Prodigious plumes of planet-warming methane are bubbling from
sediments across a broad region of Arctic seafloor previously thought
to be sealed by permafrost, new analyses indicate. The resulting
increase of methane gas in the atmosphere may accelerate climate
warming, scientists say.

Though immense amounts of carbon are known to be trapped in the
peatlands of Siberia, a larger, often unrecognized carbon reservoir
lies hidden just north of that frigid region, says Natalia Shakhova, a
biogeochemist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. The East
Siberian Arctic Shelf — a 2.1-million-square-kilometer patch of Arctic
seafloor that was exposed during the most recent ice age, when sea
levels were lower — is three times larger than all of today’s land-
based Siberian wetlands. When the region was above sea level, tundra
vegetation pulled carbon dioxide from the air as plants grew. That
organic material, much of which didn’t decompose in the frigid Arctic,
accumulated in the soil and is the source of modern methane.

More at http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...dy-coming-true

On 7 Mar, 11:23, " wrote:
Prodigious plumes of planet-warming methane are bubbling from
sediments across a broad region of Arctic seafloor previously thought
to be sealed by permafrost, new analyses indicate. The resulting
increase of methane gas in the atmosphere may accelerate climate
warming, scientists say.

Though immense amounts of carbon are known to be trapped in the
peatlands of Siberia, a larger, often unrecognized carbon reservoir
lies hidden just north of that frigid region, says Natalia Shakhova, a
biogeochemist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. The East
Siberian Arctic Shelf — a 2.1-million-square-kilometer patch of Arctic
seafloor that was exposed during the most recent ice age, when sea
levels were lower — is three times larger than all of today’s land-
based Siberian wetlands. When the region was above sea level, tundra
vegetation pulled carbon dioxide from the air as plants grew. That
organic material, much of which didn’t decompose in the frigid Arctic,
accumulated in the soil and is the source of modern methane.

More at
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...rsea-methane-l...

Speaking as a fruitcake, what exactly is the difference between a
scientist and a sheep?

As a fruitcake, I can see that the ability to trap heat makes a
methane molecule capable of blocking it too. Sometimes I wish I wasn't
half baked.

And sometimes I get the impression I'm not the only one.

On 7 Mar, 13:05, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On 7 Mar, 11:23, " wrote:



Prodigious plumes of planet-warming methane are bubbling from
sediments across a broad region of Arctic seafloor previously thought
to be sealed by permafrost, new analyses indicate. The resulting
increase of methane gas in the atmosphere may accelerate climate
warming, scientists say.

Though immense amounts of carbon are known to be trapped in the
peatlands of Siberia, a larger, often unrecognized carbon reservoir
lies hidden just north of that frigid region, says Natalia Shakhova, a
biogeochemist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. The East
Siberian Arctic Shelf — a 2.1-million-square-kilometer patch of Arctic
seafloor that was exposed during the most recent ice age, when sea
levels were lower — is three times larger than all of today’s land-
based Siberian wetlands. When the region was above sea level, tundra
vegetation pulled carbon dioxide from the air as plants grew. That
organic material, much of which didn’t decompose in the frigid Arctic,
accumulated in the soil and is the source of modern methane.

More at
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...rsea-methane-l...

Speaking as a fruitcake, what exactly is the difference between a
scientist and a sheep?

As a fruitcake, I can see that the ability to trap heat makes a
methane molecule capable of blocking it too. Sometimes I wish I wasn't
half baked.

And sometimes I get the impression I'm not the only one.

Forgive me for being thick, but if the tundra becomes more temperate
wouldn't that lead to much more vegetation developing over the region,
and therefore absorbing more CO2?

In message
,
" writes
On 7 Mar, 13:05, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On 7 Mar, 11:23, " wrote:



Prodigious plumes of planet-warming methane are bubbling from
sediments across a broad region of Arctic seafloor previously thought
to be sealed by permafrost, new analyses indicate. The resulting
increase of methane gas in the atmosphere may accelerate climate
warming, scientists say.

Though immense amounts of carbon are known to be trapped in the
peatlands of Siberia, a larger, often unrecognized carbon reservoir
lies hidden just north of that frigid region, says Natalia Shakhova, a
biogeochemist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. The East
Siberian Arctic Shelf — a 2.1-million-square-kilometer patch of Arctic
seafloor that was exposed during the most recent ice age, when sea
levels were lower — is three times larger than all of today’s land-
based Siberian wetlands. When the region was above sea level, tundra
vegetation pulled carbon dioxide from the air as plants grew. That
organic material, much of which didn’t decompose in the frigid Arctic,
accumulated in the soil and is the source of modern methane.

More at
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...rsea-methane-l...

Speaking as a fruitcake, what exactly is the difference between a
scientist and a sheep?

As a fruitcake, I can see that the ability to trap heat makes a
methane molecule capable of blocking it too. Sometimes I wish I wasn't
half baked.

