Page 6 of 12

Mad cow focus, less passing gas

Unread postPosted: Mon 03 Jul 2017, 06:41:00
by Whitefang ... s.html#jCp

we need to look just as hard if not harder at agriculture," Jackson says. "The situation certainly isn't hopeless. It's a real opportunity!

The grand solution to methane issue, extinction level event start up:

Cows on a diet!!!!!!! 8) :roll: hilarious!!!!! :-D LOL

No worries, it is not all bad news, just them cows on a diet and things will cool down below 2 degrees C.......

"Why this change happened is still not well understood," says Marielle Saunois, lead author of the new paper and an assistant professor of Université de Versailles Saint Quentin and researcher at Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement in France. "For the last two years especially, the growth rate has been faster than for the years before. It's really intriguing."

Saunois adds that this runaway pace could threaten international efforts to limit warming from climate change to 2 degrees Celsius. The research provides a strong argument that "we should do more about methane emissions," Saunois says. "If we want to stay below 2 degrees temperature increase, we should not follow this track and need to make a rapid turn-around."

Pinpointing where those methane emissions are coming from, however, isn't easy. Many environmental advocates in North America have raised concerns that expanded drilling for natural gas in recent years could lead to a surge in methane emissions. But Saunois says that based on available data, the more likely source, at least for now, is agriculture. She and her colleagues aren't sure what may be driving this increase. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, livestock operations around the world expanded from producing 1,300 million head of cattle in 1994 to nearly 1,500 million in 2014 - with a similar increase in rice cultivation in many Asian countries.

Saunois and Jackson argue, however, that the story isn't all bad news. A number of researchers have experimented with different ways of reducing methane emissions from farms. Feeding cows a diet supplemented with linseed oil, for example, seems to reduce the amount of methane they belch out. "When it comes to methane, there has been a lot of focus on the fossil fuel industry, but we need to look just as hard if not harder at agriculture," Jackson says. "The situation certainly isn't hopeless. It's a real opportunity."

Maybe someone should tell these serious scientists to look up, North and notice the signs, craters of methane, stratospheric clouds, arctic methane readings, etc etc....they know better, this is just a cover up....mad cow doodoo.
Like Islamic State using US battle tanks, ammo and the rest.......we are fighting our own stupidity, we humanity took too much after starting with agriculture and now it's payback time.

August 4-7 saw a large and growing pulse of methane emerging from the Yedoma region of Russia and the Siberian Arctic over the past week. By Wednesday, about 30 percent of the Yedoma region was covered in methane readings exceeding 1950 parts per billion, according to measurements published through the online resource — Methane Tracker.

This pulse emerged in conjuction with late summer fires and heatwaves scorching this massive region of permafrost above or near the Arctic Circle. Yedoma includes a broad expanse of permafrost ranging from Siberia to a shallow sea known as the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. In total, this region is estimated to hold 500 gigatons of carbon locked in, now thawing, tundra.

The region has come under increased scrutiny and study during recent years as temperatures throughout the Arctic and especially in this area have rapidly risen due to human warming. While global temperatures have increased by an average of around .2 degrees Celsius per decade, temperatures in Yedoma have increased by more than twice that rate at a whopping .5 degrees Celsius per decade. As a result, most of the tundra, both land and shallow sea, is subjected to increasing heat forcing and is at greater risk of releasing large volumes of carbon into the atmosphere.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Mon 03 Jul 2017, 21:50:39
by dohboi
Court rejects EPA's attempt to halt Obama-era methane rule

The Environmental Protection Agency cannot freeze the implementation of a rule requiring oil and gas companies to fix methane leaks in their equipment, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday in a setback for Donald Trump’s push to cut environmental regulations.... ... ott-pruitt

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Tue 04 Jul 2017, 05:44:05
by onlooker ... ps/528654/
Hundreds of Huge Craters Discovered in the Arctic Ocean

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Wed 12 Jul 2017, 10:42:17
by dohboi
An important study that shows that methane radiative forcing is about 25% higher than previously estimated in AR5 for shortwave forcing:

M. Etminan et al. Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing, Geophysical Research Letters (2016). DOI: 10.1002/2016GL071930 ... 6F4.f03t01

Abstract: “New calculations of the radiative forcing (RF) are presented for the three main well-mixed greenhouse gases, methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. Methane’s RF is particularly impacted because of the inclusion of the shortwave forcing; the 1750–2011 RF is about 25% higher (increasing from 0.48 W m−2 to 0.61 W m−2) compared to the value in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2013 assessment; the 100 year global warming potential is 14% higher than the IPCC value. We present new simplified expressions to calculate RF. Unlike previous expressions used by IPCC, the new ones include the overlap between CO2 and N2O; for N2O forcing, the CO2 overlap can be as important as the CH4 overlap. The 1750–2011 CO2 RF is within 1% of IPCC’s value but is about 10% higher when CO2 amounts reach 2000 ppm, a value projected to be possible under the extended RCP8.5 scenario.”

