• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Methane And Global Warming

Not sure if i should say Strewth! or Fair Dinkum Cobber!

Australian aims to breed 'green' sheep that burp less
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8385068.stm

Livestock account for a significant amount of Austalian emissions
Australian scientists have said they are hoping to breed sheep that burp less as part of efforts to tackle climate change.

The scientists have been trying to identify a genetic link that causes some sheep to belch less than others.

Burping is a far greater cause of emissions in sheep than flatulence, they say.

About 16% of Australia's greenhouse emissions come from agriculture, says the department of climate change.

Australia's Sheep Cooperative Research Council says 66% of agricultural emissions are released as methane from the gut of livestock.

"Ninety per cent of the methane that sheep and cattle and goats produce comes from the rumen, and that's burped out," John Goopy from the New South Wales Department of Industry and Investment told ABC.

"Not much goes behind - that's horses."

The scientists in New South Wales have been conducting experiments in specially designed pens where they measure how much gas sheep emit by burping.

They have found, from tests on 200 sheep so far, that the more they eat, the more they belch.

But even taking that into account, there appear to be "significant differences" between individual animals, Mr Goopy said.

The scientists' goal in the long term is to breed sheep that produce less methane, which produces many times more global warming than carbon dioxide.

"We're looking for natural variations so we'll steer the population that way, " said Roger Hegarty, from the Sheep Cooperative Research Council.
 
Methane release 'looks stronger'

Scientists have uncovered what appears to be a further dramatic increase in the leakage of methane gas that is seeping from the Arctic seabed.
Methane is about 20 times more potent than CO2 in trapping solar heat.
The findings come from measurements of carbon fluxes around the north of Russia, led by Igor Semiletov from the University of Alaska at Fairbanks.
"Methane release from the East Siberian Shelf is underway and it looks stronger than it was supposed [to be]," he said.
Professor Semiletov has been studying methane seepage in the region for the last few decades, and leads the International Siberian Shelf Study (ISSS), which has launched multiple expeditions to the Arctic Ocean.
The preliminary findings of ISSS 2009 are now being prepared for publication, he told BBC News.
Methane seepage recorded last summer was already the highest ever measured in the Arctic Ocean.

High seepage
Acting as a giant frozen depository of carbon such as CO2 and methane (often stored as compacted solid gas hydrates), Siberia's shallow shelf areas are increasingly subjected to warming and are now giving up greater amounts of methane to the sea and to the atmosphere than recorded in the past.
This undersea permafrost was until recently considered to be stable.
But now scientists think the release of such a powerful greenhouse gas may accelerate global warming.
Higher concentrations of atmospheric methane are contributing to global temperature rise; this in turn is projected to cause further permafrost melting and the release of yet more methane in a feedback loop.
A worst-case scenario is one where the feedback passes a tipping point and billions of tonnes of methane are released suddenly, as has occurred at least once in the Earth's past.
Such sudden releases have been linked to rapid increases in global temperatures and could have been a factor in the mass extinction of species.
According to a report by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), the springtime air temperature across the region in the period 2000-2007 was an average of 4C higher than during 1970-1999.
That is the fastest temperature rise on the planet, claims the university.

The recent thaw over the last decade means that some of the large reserve of carbon from organic material such as dead animals and plants in sediments is now being released into the sea and into our atmosphere.
Trapped below that is the methane hydrate now warming and leaking through holes in the defrosting sediments.
Previously it was thought much of this gas was absorbed into the sea.
But according to a recent report that Professor Semiletov and his team compiled for the environmental group WWF, the shallow depth of arctic shelves means that methane is reaching the atmosphere without reacting to become CO2 dissolved in the ocean.
Professor Semiletov's fellow researcher aboard the Russian icebreaker that carries the ISSS team each year is Professor Orjan Gustafsson from Stockholm University in Sweden.
He said that methane measured in the atmosphere around the region is 100 times higher than normal background levels, and in some cases 1,000 times higher.

'No alarm'
Despite the high readings, Professor Gustafsson said that so far there was no cause for alarm, and stressed that further studies were still necessary to determine the exact cause of the methane seepage.
"It is important now to understand how fast it is being released and how much is being released," he said.
However, there is a real fear that global warming may cause Siberia's subsea permafrost to thaw.
Some estimates put the amount of carbon trapped in shelf permafrost at 1,600 billion tonnes - roughly twice as much carbon as in the atmosphere now.
The release of this once captive carbon from destabilised ocean sediments and permafrost would have catastrophic effect on our climate and life on Earth, warn the scientists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8437703.stm

The italics are mine. i think everyone who reads this thread knows my *general* position on the matter, but those statistics seem unbelievable to me. which bit of the "air" was being tested here? Once published officially it will be an absolute field day for the mass media...
 
