It seems the primary message is "CO2 reduction won’t even stop climate change ... we have not fixed the primary root cause – the destruction of nature by toxic chemicals, and substances such as plastic."
https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4099018
> Pollution from the Congo, Gambia and Amazon from municipal waste, agricultural run-off and deforestation has caused an explosion in the growth of pelagic Sargassum seaweed. It is estimated that, each year, 20 million tonnes of this weed are growing in the Atlantic Ocean - that’s more weed than plastic by weight.
> The smell of the ocean comes from coccolithophores, and they are in the air we breathe, our water and our food, but if their numbers are depleted, they will most likely be replaced by toxic dinoflagellates. Already we are seeing HABS, hazardous algae blooms around the world which are killing people living next to the ocean. This is coupled with increased levels of ciguatera disease caused by dinoflagellate contaminated fish. Health authorities are now recommended that any fish from tropical water over 3kg in size should not be consumed
But lets not discredit the findings. Even if it's 90% in 2045, and if 1% of plankton dies every year (https://www.goesfoundation.com/), it means we've lost so far 70% of plankton since 1940.
It still seems like a reason to be worried, and not to say "it's absolute garbage => everything's ok, no reason to be concerned".
>> The landmark research blames chemical pollution from plastics, farm fertilisers and pharmaceuticals in the water. Previously, it was thought the amount of plankton had halved since the 1940s, but the evidence gathered by the Scots suggest 90% has now vanished.
Even if this correction is an overestimate, and the old estimate was right, the quantities of plankton halving since 1940 is still a disturbingly high amount of reduction. As to seeing plankton from space that doesn't really say anything unless we know what proportion of the plankton that exists is visible from space. For instance, it might not be possible to estimate total plankton quantities just from looking at a picture with a particular "bloom" concentrated in an area.
I'm surprised about these numbers also but I don't know how I could easily trash the research reported, just because I've seen pictures of plankton. I think that's just making an overgeneralisation.
Oh wait.
Global industry pollution should have been internationally controlled decades ago if we would have had any chance of ducking this.
Many has screamed about this for years, recently Greta.
2 years of covid pandemic gave the earth some breathing-room but seems in hindsight only to have slowed down the end date by about 6 months, according to recent graphs.
The decision makers never cared.
Now we are fucked.
Defeatism won't help us. In fact, it's a new strategy of oil/plastic/meat/dairy producers, to stop people from changing status quo.
We as individuals can do plenty. We can change our eating and spending habits (cocacola & burger anyone?), we can demand change, we can stop buying stuff, we can protest, we can educate, we can plant trees and forests, we can stop people spreading defeatism etc.
So do something. Just don't spread this attitude, please.
The people scolding the masses for using plastic bags at the grocery store are still riding in private jets. For media events and fancy dinners. Jaunting around the world in planes fueled by dinosaur juice, financed by human suffering. But this is nothing new. Dinosaur juice just means that no humans are having to row inside the plane. That and physics, but if it weren’t for the physics, Amazon warehouses would look like damn good employment compared to the flying contraptions of the elites.
We have been fucked for a long time. Generations upon generations. The environment is a symptom. This is a systemic issue.
Nothing can be done? Well, you’re dumping a meme on the internet claiming that all is lost. That’s doing something. Harmful. Could spend the same effort to point the finger at those most to blame. Yes, one finger. One finger can open many eyes. Shoot, maybe you hate my idea, find it frivolous, and thought of a better one. Fantastic! I don’t care. Maybe I’m an idiot, but I won’t be offended if you do something more productive. That’s the point. Do anything but roll over.
What if people decided it was about more than the environment of Earth? Do you want this species shitting on Mars next? Earth may burn in a fire but the disease can still spread. We only have one Mars, too. And plans are already being made on how to carve it up.
Or what if the powers that be found eco-friendly ways to drain the livelihood of the rest of humanity, should we celebrate that the planet is saved? At least hell could be lush and vibrant?
Again, the environment is just a symptom. As is your attitude. The real problem is not being addressed. So neither are the symptoms.
“Look at this internet warrior typing angry things.”
Sure, why not. The plankton isn’t dead yet so I might as well.
https://preview.redd.it/588iz6x790a51.png?auto=webp&s=c5eaf1...
Individuals, collectively, can absolutely have an impact. The problem is still that not enough people actually care or are paying attention. If we had anywhere near the entire population demanding changes, we’d get changes!
I'm guessing you mean point of no return, which I've tried to find, to no avail. The closest I've found in the IPCC reports is vague predictions of local ecosystem collapse at 6C warming, predicted next century.
Stop traveling everywhere by car/plane, stop buying meat/dairy, stop buying plastic (check your shopping basket), reject consumerism, educate others to do the same, organize, then bring off legislative change.
The wealthy are just the minor obstacle. The masses of people not willing to change their habits may be bigger problem.
There's no good reason for plastic to be leaving waterways and entering the ocean, and farmers need to be strongly pushed and supported to look at ways to farm without leaching fertilizer.
And yes, all your ideas are good ones. We need to try a bunch of these things.
For example: how much of the plankton in the Atlanic is visible from space? 1%? 100%? Does "some guy on reddit" have any clue whether it's possible to estimate the quantity of plankton just from satellite images? I honestly don't.
You try to discredit a serious article about a subject you should be well aware is 100% true by now even if you were in fact living under a rock.-- by siding with random anon redditor that had a take more suitable for your world view.
It is not surprising the least why we are in this rut.
Phytoplankton bloom with 700000 cells per liter density is visible to the naked eye.
This gives the colour (red, green, or brown) on the sea surface. This means that the satellite maps showing visible blooms may directly repudiate the article. Or not... Not my field of expertise.