“Plain Language Summary
“Radiative forcing” is an important method to assess the importance of different climate change mechanisms, and is used, for example, by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Increased concentrations of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, are the major component of the human activity that led the IPCC, in its 2013 Assessment, to conclude that “it is extremely likely that human influence is the dominant cause of warming since the mid-20th century.” In this letter, we report new and detailed calculations that aimed to update the simpler methods of computing the radiative forcing that have been used in IPCC assessments, and elsewhere. The major result is that radiative forcing due to methane is around 20-25% higher than that found using the previous simpler methods. The main reason for this is the inclusion of the absorption of solar radiation by methane, a mechanism that had not been included in earlier calculations. We examine the mechanisms by which this solar absorption causes this radiative forcing.The work has significance for assessments of the climate impacts of methane emissions due to human activity, and for the way methane is included in international climate agreements.”

See also: ... ought.html

Extract: “Research led by the University of Reading indicates that emissions of methane due to human activity have, to date, caused a warming effect which is about one-third of the warming effect due to carbon dioxide emissions – this methane contribution is 25% higher than previous estimates.”

(Thanks to ASLR at ASIF for this)

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Thu 13 Jul 2017, 06:28:39
by Whitefang
Here you go onlooker, fine YouTube on Berentz sea craters:

Methane and fluid flow in the marine and terrestrial realm: geo(physical) aspects, biogeochemical cycling, microbial metabolisms, environmental impacts and climate change

Press release from last year I believe.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 15 Jul 2017, 08:59:04
by dohboi
I mentioned this article in the Greenland thread, but it (along with most of the discussion there) was pretty off topic there.

Is it this? ... 28384/full

"Role of hydrogen sulfide in a Permian-Triassic boundary ozone collapse"

... large quantities of hydrogen sulfide create a significant decrease in tropospheric hydroxyl radical, leading to a commensurate increase in atmospheric methane.

Therefore a large methane flux (possibly from methane clathrate destabilization, Siberian traps or hydrothermal vent complexes) combined with a large hydrogen sulfide oceanic flux is much more likely to lead to an ozone collapse than methane or hydrogen sulfide alone with implications to the Permian-Triassic boundary extinction 250 million years ago.

So there's our future all laid out for us...deadly H2S bubbling out of the oceans not only directly kills us, but also destroys the hydroxyl radicals that break down methane (and other nasties), leading to much higher methane levels. And to top it off (so to speak), this combination will also wipe out the ozone layer, making mere sunlight deadly.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 15 Jul 2017, 10:37:31
by Cog
Yeah. When does this die-off actually occur?

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 15 Jul 2017, 13:00:02
by dohboi

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Wed 19 Jul 2017, 10:04:47
by dohboi
Methane Seeps Out as Arctic Permafrost Starts to Resemble Swiss Cheese

Measurements over Canada's Mackenzie River Basin suggest that thawing permafrost is starting to free greenhouse gases long trapped in oil and gas deposits. ... rces-study

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Fri 21 Jul 2017, 18:54:32
by dohboi
Siberian permafrost hole/blowout and Anthrax. ... atherwatch

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Thu 03 Aug 2017, 08:42:41
by Tanada ... end_gl.png

April 2017: 1847.9 ppb
April 2016: 1843.3 ppb

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 12:01:58
by EnergyUnlimited
Cog wrote:Yeah. When does this die-off actually occur?

If I remember well Cid's estimations from about 6 years ago, we should be all dead (except of Cid in his bunker) within 2-3 years.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 12:08:18
by pstarr
I wonder if methane increases vegetation growth like carbon dioxide?

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 12:38:43
by EnergyUnlimited
pstarr wrote:I wonder if methane increases vegetation growth like carbon dioxide?

Yes, within a decade or two it is oxidized in air to carbon dioxide.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 12:43:34
by pstarr
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
pstarr wrote:I wonder if methane increases vegetation growth like carbon dioxide?

Yes, within a decade or two it is oxidized in air to carbon dioxide.