Methane levels may see 'runaway' rise, scientists warn
A rapid acceleration may have begun in levels of a gas far more harmful than CO2
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
Monday, 22 February 2010

Atmospheric levels of methane, the greenhouse gas which is much more powerful than carbon dioxide, have risen significantly for the last three years running, scientists will disclose today – leading to fears that a major global-warming "feedback" is beginning to kick in.

For some time there has been concern that the vast amounts of methane, or "natural gas", locked up in the frozen tundra of the Arctic could be released as the permafrost is melted by global warming. This would give a huge further impetus to climate change, an effect sometimes referred to as "the methane time bomb".

This is because methane (CH4) is even more effective at retaining the Sun's heat in the atmosphere than CO2, the main focus of international climate concern for the last two decades. Over a relatively short period, such as 20 years, CH4 has a global warming potential more than 60 times as powerful as CO2, although it decays more quickly.

Now comes the first news that levels of methane in the atmosphere, which began rising in 2007 when an unprecedented heatwave in the Arctic caused a record shrinking of the sea ice, have continued to rise significantly through 2008 and 2009.

Although researchers cannot yet be certain, and there may be non-threatening explanations, there is a fear that rising temperatures may have started to activate the positive feedback mechanism. This would see higher atmospheric levels of the gas producing more warming, which in turn would release more methane, which would produce even further warming, and so on into an uncontrollable "runaway" warming effect. This is believed to have happened at the end of the last Ice Age, causing a very rapid temperature rise in a matter of decades.

The new figures will be revealed this morning at a major two-day conference on greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, taking place at the Royal Society in London. They will be disclosed in a presentation by Professor Euan Nisbet, of Royal Holloway College of the University of London, and Dr Ed Dlugokencky of the Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado, which is run by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

etc...

http://www.independent.co.uk/environmen ... 06484.html
 
Arctic Methane On The Move?
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... -the-move/

By Real Climate

06 March, 2010
Real Climate

Methane is like the radical wing of the carbon cycle, in today’s atmosphere a stronger greenhouse gas per molecule than CO2, and an atmospheric concentration that can change more quickly than CO2 can. There has been a lot of press coverage of a new paper in Science this week called “Extensive methane venting to the atmosphere from sediments of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf”, which comes on the heels of a handful of interrelated methane papers in the last year or so. Is now the time to get frightened?

No. CO2 is plenty to be frightened of, while methane is frosting on the cake. Imagine you are in a Toyota on the highway at 70 miles per hour approaching stopped traffic, and you find that the brake pedal is broken. This is CO2. Then you figure out that the accelerator has also jammed, so that by the time you hit the truck in front of you, you will be going 80 miles per hour instead of 70. This is methane. Is now the time to get worried? No, you should already have been worried by the broken brake pedal. Methane sells newspapers, but it’s not the big story, nor does it look to be a game changer to the big story, which is CO2.

For some background on methane hydrates we can refer you here. This weeks’ Science paper is by Shakhova et al, a follow on to a 2005 GRL paper. The observation in 2005 was elevated concentrations of methane in ocean waters on the Siberian shelf, presumably driven by outgassing from the sediments and driving excess methane to the atmosphere. The new paper adds observations of methane spikes in the air over the water, confirming the methane’s escape from the water column, instead of it being trapped by fresh water and oxidized to CO2 in the water, for example. The new data enable the methane flux from this region to the atmosphere to be quantified, and they find that this region rivals the methane flux from the whole rest of the ocean.

What’s missing from these studies themselves is evidence that the Siberian shelf degassing is new, a climate feedback, rather than simply nature-as-usual, driven by the retreat of submerged permafrost left over from the last ice age. However, other recent papers speak to this question.

Westbrook et al 2009, published stunning sonar images of bubble plumes rising from sediments off Spitzbergen, Norway. The bubbles are rising from a line on the sea floor that corresponds to the boundary of methane hydrate stability, a boundary that would retreat in a warming water column. A modeling study by Reagan and Moridis 2009 supports the idea that the observed bubbles could be in response to observed warming of the water column driven by anthropogenic warming.

