Tidying up a bit

Last year I saw an article in Science magazine that combines various statements from researchers in a way that "substantiates" the author's message that the climate change prognosis for atolls is perhaps not as bad as people living on atolls such as Kathy Jetnil-Kijiner and Ministry Tony deBrum have made it out to be. The debate has come up several more times in the media, and thus is worth further examination.

The author quotes Dr. Paul Kench of the University of Auckland as having stated that based on data from Jabat Island in the Marshall Islands, coral growth of 10-15mm per year will exceed the rate of sea level rise, thus allowing islands to grow and remain above water. Although this may indeed be the case--that the islands will remain above water--consider for a second how long it would take for 1) coral to grow, 2) be broken up and thrown onto intertidal reefs by waves and currents along with finer sediments, 3) and then for plants to take root and "cement" all these atoll building blocks together, and 4) finally for organic matter to decompose and provide a truly habitable environment for humans to survive. Atolls that are only allowed to build naturally up to the first step mentioned above, before having to build up yet again to keep pace with sea level rise, would not be fit for habitation without significant environmental engineering contributions.

I asked another atoll researcher named Dr. William Dickinson about it, and his take was that "The Kench study of Jabat shows nicely that islands could form near the highstand where buildup of rubbly storm ramparts on reef flats was sufficient (how that eventuality might or might not influence human settlement seems an open question to me, as such places would not be very attractive for habitation)."