I figured as much. My post was really just a not-so-subtle global greening troll. :)

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 14:17:35
by Cid_Yama
My prediction has been abrupt climate change by 2020 causing global crop failures and famine, followed by pandemics due to weakened immune systems, loss of surface water sources, migrations and war.

Still right on track.

Extinction will take a bit longer. (Technology will allow thousands of the wealthy to survive long after the masses are gone. But even they will succumb before the end of the century.)

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 14:41:28
by EnergyUnlimited
Events like famine etc can be of different magnitude.
OK, extinction by the end of century - for me untestable as massive dieoff might start in 2070 or so.
So when will be the last year of global population *growth*?
2020? 2025? 2030?
What is your definition of "abrupt climate change" which is to materialize within 3 years?

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 17:23:49
by Sys1
Cid_Yama : Where are you predictions coming from for a catastrophic climate change by 2020? Abrupt climate change could occur today, in 10 years, in 50 years... I'm also a doomer, but I'm not sure at all about the way climate behaves.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 Aug 2017, 18:57:44
by Cid_Yama
It is happening right now. It is most evident in Arctic, especially last winter's faltering ice formation, but is also evident in the catastrophic storms, and incredible heat waves across the planet.

The definition of Abrupt Climate Change:
Jim White at the AGU 2014

The Arctic atmospheric methane concentration increases are accelerating.

Methane blowholes are forming like bubbles on a cooking pancake.


Similar pockmarks and new mounds are also forming on the ESAS.

With the greatest increases in temperature being in the Arctic and the thawing permafrost that has acted like a cap to dissociating methane causing an overpressure situation, conclusions should be obvious to anyone with critical thinking skills.

Only the ideologically blinded and those in psychological denial can't see the truth in front of their faces.

The global crop failures in 2013 were just a prelude to what's coming.

Major global crop failures by 2020 followed by a major dieback of the human population over the next decade.
Worldwide famine followed by worldwide pandemics. Wars over food and water. Desperate climate refugees taking up arms. Europe and North America the destination. China and India already in trouble as temperatures rise, and water sources dry up.

Re: The Methane Thread pt. 2

Unread postPosted: Thu 17 Aug 2017, 10:34:53
by vox_mundi
IPCC Over-Estimates ESAS Subsea Permafrost Stability; Methane Hydrates at Risk


The rate of vertical degradation of subsea permafrost in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS) is 18 cm a year (7.1 in/yr) over the past 30 years, which is greater than previously thought. Scientists from Tomsk Polytechnic University received this data after the comprehensive study of subsea permafrost not only in the Russian Arctic but also in the Arctic as a whole.

Earlier it was believed that the bulk of subsea permafrost in the ESAS is continuous that eliminates the destabilization of a giant pool of lower-laying methane hydrates. According to the model estimates of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), until the end of the 21st century the degradation of permafrost in the ESAS cannot exceed several meters and the formation of through taliks will take hundreds or thousands of years that eliminates the opportunity of massive methane (CH4) emissions from the bottom sediments of the ESAS into water column - atmosphere system due to the destruction of hydrates. Thus the IPCC considers the potential contribution of the ESAS into the emissions of CH4 as insignificant.

The paper shows that the model is not really correct.

Basing on the repeated drilling of four wells performed by the Institute of Permafrost Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences in 1982-1983, scientists have proved that the rates of vertical degradation of subsea permafrost amount to18 cm a year over the last 30 years (the average is 14 cm a year) which is greater than it was assumed before.
... 'New data obtained by complex biochemical, geophysical and geological studies conducted in 2011-2016 resulted in the conclusion that in some areas of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf the roof of the subsea permafrost had already reached the depth of hydrates' stability the destruction of which may cause massive releases of bubble methane.

According to our findings published earlier in Nature Geoscience, Science and Philosophical Transactions, Royal Society, the size of CH4 bubble flaw from the bottom sediments into the ESAS water can vary from milligrams to tens or hundreds of grams per square meter a day depending on the state of subsea permafrost, which leads to the concentration increase of atmospheric CH4 in the surface layer to values 2-4 times exceeding background concentrations measured in our planet,' says the first author of the paper Professor Natalia Shakhova, the TPU Department of Geology and Minerals Prospecting.


N. Shakhova, I. Semiletov, et. alCurrent rates and mechanisms of subsea permafrost degradation in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, Nature Communications 8, Article number: 15872 (2017) doi:10.1038/ncomms15872