Another recent paper, from Dlugokencky et al. 2009, describes an uptick in the methane concentration in the air in 2007, and tries to figure out where it’s coming from. The atmospheric methane concentration rose from the preanthropogenic until about the year 1993, at which point it rather abruptly plateaued. Methane is a transient gas in the atmosphere, so it ought to plateau if the emission flux is steady, but the shape of the concentration curve suggested some sudden decrease in the emission rate, stemming from the collapse of economic activity in the former Soviet bloc, or by drying of wetlands, or any of several other proposed and unresolved explanations. (Maybe the legislature in South Dakota should pass a law that methane is driven by astrology!) A previous uptick in the methane concentration in 1998 could be explained in terms of the effect of el Nino on wetlands, but the uptick in 2007 is not so simple to explain. The concentration held steady in 2008, meaning at least that interannual variability is important in the methane cycle, and making it hard to say if the long-term average emission rate is rising in a way that would be consistent with a new carbon feedback.

Anyway, so far it is at most a very small feedback. The Siberian Margin might rival the whole rest of the world ocean as a methane source, but the ocean source overall is much smaller than the land source. Most of the methane in the atmosphere comes from wetlands, natural and artificial associated with rice agriculture. The ocean is small potatoes, and there is enough uncertainty in the methane budget to accommodate adjustments in the sources without too much overturning of apple carts.

Could this be the first modest sprout of what will grow into a huge carbon feedback in the future? It is possible, but two things should be kept in mind. One is that there’s no reason to fixate on methane in particular. Methane is a transient gas in the atmosphere, while CO2 essentially accumulates in the atmosphere / ocean carbon cycle, so in the end the climate forcing from the accumulating CO2 that methane oxidizes into may be as important as the transient concentration of methane itself. The other thing to remember is that there’s no reason to fixate on methane hydrates in particular, as opposed to the carbon stored in peats in Arctic permafrosts for example. Peats take time to degrade but hydrate also takes time to melt, limited by heat transport. They don’t generally explode instantaneously.

For methane to be a game-changer in the future of Earth’s climate, it would have to degas to the atmosphere catastrophically, on a time scale that is faster than the decadal lifetime of methane in the air. So far no one has seen or proposed a mechanism to make that happen.

Dlugokencky et al., Observational constraints on recent increases in the atmospheric CH4 burden. GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 36, L18803, doi:10.1029/2009GL039780, 2009

Reagan, M. and G. Moridis, Large-scale simulation of methane hydrate dissociation along the West Spitsbergen Margin, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 36, L23612, doi:10.1029/2009GL041332, 2009

Shakova et al., Extensive Methane Venting to the Atmosphere from Sediments of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, Science 237: 1246-1250, 2010

Shakova et al., The distribution of methane on the Siberian Arctic shelves: Implications for the marine methane cycle, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 32, L09601, doi:10.1029/2005GL022751, 2005

Westbrook, G., et al, Escape of methane gas from the seabed along the West Spitsbergen continental margin, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 36, L15608, doi:10.1029/2009GL039191, 2009
 
Shock as retreat of Arctic sea ice releases deadly greenhouse gas
Russian research team astonished after finding 'fountains' of methane bubbling to surface
Steve Connor Tuesday 13 December 2011

Dramatic and unprecedented plumes of methane – a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide – have been seen bubbling to the surface of the Arctic Ocean by scientists undertaking an extensive survey of the region.

The scale and volume of the methane release has astonished the head of the Russian research team who has been surveying the seabed of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf off northern Russia for nearly 20 years.
In an exclusive interview with The Independent, Igor Semiletov, of the Far Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said that he has never before witnessed the scale and force of the methane being released from beneath the Arctic seabed.

"Earlier we found torch-like structures like this but they were only tens of metres in diameter. This is the first time that we've found continuous, powerful and impressive seeping structures, more than 1,000 metres in diameter. It's amazing," Dr Semiletov said. "I was most impressed by the sheer scale and high density of the plumes. Over a relatively small area we found more than 100, but over a wider area there should be thousands of them."

Scientists estimate that there are hundreds of millions of tonnes of methane gas locked away beneath the Arctic permafrost, which extends from the mainland into the seabed of the relatively shallow sea of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. One of the greatest fears is that with the disappearance of the Arctic sea-ice in summer, and rapidly rising temperatures across the entire region, which are already melting the Siberian permafrost, the trapped methane could be suddenly released into the atmosphere leading to rapid and severe climate change.