And sometimes I get the impression I'm not the only one.

Forgive me for being thick, but if the tundra becomes more temperate
wouldn't that lead to much more vegetation developing over the region,
and therefore absorbing more CO2?

It's not as simple as that. While I expect that the replacement of
tundra by taiga will increase the amount of carbon bound up in plants,
the question of the amount of carbon bound up in other reserves also has
to be considered. Two such reserves are soil carbon (oxidation of peat
releases CO2 and bacterial decomposition of peat CH4) and permafrost
methane (where the tundra becoming more temperate means that methane is
no longer trapped by ice). I have the impression that the professionals
expect the sum of these 3 factors to result in a net release of
greenhouse gases.

In the case of the East Siberian Arctic (Continental) Shelf, as it's
under water, only the 3rd factor is relevant.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

"Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote in message
...
| In message
| ,
| " writes
| On 7 Mar, 13:05, Weatherlawyer wrote:
| On 7 Mar, 11:23, " wrote:
|
|
|
| Prodigious plumes of planet-warming methane are bubbling from
| sediments across a broad region of Arctic seafloor previously thought
| to be sealed by permafrost, new analyses indicate. The resulting
| increase of methane gas in the atmosphere may accelerate climate
| warming, scientists say.
|
| Though immense amounts of carbon are known to be trapped in the
| peatlands of Siberia, a larger, often unrecognized carbon reservoir
| lies hidden just north of that frigid region, says Natalia Shakhova,
a
| biogeochemist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. The East
| Siberian Arctic Shelf - a 2.1-million-square-kilometer patch of
Arctic
| seafloor that was exposed during the most recent ice age, when sea
| levels were lower - is three times larger than all of today's land-
| based Siberian wetlands. When the region was above sea level, tundra
| vegetation pulled carbon dioxide from the air as plants grew. That
| organic material, much of which didn't decompose in the frigid
Arctic,
| accumulated in the soil and is the source of modern methane.
|
| More at
|
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...rsea-methane-l...
|
| Speaking as a fruitcake, what exactly is the difference between a
| scientist and a sheep?
|
| As a fruitcake, I can see that the ability to trap heat makes a
| methane molecule capable of blocking it too. Sometimes I wish I wasn't
| half baked.
|
| And sometimes I get the impression I'm not the only one.
|
| Forgive me for being thick, but if the tundra becomes more temperate
| wouldn't that lead to much more vegetation developing over the region,
| and therefore absorbing more CO2?
|
| It's not as simple as that. While I expect that the replacement of
| tundra by taiga will increase the amount of carbon bound up in plants,
| the question of the amount of carbon bound up in other reserves also has
| to be considered. Two such reserves are soil carbon (oxidation of peat
| releases CO2 and bacterial decomposition of peat CH4) and permafrost
| methane (where the tundra becoming more temperate means that methane is
| no longer trapped by ice). I have the impression that the professionals
| expect the sum of these 3 factors to result in a net release of
| greenhouse gases.
|
| In the case of the East Siberian Arctic (Continental) Shelf, as it's
| under water, only the 3rd factor is relevant.

The deposits which give most concern are a loose crystalline combination of
methane with water called, unsurprisingly, methane hydrate. It is not a true
chemical compound and its stability is very dependent on temperature and
pressure. It normally forms at certain depths underwater where temperatures
are close to freezing.

The threat is that if sea floor temperatures rise, the combination becomes
unstable and the methane is liberated. Methane is a far more potent
"greenhouse gas" than carbon dioxide and the decomposition of major deposits
of methane hydrate could lead to an unstoppable warming.

It has happened in the past, normally triggered by the weaker warming caused
by CO2 levels rising. The most severe known event was about 250 million
years ago when it is believed that the methane hydrate release added a
further 5C warming to a 5C warming caused by CO2 released by a major
volcanic episode. The resultant 10C warming extinguished 95% of life on the
planet.

How much of this stuff is on the East Siberian Shelf I don't know - perhaps
not too much in the great scheme of things. But the warning bells should
still be ringing as if conditions are changing so that other, larger,
deposits are going to be released we could be in big trouble. Once these
start to go it will be too late to do anything about cutting our CO2
emissions as a climate disaster will be inevitable and unstoppable.
--
- Yokel -

"Yokel" posts via a spam-trap account which is not read.

In message , Yokel
writes
It has happened in the past, normally triggered by the weaker warming
caused by CO2 levels rising. The most severe known event was about 250
million years ago when it is believed that the methane hydrate release
added a further 5C warming to a 5C warming caused by CO2 released by a
major volcanic episode. The resultant 10C warming extinguished 95% of
life on the planet.

I am under the impression that the cause of the end Permian extinction
is not yet generally agreed. But the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum
does appear to have the above cause, and that resulted in the largest
mass extinction of the Caenozoic.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley