Coral bleaching in Japan the worst in 20 years, say scientists

[rooster59]

Coral bleaching in Japan the worst in 20 years, say scientists

 

 

Scientists say coral bleaching is getting worse in southwestern Japan.

 

It is feared the damage, which includes areas near the Island of Okinawa, could be the most serious in nearly 20 years.

 

Water temperatures have topped 30 degrees Celsius this year. Under such conditions, coral bleaching usually takes place within two to four weeks.

 

A lack of typhoons in the region is one explanation being put forward by scientists for the unseasonal high water temperatures.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-08-27

[daveAustin]

Here's another; how about unnaturally high levels of radiation in the region?

[SgtRock]

20 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

Here's another; how about unnaturally high levels of radiation in the region?

 

Beat me to it.

 

Nothing to with Fukushima

[thaibeachlovers]

So it was as bad or worse 20 years ago before GW became trendy.

[halloween]

1 hour ago, daveAustin said:

Here's another; how about unnaturally high levels of radiation in the region?

So you went for rocket science instead of nuclear physics?

[SgtRock]

48 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

So it was as bad or worse 20 years ago before GW became trendy.

 

I read this the other day and the 1st thing that crossed my mind was that this kills a lot of the GW arguments

 

Quote

Coastal areas were also analysed, and to the scientists surprise, coastlines had gained more land - 33,700 sq km (13,000 sq miles) - than they had been lost to water (20,100 sq km or 7,800 sq miles).

"We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world," said Dr Baart.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37187100

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, daveAustin said:

Here's another; how about unnaturally high levels of radiation in the region?

Okinawa and Fukushima are about 1000 miles apart

[ilostmypassword]

8 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

I read this the other day and the 1st thing that crossed my mind was that this kills a lot of the GW arguments

 

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37187100

Clearly you didn't read the whole thing:

"The researchers said Dubai's coast had been significantly extended, with the creation of new islands to house luxury resorts.

"China has also reconstructed their whole coast from the Yellow Sea all the way down to Hong Kong," sid Dr Baart."

The article also notes that:

"The team found that vast areas that were once land are now submerged beneath water, with the largest change occurring in the Tibetan Plateau, where melting glaciers are creating huge new lakes."

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37187100

[SgtRock]

8 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Okinawa and Fukushima are about 1000 miles apart

 

Yep,

 

And the fallout from Chernobyl caused chaos in the UK. 

 

More than 1000 miles apart

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, SgtRock said:

 

Yep,

 

And the fallout from Chernobyl caused chaos in the UK. 

 

More than 1000 miles apart

The difference should be obvious.   The amount of radiation released by Chernobyl was massively greater than that released at Fukushima. Fukushima was a leak. Chernobyly was an explosion. 

[Anthony5]

3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

The difference should be obvious.   The amount of radiation released by Chernobyl was massively greater than that released at Fukushima. Fukushima was a leak. Chernobyly was an explosion. 

Did Chernobyl also have radioactive water leaking into the ocean for years in row?

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, Anthony5 said:

Did Chernobyl also have radioactive water leaking into the ocean for years in row?

You have to learn the difference between quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis.

[SgtRock]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

The difference should be obvious.   The amount of radiation released by Chernobyl was massively greater than that released at Fukushima. Fukushima was a leak. Chernobyly was an explosion. 

 

Escaped radiation causes havoc over long periods of time and great distances.

 

How that escape happens is not very significant.

 

Now tell me how much radiation is estimated to have been released at both locations, backed up of course with an independent source.

[ilostmypassword]

Since you're the one who invoked Chernobyl, I think that should be up to you.

And vague general statements like escaped radiation causes havoc over long periods of time and great distances are useless. The question is what kind of radioactive substances and how much of them.

34 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

Escaped radiation causes havoc over long periods of time and great distances.

 

How that escape happens is not very significant.

 

Now tell me how much radiation is estimated to have been released at both locations, backed up of course with an independent source.

 

[ilostmypassword]

46 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

Escaped radiation causes havoc over long periods of time and great distances.

 

How that escape happens is not very significant.

 

Now tell me how much radiation is estimated to have been released at both locations, backed up of course with an independent source.