Dr Semiletov's team published a study in 2010 estimating that the methane emissions from this region were about eight million tonnes a year, but the latest expedition suggests this is a significant underestimate of the phenomenon.

In late summer, the Russian research vessel Academician Lavrentiev conducted an extensive survey of about 10,000 square miles of sea off the East Siberian coast. Scientists deployed four highly sensitive instruments, both seismic and acoustic, to monitor the "fountains" or plumes of methane bubbles rising to the sea surface from beneath the seabed.

"In a very small area, less than 10,000 square miles, we have counted more than 100 fountains, or torch-like structures, bubbling through the water column and injected directly into the atmosphere from the seabed," Dr Semiletov said. "We carried out checks at about 115 stationary points and discovered methane fields of a fantastic scale – I think on a scale not seen before. Some plumes were a kilometre or more wide and the emissions went directly into the atmosphere – the concentration was a hundred times higher than normal."

Dr Semiletov released his findings for the first time last week at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco

http://www.independent.co.uk/environmen ... 76134.html
 
rynner2 said:
Shock as retreat of Arctic sea ice releases deadly greenhouse gas
Russian research team astonished after finding 'fountains' of methane bubbling to surface

Not a surprise. These reseachers must be easily "shocked".
 
SHAYBARSABE said:
rynner2 said:
Shock as retreat of Arctic sea ice releases deadly greenhouse gas
Russian research team astonished after finding 'fountains' of methane bubbling to surface
Not a surprise. These reseachers must be easily "shocked".
Although methane has been found rising from the sea floor before, I think the 'shocking' element here is the sheer volume discovered,
"Earlier we found torch-like structures like this but they were only tens of metres in diameter. This is the first time that we've found continuous, powerful and impressive seeping structures, more than 1,000 metres in diameter. It's amazing," Dr Semiletov said. "I was most impressed by the sheer scale and high density of the plumes...."
A 1,000m diameter seeper could release 10,000 times the volume of methane released by a 10m diameter seeper if the flow rates per square metre are similar.

The other 'shocking' aspect is that this methane release seems to have been triggered by the ongoing GW, and this creates a positive feedback reinforcing GW, possibly leading to a catastrophic runaway effect.
 
Expect methane levels in the UK to rise significantly this Christmas due to the consumption of Brussels sprouts. :)
 
rynner2 said:
SHAYBARSABE said:
rynner2 said:
Shock as retreat of Arctic sea ice releases deadly greenhouse gas
Russian research team astonished after finding 'fountains' of methane bubbling to surface
Not a surprise. These reseachers must be easily "shocked".
Although methane has been found rising from the sea floor before, I think the 'shocking' element here is the sheer volume discovered,
"Earlier we found torch-like structures like this but they were only tens of metres in diameter. This is the first time that we've found continuous, powerful and impressive seeping structures, more than 1,000 metres in diameter. It's amazing," Dr Semiletov said. "I was most impressed by the sheer scale and high density of the plumes...."
A 1,000m diameter seeper could release 10,000 times the volume of methane released by a 10m diameter seeper if the flow rates per square metre are similar.

The other 'shocking' aspect is that this methane release seems to have been triggered by the ongoing GW, and this creates a positive feedback reinforcing GW, possibly leading to a catastrophic runaway effect.
The Calthrate Gun Hypothesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis
 
rynner2 said:
Although methane has been found rising from the sea floor before, I think the 'shocking' element here is the sheer volume discovered,

I guess I come from the point of view that we know the methane is down there. We know that warming can release it. Volume just doesn't seem shocking--unless they mean shocking in the absolutely terrifying sense. (Yes, I did see "Dimming the Sun" which now seems to be available in parts on youtube.com -- http://youtu.be/gUD66kjLVNw)
 
Interesting proposals. Chart & images at link.

Climate 'tech fixes' urged for Arctic methane
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17400804
By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News

The original idea called for cloud-whitening ships - but it could be done from land

Related Stories

More sulphur trails from the stratosphere
Climate 'fix' may warm, not cool
Saltire prize for 'Duck' inventor

An eminent UK engineer is suggesting building cloud-whitening towers in the Faroe Islands as a "technical fix" for warming across the Arctic.

Scientists told UK MPs this week that the possibility of a major methane release triggered by melting Arctic ice constitutes a "planetary emergency".

The Arctic could be sea-ice free each September within a few years.

Wave energy pioneer Stephen Salter has shown that pumping seawater sprays into the atmosphere could cool the planet.

The Edinburgh University academic has previously suggested whitening clouds using specially-built ships.

