https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/03/barrier-reef-coral-genetically-altered-in-hope-of-surviving-climate-change
>The Australian government’s marine research agency is looking to genetically alter species of coral to help them cope with rising sea temperatures, as new modelling showed the coverage of living corals on the Great Barrier Reef could decline to less than 10% if warming continued.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170720095111.htm
>Solutions to climate change, and particularly its effects on the ocean, are needed now more than ever. Coral bleaching caused by climate change is a huge threat to coral reefs. Recent extreme bleaching events have already killed corals worldwide and permanent destruction of reefs is projected within the century if immediate action is not taken. However, genetically engineering a group of microalgae found in corals may enhance their stress tolerance to ocean warming and save coral reefs.
What does /mlpol/ think about using gene editing to help organisms deal with pollution? Do we have a solution to climate change here that doesn't involve sending all of our industry over seas?
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): 2EA480CE4F3A753129AA585183285097-148532.jpg (145.1 KB, 824x550, Colorful-coral-reef.824x0_….jpg)
Because sea levels are rising and temperatures are rising. this stresses out the organism and blocks light from reaching its photosynthetic symbiotic algal partner. so coral dies in a phenomenon known as coral bleaching. Some estimates say that by 2050 there will be no reefs
>>111032
There's also the fact that coral reefs support an untold number of aquatic organisms in their environments. If the coral bleaches, it dies. If coral dies, any marine life that depends on it will die because it no longer has a suitable environment. If the marine life dies, there's less for us to get food from.
Basically, we need to save our food supplies or the price of fish worldwide, and especially in Oceania, will skyrocket.
There's also the fact that coral reefs support an untold number of aquatic organisms in their environments. If the coral bleaches, it dies. If coral dies, any marine life that depends on it will die because it no longer has a suitable environment. If the marine life dies, there's less for us to get food from.
Basically, we need to save our food supplies or the price of fish worldwide, and especially in Oceania, will skyrocket.
>>111032
Because the reefs are dying off and they play a huge role in the ocean's ecosystem. If something isn't done soon then we risk a collapse of the ocean's biosphere. I doubt that the 3rd world is going to stop dumping shit in the ocean or burning coal anytime soon so getting the world to fight climate change together isn't going to happen. Gene editing looks like the best bet we have right now.
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/coral_bleach.html
Because the reefs are dying off and they play a huge role in the ocean's ecosystem. If something isn't done soon then we risk a collapse of the ocean's biosphere. I doubt that the 3rd world is going to stop dumping shit in the ocean or burning coal anytime soon so getting the world to fight climate change together isn't going to happen. Gene editing looks like the best bet we have right now.
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/coral_bleach.html
>>111037
>I doubt gene-editing would work.
Why? We've already used gene-editing techniques in medicine, agriculture, and industry. Why couldn't we use them to save the environment?
>I doubt gene-editing would work.
Why? We've already used gene-editing techniques in medicine, agriculture, and industry. Why couldn't we use them to save the environment?
>>111041
I just don't see how it's feasible to augment an entire reef in the wild.
Go for it if it could work, but I'm doubting it'll get the funding..
I just don't see how it's feasible to augment an entire reef in the wild.
Go for it if it could work, but I'm doubting it'll get the funding..
>>111044
I imagine it would be more like augmenting coral and then planting it in existing reefs, allowing it to grow and replace the existing coral as it bleaches and dies.
I imagine it would be more like augmenting coral and then planting it in existing reefs, allowing it to grow and replace the existing coral as it bleaches and dies.
>>111044
We dont have to augment the whole reef only the algae and we don't have to produce all of the algae as it will grow in the wild aswell.
We dont have to augment the whole reef only the algae and we don't have to produce all of the algae as it will grow in the wild aswell.
Another thing that would be helpful for the environment is using genetically modified organisms for mining or to produce industrial products. These are the kinds of solutions to environmental problems we should push on the right. The last thing the left wants is for the problems to be fixed.
>>111229
>Let's just edit them into nonexistance
As great as this solution would be I don't see it happening anytime soon.
>Let's just edit them into nonexistance
As great as this solution would be I don't see it happening anytime soon.
If all goes well, bring on the gene-edited pollution-devouring magic coral.
If all goes better, bring on the genetically-edited ponies.
If all goes bad, here come badly-made literally-manufactured barely-even-human muties made to be the new liberal voter base.
If all goes better, bring on the genetically-edited ponies.
If all goes bad, here come badly-made literally-manufactured barely-even-human muties made to be the new liberal voter base.
17 replies | 1 files | 1 UUIDs | Archived