I broke my word. Here is the info

Comparison of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents: A review of the environmental impacts

"It is obvious from Table 1 that the amount of ¹³¹I released from Fukushima was less than 10% of the amount released from Chernobyl. Cesium-137, the next most important fission product, was less than 15% of the Chernobyl total. The overall releases from Fukushima Daiichi, according to Table 1, were 10% of the Chernobyl releases."

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971301173X?np=y#f0010

Also, the exclusion zone for Fukushima is 30 kilometers. Okinawa is about 1700 kilometers away.

And for the final, definitive kicker?  The Kuriosho Current. It flows north from Okinawa. So unless those radioactive particles got motors attached to them, they'll be heading in the opposite direction.

Edited August 27, 2016 by ilostmypassword

[RuamRudy]

3 hours ago, daveAustin said:

Here's another; how about unnaturally high levels of radiation in the region?

 

This is not an isolated incident. Almost a quarter of the Great Barrier Reef has been killed off this year. Even if Fukushima was related to the Japanese reef dying (which I don't believe to be the case) it is in no way impacting Australian waters.

 

"It was the smell that really got to diver Richard Vevers. The smell of death on the reef.

“I can’t even tell you how bad I smelt after the dive – the smell of millions of rotting animals.”"

[SgtRock]

29 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I broke my word. Here is the info

Comparison of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents: A review of the environmental impacts

"It is obvious from Table 1 that the amount of ¹³¹I released from Fukushima was less than 10% of the amount released from Chernobyl. Cesium-137, the next most important fission product, was less than 15% of the Chernobyl total. The overall releases from Fukushima Daiichi, according to Table 1, were 10% of the Chernobyl releases."

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971301173X?np=y#f0010

Also, the exclusion zone for Fukushima is 30 kilometers. Okinawa is about 1700 kilometers away.

And for the final, definitive kicker?  The Kuriosho Current. It flows north from Okinawa. So unless those radioactive particles got motors attached to them, they'll be heading in the opposite direction.

 

You should have checked what was used to make the comparison.

 

From your link

 

Quote

Consequently, the contamination levels in all relevant biota (air, rainwater, soil, vegetation, cow milk and animal thyroids) were in the vast majority of cases significantly higher after the Chernobyl accident than after Fukushima,

 

Fukushima mainly leaked into the ocean, apparently it is still leaking into the ocean.

 

Quote

5 years later, Fukushima radiation continues to seep into the Pacific Ocean

 

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/fukushima-radiation-continues-to-leak-into-the-pacific-ocean/

 

It is good when you can provide links to support you. It is even better when you can actually understand them.

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

You should have checked what was used to make the comparison.

 

From your link

 

 

Fukushima mainly leaked into the ocean, apparently it is still leaking into the ocean.

 

 

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/fukushima-radiation-continues-to-leak-into-the-pacific-ocean/

 

It is good when you can provide links to support you. It is even better when you can actually understand them.

You're missing the obvious here: no way can any Fukushima leakage have reached Okinawa.

 

Like it or not, this is clearly Global Warming. Manmade or not is to me also very clear, but that would be for a different thread.

Edited August 27, 2016 by stevenl

[SgtRock]

18 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You're missing the obvious here: no way can any Fukushima leakage have reached Okinawa.

 

Like it or not, this is clearly Global Warming. Manmade or not is to me also very clear, but that would be for a different thread.

 

Did you read the link I provided ?

 

If radiation from Fukushima is washing up on the coast of America it would take a special kind of fool to state '' No way could any Fukushima leakage have reached Okinawa ''

[ilostmypassword]

 

2 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

Did you read the link I provided ?

 

If radiation from Fukushima is washing up on the coast of America it would take a special kind of fool to state '' No way could any Fukushima leakage have reached Okinawa ''

I actually did read the article:  Here's a bit from it:

"Although just barely discernible by our most sophisticated instruments, these signs, and the many more signs from samples we’ve collected on both sides of the Pacific, show that releases have continued, but that at current rates, it would take 5,000 years to equal the amount of cesium released in the accident’s first few months. Despite this, the fact remains that this event is unprecedented in its total release of radioactive contamination into the ocean. Nevertheless, we often struggle to detect signals from Fukushima above the background radiation that surrounds us every day. ...