At a meeting in Westminster organised by the Arctic Methane Emergency Group (Ameg), Prof Salter told MPs that the situation in the Arctic was so serious that ships might take too long.

"I don't think there's time to do ships for the Arctic now," he said.

"We'd need a bit of land, in clean air and the right distance north... where you can cool water flowing into the Arctic."

Continue reading the main story

Start Quote

Everybody working in geo-engineering hopes it won't be needed - but we fear it will be”

Stephen Salter
Edinburgh University
Favoured locations would be the Faroes and islands in the Bering Strait, he said.

Towers would be constructed, simplified versions of what has been planned for ships.

In summer, seawater would be pumped up to the top using some kind of renewable energy, and out through the nozzles that are now being developed at Edinburgh University, which achieve incredibly fine droplet size.

In an idea first proposed by US physicist John Latham, the fine droplets of seawater provide nuclei around which water vapour can condense.

This makes the average droplet size in the clouds smaller, meaning they appear whiter and reflect more of the Sun's incoming energy back into space, cooling the Earth.

On melting ice
The area of Arctic Ocean covered by ice each summer has declined significantly over the last few decades as air and sea temperatures have risen.

For each of the last four years, the September minimum has seen about two-thirds of the average cover for the years 1979-2000, which is used a baseline. The extent covered at other times of the year has also been shrinking.

What more concerns some scientists is the falling volume of ice.

Analysis from the University of Washington, in Seattle, using ice thickness data from submarines and satellites, suggests that Septembers could be ice-free within just a few years.


Data for September suggests the Arctic Ocean could be free of sea ice in a few years
"In 2007, the water [off northern Siberia] warmed up to about 5C (41F) in summer, and this extends down to the sea bed, melting the offshore permafrost," said Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at Cambridge University.

Among the issues this raises is whether the ice-free conditions will quicken release of methane currently trapped in the sea bed, especially in the shallow waters along the northern coast of Siberia, Canada and Alaska.

Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, though it does not last as long in the atmosphere.


Dramatic methane release would bring major impacts to Arctic indigenous peoples
Several teams of scientists trying to measure how much methane is actually being released have reported seeing vast bubbles coming up through the water - although analysing how much this matters is complicated by the absence of similar measurements from previous decades.

Nevertheless, Prof Wadhams told MPs, the release could be expected to get stronger over time.

"With 'business-as-usual' greenhouse gas emissions, we might have warming of 9-10C in the Arctic.

"That will cement in place the ice-free nature of the Arctic Ocean - it will release methane from offshore, and a lot of the methane on land as well."

This would - in turn - exacerbate warming, across the Arctic and the rest of the world.

Abrupt methane releases from frozen regions may have played a major role in two events, 55 and 251 million years ago, that extinguished much of the life then on Earth.

Meteorologist Lord (Julian) Hunt, who chaired the meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Climate Change, clarified that an abrupt methane release from the current warming was not inevitable, describing that as "an issue for scientific debate".

But he also said that some in the scientific community had been reluctant to discuss the possibility.

"There is quite a lot of suppression and non-discussion of issues that are difficult, and one of those is in fact methane," he said, recalling a reluctance on the part of at least one senior scientists involved in the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment to discuss the impact that a methane release might have.

Reluctant solutions
The field of implementing technical climate fixes, or geo-engineering, is full of controversy, and even those involved in researching the issue see it as a last-ditch option, a lot less desirable than constraining greenhouse gas emissions.

Continue reading the main story
Climate change glossary
Select a term to learn more:
Adaptation
Adaptation
Action that helps cope with the effects of climate change - for example construction of barriers to protect against rising sea levels, or conversion to crops capable of surviving high temperatures and drought.
Glossary in full
"Everybody working in geo-engineering hopes it won't be needed - but we fear it will be," said Prof Salter.

Adding to the controversy is that some of the techniques proposed could do more harm than good.

The idea of putting dust particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight, mimicking the cooling effect of volcanic eruptions, would in fact be disastrous for the Arctic, said Prof Salter, with models showing it would increase temperatures at the pole by perhaps 10C.

And last year, the cloud-whitening idea was also criticised by scientists who calculated that using the wrong droplet size could lead to warming - though Prof Salter says this can be eliminated through experimentation.

He has not so far embarked on a full costing of the land-based towers, but suggests £200,000 as a ballpark figure.

Depending on the size and location, Prof Salter said that in the order of 100 towers would be needed to counteract Arctic warming.

