More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
July 25 - July 25, 2022
The number of species that can be found on a healthy patch of reef is probably greater than can be encountered in a similar amount of space anywhere else on earth, including the Amazon rainforest.
It is likely, they wrote, that “the diversity of reefs” has been “seriously under-detected.”
“Darwin’s paradox.” The best answer anyone has come up with is that reef dwellers have developed the ultimate recycling system: one creature’s trash becomes its neighbor’s treasure.
Since no one knows how many creatures depend on reefs, no one can say how many would be threatened by their collapse; clearly, though, the number is enormous. It’s estimated that one out of every four creatures in the oceans spends at least part of its life on a reef.
The authority said that the reef’s long-term prospects, which it had previously characterized as “poor,” had declined to “very poor.”
SeaSim. The mine, often described as a “mega-mine,” is expected to send most of its coal to India via a port—Abbot Point—situated right along the reef. Saving corals and mining more coal are, as many commentators pointed out, activities that are tough to reconcile. “The world’s most insane energy project” was Rolling Stone’s assessment.
catastrophic. It takes other genomes out completely. “What people are not seeing is that this is already a genetically modified environment,” he went on. Invasive species alter the environment by adding entire genomes that don’t belong. Genetic engineers, by contrast, alter just a few bits of DNA here and there.
We are using our understanding of biological processes to see if we can benefit a system that is in trauma.”
The trait that makes them truly “hated,” though, is that they’re toxic. When an adult is bitten or feels threatened, it releases a milky goo that swims with heart-stopping compounds.
The list of species whose numbers have crashed due to cane toad consumption is long and varied. It includes: freshwater crocodiles, which Australians call “freshies”; yellow-spotted monitor lizards, which can grow up to five feet long; northern blue-tongued lizards, which are actually skinks; water dragons, which look like small dinosaurs; common death adders, which, as the name suggests, are venomous snakes; and king brown snakes, which are also venomous.
The strongest argument for gene editing cane toads, house mice, and ship rats is also the simplest: what’s the alternative? Rejecting such technologies as unnatural isn’t going to bring nature back. The
“We are as gods and have to get good at it.”
The ability to “rewrite the very molecules of life” places us, it could be argued, under an obligation.
The cannibal snails mostly left the giant snails alone. Instead, they ate their way through dozens of species of Hawaii’s small endemic land snails, producing what E. O. Wilson has called “an extinction avalanche.”
We’re not yet sentient or intelligent enough to be much of anything.”
We are Loki, killing the beautiful for fun. We are Saturn, devouring our children.”
Kingsnorth has also observed, “Sometimes doing nothing is better than doing something. Sometimes it is the other way around.”
They called the machines “auxons,” from the Greek αυξάνω, meaning “grow.” The auxons would be powered by solar panels and, as they multiplied, they’d produce more solar panels, which they’d assemble using elements, like silicon and aluminum, extracted from ordinary dirt.
“I would argue that if technologies to pull CO2 out of the environment fail, then we’re in deep trouble.” —
All of the scenarios consistent with that goal relied on negative emissions.
Among the sevens, the most recent—and, hence, the best chronicled—is the eruption of Mount Tambora, on the Indonesian island of Sumbawa.
“Man is unwittingly conducting a vast geophysical experiment,” it asserted. The result of burning fossil fuels would, almost certainly, be “significant changes in the temperature,” which would, in turn, lead to other changes.
the 1960s were growing fast—by about five percent a year. And yet the report made no mention of reversing or even just trying to slow this growth. Instead, it advised that “the possibilities of deliberately bringing about countervailing climatic changes…be thoroughly explored.” One such possibility was “spreading very small reflecting particles over large oceanic areas.
levels but argued that their continued climb was inevitable: The only way to hold down emissions was to cut fossil-fuel use, and no nation was likely to do that. Following this logic,
The best way forward, he argues, is to do everything: cut emissions, work on carbon removal, and look a lot more seriously at geoengineering.
“opening up the range of options” could inspire greater action.
Solar geoengineering would not just be cheap, relatively speaking; it would also be speedy. Pretty much as soon as the fleet of SAILs went into operation, cooling would begin. (A year and a half after Tambora erupted, the cucumbers in New England were frozen.) As Keutsch told me, it’s the only way to “do something fast” about climate change. But if a fleet of SAILs looks like a quick, cut-rate
All the warming that had been masked would suddenly manifest itself in a rapid and dramatic temperature run-up, a phenomenon that’s become known as “termination shock.”
Number 24 is “conflicts between countries.” Number 28 is “do humans have the right to do this?”
“The hope is to preserve the layer of sea ice that is formed during the polar winter,” King said. “And if you proceed with that year on year, you rebuild the ice, layer by layer.”
People want hope. And I’m like, ‘You know what? I’m a scientist. My job is not to tell people the good news. My job is to describe the world as accurately as possible.’
If we stop CO2 emissions tomorrow, which, of course, is impossible, it’s still going to warm at least for centuries, because the ocean hasn’t equilibrated. That’s just basic physics. We’re not sure how much additional warming that is, but it could easily be another seventy percent beyond what we’ve experienced. So in that sense, we’re already at 2°C. We’re going to be lucky to stop at 4°C. That’s not optimistic or pessimistic. I think that’s objective reality.”
territory that’s probably best described as unthinkable.)
One way to gloss the Camp Century story is as another Anthropocene allegory. Man sets out to “conquer his environment.” He congratulates himself for his resourcefulness and derring-do, only to find the walls closing in. Drive out nature with a snowblower, yet she will always hurry back.
Even if greenhouse-gas emissions are slashed, which looks unlikely, it would take decades for the climate to stabilize.”
“We live in a world,” he has said, “where deliberately dimming the fucking sun might be less risky than not doing it.”