At the same time, it is also wrong to attribute to Fukushima events like recent die-offs of seal, whale, and starfish along the West Coast rather than see that they are far more complex and have been happening for far longer than we’d like to admit. "

Because of fair use rules, that's all I can cite.

But if you looked at maps of the Kurioshi current you would seee that it would have to complete the second half of its circuit before again reaching Okinawa. If the radioactive material could barely be detected on the Western Pacific coast, there is absolutely no chance it could be detected when the current finally returned to Okinawa.

[halloween]

Whatever else it may do, the amount of radioactive material leaking into the Pacific Ocean is not going to raise its temperature.

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

Did you read the link I provided ?

 

If radiation from Fukushima is washing up on the coast of America it would take a special kind of fool to state '' No way could any Fukushima leakage have reached Okinawa ''

All it takes is somebody who knows ocean currents.

 

However it would take a special kind of fool to think that the radation would either travel against the current or with the current all around the world and still be strong enough to cause any form of coral bleaching.

[SgtRock]

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

All it takes is somebody who knows ocean currents.

 

However it would take a special kind of fool to think that the radation would either travel against the current or with the current all around the world and still be strong enough to cause any form of coral bleaching.

 

You would be correct if it was only the current that is capable of moving the particles.

 

And it gets better, an expert on coral bleaching who also  knows enough about the lifespan and effects of radioactive material to state the above.

 

Must be great to have all your PHD's 

[ilostmypassword]

9 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

You would be correct if it was only the current that is capable of moving the particles.

 

And it gets better, an expert on coral bleaching who also  knows enough about the lifespan and effects of radioactive material to state the above.

 

Must be great to have all your PHD's 

I'm sure there are other things that are capable of moving the particles.  The question is, though, what are they, do they actually exist,  and are they actually moving the particles.  Nice of you not to provide any specifics.

And we were specifically discussing the Okinawa reefs.  Given the distance that the current would have to go to reach Okinawa, the amount of material reaching it would be undetectable. 

And it was you cited the article, not me.  If you don't like what it says, why did you bring it into the conversation?

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, SgtRock said:

 

You would be correct if it was only the current that is capable of moving the particles.

 

And it gets better, an expert on coral bleaching who also  knows enough about the lifespan and effects of radioactive material to state the above.

 

Must be great to have all your PHD's 

You claim it was Fukushima that caused the coral bleaching, and to prove that  you quote an article that says it was not the Fukushima radio active material causing this bleaching. Something seems amiss here.

[lvr181]

Nature gives and nature takes away. Nowadays perhaps with a little help from humans. Our planet is not static. Never has been and likely never will be. 

[MajarTheLion]

Most coral bleaching in 20 years is not even a blink of an eye on Earth's timeline. This "event" is pretty much meaningless.

 

I will maintain my usual standard on this: if the "global warming" problem isn't serious enough for the rich people screaming for action to cut back on flying around the world on private jets preaching to the rest of us how WE need to change our habits, why should I be concerned?

Edited August 28, 2016 by MajarTheLion

[daveAustin]

On 8/27/2016 at 0:30 PM, halloween said:

So you went for rocket science instead of nuclear physics?

 

On 8/27/2016 at 1:05 PM, ilostmypassword said:

Okinawa and Fukushima are about 1000 miles apart

 

Irony is lost on some, it seems.

[ilostmypassword]

On 8/27/2016 at 10:58 AM, daveAustin said:

Here's another; how about unnaturally high levels of radiation in the region?

3 hours ago, daveAustin said:

 

 

Irony is lost on some, it seems.

To signal irony, it isn't enough that you believe your statement is ironic.  There has to be something in the text to undercut the statement you are making.  Nothing in that statement does that.  If you had said, a large radiation exhaling dinosaur may have been spotted in the vicinity, that might have done the trick.  But there was nothing there at all. What's more, it's significant that you call out 2 people who questioned it's validity, but not anyone who endorsed it. I suspect you believed it at the time, but no longer do.