However, no funding is currently on the table for cloud-whitening. A proposal to build a prototype ship for about £20m found no takers, and currently development work is limited to the lab.
 
If methane is rising to the surface, I don't know why we aren't harvesting it on a large scale. It seems to me that mining clathrates would be a lot easier than drilling for gas.
In fact, if it was mined on a big enough scale, natural gas could be used as a relatively green alternative to oil, for the purposes of producing fuel for vehicles.
 
Mythopoeika said:
If methane is rising to the surface, I don't know why we aren't harvesting it on a large scale. It seems to me that mining clathrates would be a lot easier than drilling for gas.
In fact, if it was mined on a big enough scale, natural gas could be used as a relatively green alternative to oil, for the purposes of producing fuel for vehicles.

Good point. anyone know if there is a method of harvesting it available?
 
ramonmercado said:
Good point. anyone know if there is a method of harvesting it available?
If there was you can be sure this government would tax the hell out of it.
 
Arctic melt releasing ancient methane
By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News

Scientists have identified thousands of sites in the Arctic where methane that has been stored for many millennia is bubbling into the atmosphere.
The methane has been trapped by ice, but is able to escape as the ice melts.

Writing in the journal Nature Geoscience, the researchers say this ancient gas could have a significant impact on climate change.
Methane is the second most important greenhouse gas after CO2 and levels are rising after a few years of stability.

There are many sources of the gas around the world, some natural and some man-made, such as landfill waste disposal sites and farm animals.
Tracking methane to these various sources is not easy.
But the researchers on the new Arctic project, led by Katey Walter Anthony from the University of Alaska at Fairbanks (UAF), were able to identify long-stored gas by the ratio of different isotopes of carbon in the methane molecules.

Using aerial and ground-based surveys, the team identified about 150,000 methane seeps in Alaska and Greenland in lakes along the margins of ice cover.
Local sampling showed that some of these are releasing the ancient methane, perhaps from natural gas or coal deposits underneath the lakes, whereas others are emitting much younger gas, presumably formed through decay of plant material in the lakes.

"We observed most of these cryosphere-cap seeps in lakes along the boundaries of permafrost thaw and in moraines and fjords of retreating glaciers," they write, emphasising the point that warming in the Arctic is releasing this long-stored carbon.
"If this relationship holds true for other regions where sedimentary basins are at present capped by permafrost, glaciers and ice sheets, such as northern West Siberia, rich in natural gas and partially underlain by thin permafrost predicted to degrade substantially by 2100, a very strong increase in methane carbon cycling will result, with potential implications for climate warming feedbacks."

Quantifying methane release across the Arctic is an active area of research, with several countries despatching missions to monitor sites on land and sea.
The region stores vast quantities of the gas in different places - in and under permafrost on land, on and under the sea bed, and - as evidenced by the latest research - in geological reservoirs.

"The Arctic is the fastest warming region on the planet, and has many methane sources that will increase as the temperature rises," commented Prof Euan Nisbet from Royal Holloway, University of London, who is also involved in Arctic methane research.
"This is yet another serious concern: the warming will feed the warming."

How serious and how immediate a threat this feedback mechanism presents is a controversial area, with some scientists believing that the impacts will not be seen for many decades, and others pointing out the possibility of a rapid release that could swiftly accelerate global warming.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18120093
 
rynner2 said:
Arctic melt releasing ancient methane
By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News

Scientists have identified thousands of sites in the Arctic where methane that has been stored for many millennia is bubbling into the atmosphere.
The methane has been trapped by ice, but is able to escape as the ice melts.

...

"The Arctic is the fastest warming region on the planet, and has many methane sources that will increase as the temperature rises," commented Prof Euan Nisbet from Royal Holloway, University of London, who is also involved in Arctic methane research.
"This is yet another serious concern: the warming will feed the warming."

How serious and how immediate a threat this feedback mechanism presents is a controversial area, with some scientists believing that the impacts will not be seen for many decades, and others pointing out the possibility of a rapid release that could swiftly accelerate global warming.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18120093
There was a picture to go with that story.

arcticlake.jpg


No doubt, you could light some of those streams of bubbles, like enormous farts.

