Hi David, Apparently this concern about the "methane time bomb" goes back a few years [1]. But Similetov is defeatist:
*Similetov added:* *We are aware that our results showing that the permafrost is no longer an impermeable barrier to methane release have not been duplicated by other researchers at this time. But it is high time to warn people.* *He stopped for an instant and smiled, before adding, “We can do nothing about it, of course.”* However one of the comments does mention geoengineering: *Soon CH4 emissions will overwhelm any cuts Frankly, I wonder how long it will take for people to understand that soon methane (CH4) emissions from melting permafrost (both under the sea and on land) will overwhelm any greenhouse gas emission cuts mankind makes. Instead, the Greens are chasing their tails demanding politically unrealistic gigantic emission cuts. Not only would those emissions cuts, if implimented, waste resources better spent on a feasible solution, but the Greens are wasting whatever political capital they have on a lost cause. Don't you understand that the permafrost will already emit gigantic amounts of CH4 regardless, because of the thermal inertia of the climate system, because of the emissions from machines already built and agriculture, and because of feedback loops like natural methane emissions and albedo flips? Obviously, it is a simple choice between a massive cull of mankind and implimentation of a geoengineering scheme (I suggest using an engineered aerosol to dim the sun a little). Really, the only question is will we impliment a sun dimming scheme before or after the ecosystems rapidly collapse from record heatwaves. www.myspace.com/dobermanmacleod *[2]* * It turns out that the commentator is Brad Arnold [3], and I am trying to contact him. I have also written to Jim Hansen, mentioned in the same EGU report [1]. More recent research seems to confirm Similetov's fears about the instability of the permafrost layer holding back the methane. It seems that everybody in the scientific establishment has downplayed the methane problem (with very few exceptions, including Peter Wadhams). But that is also true for the retreat of the Arctic sea ice, where the frightening volume trend (with trend line curving towards zero ice end summer 2015 or 2016 [4]) is ignored. The scientists who advise governments give the impression that CO2 emissions cuts can alone solve the global warming problem. This is patently not the case. We can do something about the methane. We HAVE to do something about the methane! And quickly!! Cheers, John [1] http://www.grist.org/article/Methane-time-bomb-ticking-louder [2] Unfortunately this page no longer exists. [3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/user/dobermanmacleod [4] http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/ --- On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 12:09 AM, David Appell <[email protected]>wrote: > ??? > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Arctic methane Date: Thu, 28 > Apr 2011 19:54:32 -0700 From: David Appell > <[email protected]><[email protected]> Reply-To: > [email protected] To: [email protected] > > John, > > Hi. On the Google geoengineering group you wrote (Apr 28): > > > "Significant quantities of methane are already appearing in the Arctic > atmosphere." > > I was wondering what scientific data you were basing this statement on. > > Thanks, > David > > -- > David Appell, independent science journalist > e: [email protected] > w: http://www.davidappell.com > b: http://davidappell.blogspot.com > p: (001) 503-975-5614 > m: St. Helens, OR USA > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
