levels rise, but the bathymetry doesn't with them. Because either the reefs are dead and no longer growing upward (3...2...1..), or the wind regimes have changes so sand no longer gets to where we've gotten used to it getting. There's a good chance we'll experience the latter on the east coast for areas north of the NSW central coast.

Not everywhere will suffer. But given the amount of development right along our beaches, I wouldn't be optimistic that a natural equilibrium will be achieved in response to rising sea levels in those locations. Some new breaks could come about too. But they'll probably not be where we've already built our surf towns.

So there's that...

"reef fish are faring fine in Indo , a new study suggests"
https://news.mongabay.com/2019/07/reef-fish-are-faring-fine-in-eastern-…

Did you read the article? I took the opposite away. Only a small area left where fish are doing fine.

That article is all about present day pressures, primarily over-fishing. If there's to be any hope of supporting reefs into the future, including their migration, we'll need places like that to be strictly off-limits to everything except conservation surveys.

But humans being humans, as other natural resource areas no longer provide resources to extract, the pressure to extract from those remaining, healthy areas will be immense. Tragedy of the commons writ large.

Biggest problem in indonesia is the lack of understanding, attitudes, and regulaton on size and bag limits and then completely destructive fishing methods not just bomb fishing but netting rivers lagoons etc.

Current maritime and fisheries minister Susi is doing an amazing job in many areas, but sadly it could be impossible to change the if it moves keep and eat mentality as for many if they don't keep the small ones they font eat

I was actually having thus conversation with a decent educated local yesterday, and he couldnt understand how size and bag limits could be policed, which in reality they can't, its changed rec fishermen attitudes and education that make it work, but we have the luxury of fishing for leisure rather than need.

policed in Australia?

or Indo?

Commercial fishing ops are the biggest problem, from a global perspective. But I think in Indo there's more government protection for the more traditional "subsistence"/small community co-op kind of setups, given the implications of letting industrial fishing fleets in. But, I also understand that operations with criminal groups definitely ignore the laws - official and unwritten.

There's a reason China hasn't really tried to push against Indo's maritime boundaries. They know how seriously Indo govt takes marine resources and it has the muscle to defend it. I suspect somewhere in there is belief that despite our histories, there's a decent prospect Aust would step in and support Indo if China picked a fight with it, along with the rest of ASEAN. Which, if they didn't is a real shame. The relationship between the two countries is probably a tenth of what it deserves to be, on so many levels.

freeride76 wrote:

not really. Hope seems obscene at the moment.

Ultra-fucken-lol

https://icriforum.org/gbr-highest-coral-cover-in-36-years/

The increase in coral coverage is largely thanks to the rapid growing soft corals which are particularly susceptible to heat and wave damage as well as crown of thorns. The reef's resurgence may not last.

Acropora aren't soft corals, the study is refering to hard coral cover. I know the AIMS monitoring team well, and am involved in the project on a non technical level. That project is one of the best around in my opinion.

Is this a viable alternative to the recently anulled Scomo agreement to ban gas wells off Newcastle? Can’t see it getting through quietly despite sold as being a “green” alternative to the nearby coal industy. And as the Hunter region seems to be a magnet for stalled ECL’s, how would they survive a Pasha Bulka storm? https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-23/hunter-coast-offshore-wind-farm-…

suchas wrote:

Is this a viable alternative to the recently anulled Scomo agreement to ban gas wells off Newcastle? Can’t see it getting through quietly despite sold as being a “green” alternative to the nearby coal industy. And as the Hunter region seems to be a magnet for stalled ECL’s, how would they survive a Pasha Bulka storm? https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-23/hunter-coast-offshore-wind-farm-…

Suchas. Hi. Of course it can be made viable, we need it to be viable, ridding ourselves of coal derived energy should be of utmost importance wouldn’t you think. Just engineer the footings, towers and overall structures to withstand any level of storm activity, we must move on from the black shit, we are finished with archaic energy production. AW.

I agree, but can’t see it being an easy sell with issues like the effects on birdlife,sealife( think whale migration), visual pollution for the coastal properties etc. But good to see Labour putting it out for discussion.

suchas wrote:

I agree, but can’t see it being an easy sell with issues like the effects on birdlife,sealife( think whale migration), visual pollution for the coastal properties etc. But good to see Labour putting it out for discussion.

Suchas. Hi, agree, its never an easy sell, its in our own personal nature to oppose change, thats just how we mentally approach things. All your points are very valid, but we are a smart mob and can do anything we put our good minds to. In Victoria, the Star of The South offshore wind project covering (approx 456km2 ) off the Gippsland has all but reached the climax of its planning across those aforementioned areas. It will see about one third of Victorias energy use derived from offshore wind, let’s face it, we’ve got plenty. Build turbines offshore to a point where they are not visible.
I often get plenty of feedback whenever I mention we should be installing more wind turbines, especially those erected on land, common reply is, ‘they are so ugly’, my reply is that they are no more visually uglier than 15 archaic brick/concrete chimneys spewing out black coal fumes in the La Trobe Valley 24/7. Driving towards east Victoria and seeing these stacks makes you feel like you are in a car in a movie from the 1950’s, it’s time to move on. AW.