An article from January, this year, from the Real Climate website.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/01/an-arctic-methane-worst-case-scenario/

An Arctic methane worst-case scenario

RealClimate.org. david @ 7 January 2012

Let’s suppose that the Arctic started to degas methane 100 times faster than it is today. I just made that number up trying to come up with a blow-the-doors-off surprise, something like the ozone hole. We ran the numbers to get an idea of how the climate impact of an Arctic Methane Nasty Surprise would stack up to that from Business-as-Usual rising CO2

Walter et al (2007) says that Arctic lakes are 10% of natural global emissions, or about 5% of total emissions. I believe that was considered to be remarkably high at the time but let’s take it as a given, and representing the Arctic as a whole. If the number of lakes or their bubbling intensity suddenly increased by a factor of 100, and it persisted this way for 100 years, it would come to about 200 Gton of carbon emission, which is on the same scale as our entire fossil fuel emission so far (300 Gton C), or roughly the amount of traditional reserves of natural gas (although I’m not sure where estimates are since fracking) or petroleum. It would be a whopper of a surprise.

Scaling Walter’s Arctic lake emission rates up by a factor of 100 would increase the overall emission rate, natural and anthropogenic, by about a factor of 5 from where it is today. The weak leverage is because the high latitudes are a small source today relative to tropical wetlands and anthropogenic sources, so they have to grow a lot before they make much difference to the sum of all sources.

The steady-state methane concentration in the air scales nearly linearly with the emission rate. Actually, the concentration goes up somewhat faster than a constant times the emission rate, because the lifetime in the atmosphere gets longer (IPCC TAR). Let’s err on the side of flamboyance (great word in this context) and say the concentration of methane in the air goes up by a factor of 10 for the duration of the extra methane emission (meaning that the lifetime doubles).

Using the modtran model on line I get a radiative forcing from 10 * atmospheric methane of 3.4 Watts/m2 (the difference in the instantaneous IR flux out, labeled Iout, between cases with and without 10x methane). Using the TAR estimates of radiative forcing gives 2.7 Watts/m2.

But methane is a reactive gas and its presence leads to other greenhouse forcings, like the water vapor it decomposes into. Hansen estimates the “efficacy” of methane radiative forcing to be 1.4 (Hansen et al, 2005, Shindell et al, 2009), so that puts us to 4 or even 5 Watts/m2.

This is about twice the radiative forcing today from all anthropogenic greenhouse gases today, or (again according to Modtran) it would translate to an equivalent CO2 at today’s methane concentration of about 750 ppm. That seems significant, for sure.

Or, trying to “correct” for the different lifetimes of the gases using Global Warming Potentials, over a 100-year time horizon (which still way under-represents the lifetime of the CO2), you get that the methane would be equivalent to increasing CO2 to about 500 ppm, lower than 750 because the CO2 forcing lasts longer than the methane, which the GWP calculation tries in its own myopic way to account for.

But the methane worst case does not suddenly spell the extinction of human life on Earth. It does not lead to a runaway greenhouse. The worst-case methane scenario stands comparable to what CO2 can do. What CO2 will do, under business-as-usual, not in a wild blow-the-doors-off unpleasant surprise, but just in the absence of any pleasant surprises (like emission controls). At worst comparable to CO2 except that CO2 lasts essentially forever.

...
More, including the full links, references and comments, at the site.

Don't panic, just don't expect too much good news. :(
 
rynner2 said:
Arctic melt releasing ancient methane
By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News

"The Arctic is the fastest warming region on the planet, and has many methane sources that will increase as the temperature rises," commented Prof Euan Nisbet from Royal Holloway, University of London, who is also involved in Arctic methane research.
"This is yet another serious concern: the warming will feed the warming."

How serious and how immediate a threat this feedback mechanism presents is a controversial area, with some scientists believing that the impacts will not be seen for many decades, and others pointing out the possibility of a rapid release that could swiftly accelerate global warming.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18120093


Okay, but if Black was being impartial he'd have to tell his readers why this is so 'controversial' - which is because many scientists doubt there will be any positive feedback at all. Positive feedback loops occur infrequently in nature and there is as yet no evidence whatsoever that climate works like that. He should also have added that if there is indeed no positive feedback, then the theory of runaway heating is brought into major question - as it is based almost solely on the assumption that positive feedback will definitely happen.

Again - just trying to offer the all-important balance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Antarctic may host methane stores

Large volumes of methane - a potent greenhouse gas - could be locked beneath the ice-covered regions of Antarctica, according to a new study.
It says this methane could be released into the atmosphere as ice retreats, contributing to climate warming.
The findings indicate that ancient deposits of organic matter may have been converted to methane by microbes under the ice.

An international team reported the results in Nature journal.
Study leader Jemima Wadham, from Bristol University, said: "This is an immense amount of organic carbon, more than ten times the size of carbon stocks in northern permafrost regions.
"Our laboratory experiments tell us that these sub-ice environments are also biologically active, meaning that this organic carbon is probably being metabolised to carbon dioxide and methane gas by microbes."

They estimate that there could be hundreds of billions of tonnes of carbon stored in methane reservoirs under the ice sheet.
The authors say that the predicted shallow depth of these methane reserves means that they could be destabilised by climate change, and might act as a positive feedback on global warming.

Co-author Dr Sandra Arndt, also from the University of Bristol, said: "It's not surprising that you might expect to find significant amounts of methane hydrate trapped beneath the ice sheet.
"Just like in sub-seafloor sediments, it is cold and pressures are high which are important conditions for methane hydrate formation."

In their Nature paper, the authors comment that their "findings suggest that the Antarctic Ice Sheet may be a neglected but important component of the global methane budget".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19410444
 
Warming ocean temperatures a third of a mile below the surface, in a dark ocean in areas with little marine life, might attract scant attention. But this is precisely the depth where frozen pockets of methane 'ice' transition from a dormant solid to a powerful greenhouse gas.

New University of Washington research suggests that subsurface warming could be causing more methane gas to bubble up off the Washington and Oregon coast.

The study, to appear in the journal Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, shows that of 168 bubble plumes observed within the past decade, a disproportionate number were seen at a critical depth for the stability of methane hydrates.

"We see an unusually high number of bubble plumes at the depth where methane hydrate would decompose if seawater has warmed," said lead author H. Paul Johnson, a UW professor of oceanography. "So it is not likely to be just emitted from the sediments; this appears to be coming from the decomposition of methane that has been frozen for thousands of years."

Methane has contributed to sudden swings in Earth's climate in the past. It is unknown what role it might contribute to contemporary climate change, although recent studies have reported warming-related methane emissions in Arctic permafrost and off the Atlantic coast.

Of the 168 methane plumes in the new study, some 14 were located at the transition depth - more plumes per unit area than on surrounding parts of the Washington and Oregon seafloor.

http://phys.org/print364044017.html
 
Add to that the effect of methane, which has more effect than CO2. Nobody ever seems to mention methane's role in climate.
Cthlatrates or however they are spelled. People do talk about methane, as in the potential melting of subsea methane ice causing massive amounts of methane to be released.

Also cow farts, yes, people do talk about cow farts methane contribution, and there is research going on into making cows less farty. [Farty being the technical term ;) ]
 
  • Like
Reactions: RaM
Cthlatrates or however they are spelled. People do talk about methane, as in the potential melting of subsea methane ice causing massive amounts of methane to be released.

Also cow farts, yes, people do talk about cow farts methane contribution, and there is research going on into making cows less farty. [Farty being the technical term ;) ]
Yes...there is talk...but no 'methane tax'! Not that I want to pay a methane tax!
Yet CO2 is all the climatologists think is important (probably because it's easier to measure it, and therefore easier to tax it). And as a result, we now have yet another money market (carbon trading) for fat cats to dabble in.
 
Yes...there is talk...but no 'methane tax'!

New Zealand attempted to introduce a livestock emissions tax - largely aimed at methane emissions - as early as 2003, but it was mocked out of consideration ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_emissions_research_levy

Per unit amount, methane in the atmosphere serves to trap far more heat than CO2. I've seen estimates of the differential as high as 80-something to 1 (methane to CO2).

However, there are issues of scale which have an effect on policy priorities.

First, the amount of C02 emitted annually dwarfs the amount of methane. Recent US emissions estimates put the difference in the vicinity of 8 to 1 (CO2 to methane).

For example, see:

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks

Second, the dissipation / breakdown of atmospheric methane is considerably faster than for CO2. The average duration or latency of CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is similarly circa 8 times that of methane molecules.

The combination of these facts render methane a lesser cause for concern than CO2 (with respect to the 'big picture'), and less of an immediate problem than its greater heat trapping capability (in and of itself) would suggest.

Another factor concerns ambiguities in how effectively methane emissions could be monitored / tracked.

The greatest single source of methane emissions is fossil fuel extraction (coal and petroleum) rather than cow belches. A lot of the output is simply leakage from the natural gas supply chain. In the USA the combination of fossil fuel extraction / leakage and landfill emissions accounts for over 60% of estimated methane emissions. Livestock belches / farts and manure decomposition account for less than 25%.
 
Back
Top