Dear Mandy, I was most interested to read, in a press release [1], your warning about methane in the Arctic:
“*A range of data exists that shows a significant release of methane seeping out at the seafloor to the atmosphere, indicating that the microbial biofilter is not as effective,” Joye said. “Importantly for the future of the planet, there is even less evidence for a strong biofilter of methane hydrate destabilized in the shallow Arctic settings*.” A number of scientists are deeply concerned about this Arctic methane, since there seem to be vast quantities of carbon held in permafrost and/or as hydrates [2], sufficient to cause runaway global warming if released as methane gas into the atmosphere over the next few decades. The concern is enhanced by Shakhova's estimate of an annual 3.5 Gt (Pg) of methane being released from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf [3]. Perhaps even more frightening is the sudden release of 50 Gt of methane [4]: *Current methane release has previously been estimated at 0.5 Mt<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megatonne>per year. [12] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_methane_release#cite_note-11>Shakhova et al. (2008) estimate that not less than 1,400 Gt <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigatonne> of Carbon is presently locked up as methane and methane hydrates under the Arctic submarine permafrost, and 5-10% of that area is subject to puncturing by open taliks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talik>. They conclude that "release of up to 50 Gt<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigatonne>of predicted amount of hydrate storage [is] highly possible for abrupt release at any time". That would increase the methane content of the planet's atmosphere by a factor of twelve.[13]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_methane_release#cite_note-12> * Because of methane's global warming potential, we are concerned that a release of 3.5 Gt methane annually would multiply climate forcing by many times, inevitably leading to catastrophic climate change over the next few decades. Release of 50 Gt could trigger catastrophe much sooner. Therefore we are urgently seeking ways to prevent the methane entering the atmosphere, and would welcome your ideas on any kind of biological approach. We will be having a workshop on the weekend September 3-4 in London to evaluate all possible methods of stopping the methane. Would you be interested in attending? Kind regards, John Nissen [1] http://www.uga.edu/news/artman/publish/110526_paper.shtml [2] http://www.nioz.nl/public/symposia_workshops/arctic/17_semiletov.pdf [3] http://symposium.serdp-estcp.org/content/download/8914/107496/version/1/file/1A_Shakhova_Final.pdf [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_methane_release --- On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Sam Carana <[email protected]> wrote: > I add below the news release by the University of Georgia > Cheers! > Sam Carana > > Science paper argues against conclusion that bacteria consumed > Deepwater Horizon methane > http://www.uga.edu/news/artman/publish/110526_paper.shtml > > Athens, Ga. – A technical comment published in the current (May 27) > edition of the journal Science casts doubt on a widely publicized > study that concluded that a bacterial bloom in the Gulf of Mexico > consumed the methane discharged from the Deepwater Horizon well. > > The debate has implications for the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem as well > as for predictions of the effect of global warming, said marine > scientist and lead author Samantha Joye, University of Georgia > Athletic Association Professor in Arts and Sciences. > > Based on methane and oxygen distributions measured at 207 stations in > the Gulf of Mexico, a study published in the January 21, 2011 edition > of Science concluded that “nearly all” of the methane released from > the well was consumed in the water column within approximately 120 > days of the release. In the current paper in Science, Joye and > co-authors from 12 other institutions make the case that uncertainties > in the hydrocarbon discharge from the blowout, oxygen depletion fueled > by processes other than methane consumption, a problematic > interpretation of genetic data and shortcomings of the model used by > the authors of the January study challenge the attribution of low > oxygen zones to the oxidation of methane gas. > > “Our goal is to understand what happened to the methane released from > the Macondo discharge and, in the larger framework, to better > understand the factors that regulate microbial methane consumption > following large-scale gas releases,” said Joye, a professor in the UGA > Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. “I believe there is still a lot > to learn about the environmental factors that regulate methane > consumption in the Gulf’s waters and elsewhere.” > > Joye and her co-authors note that low levels of oxygen are known to > occur in the Gulf of Mexico because of bacterial consumption of carbon > inputs from the Mississippi River as well as the bacterial consumption > of hydrocarbons that naturally seep from the seafloor. The researchers > point out that given the uncertainty in oxygen and methane budgets, > strong supporting evidence is required to attribute oxygen depletion > to methane removal; however, a study published in the October 8, 2010 > edition of Science showed low measured rates of methane consumption by > bacteria. Joye and her co-authors note that samples from the control > stations and the low-oxygen stations that were analyzed for unique > genetic markers in the January 2011 study showed no significant > difference in the abundance of methane consuming bacteria. Joye and > her colleagues also argue that the model the study used neglected > important factors that affect the transport and biodegradation of > methane, and that it only provided a tentative match of the > observational data. > > Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and understanding the fate of the > methane released from the Deepwater Horizon well has implications for > the entire planet, since global warming is likely to accelerate the > release of methane that is currently trapped in hydrates on the > seafloor. Based on the conclusion that bacteria had rapidly consumed > the methane released from the Deepwater Horizon well, the January 2011 > Science paper suggested that methane released from the oceans may not > be likely to amplify an already warming climate. > > Joye and her colleagues note that several other studies have found > that considerable amounts of methane released from natural deep-sea > vents are not consumed by microbes. The most vulnerable store of > methane hydrates is not in the Gulf of Mexico, they also point out, > but in the deposits that underlie the shallow waters of the Arctic. > > “A range of data exists that shows a significant release of methane > seeping out at the seafloor to the atmosphere, indicating that the > microbial biofilter is not as effective,” Joye said. “Importantly for > the future of the planet, there is even less evidence for a strong > biofilter of methane hydrate destabilized in the shallow Arctic > settings.” > > ============== > > > > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:10 AM, M V Bhaskar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > http://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=119529&WT.mc_id=USNSF_1 > > How Tiny Microbes Took a Big Bite out of the Deepwater Horizon Oil > > Spill > > > > A very interesting account of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill last > > year and the methane from the spill. > > > > "Methane-eating microbes remove oxygen from the water as they breathe. > > Therefore, if microbes were consuming methane in the plumes, we would > > expect the plumes' methane and oxygen levels to drop--phenomena that > > were indeed reflected in the data collected from the plumes in the > > fall." > > > > Diatoms can provide the oxygen required by the methane-eating microbes > > so that the microbes bloom faster and consume more methane. > > > > The point is that the methane-eating bacteria did their job without > > any induced oxygen increase. > > But then the Deepwater Horizon was a 'small' problem. > > > > What if the next such problem is bigger? > > > > Fukushima Nuclear power plant was designed for a 6 meter tsunami, a 10 > > meter tsunami hit and now all 6 reactors are shut down. > > > > regards > > > > Bhaskar > > > > > > On May 24, 10:04 am, BHASKAR M V <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi John > >> > >> Diatoms are not really 'out of the box'. > >> > >> They account for about 20 to 25% of the photosynthesis on earth. > >> > >> We are only proposing to increase the Diatom biomass by a small > percentage. > >> > >> The means suggested for causing Diatoms to bloom, to use Nano Silica is > 'out > >> of the box', since in nature Diatoms consume Dissolved Si in the form of > >> Silicic Acid. > >> > >> Fe is required by Diatoms, the concept of using Si to deliver Fe is 'out > of > >> the box'. > >> > >> Diatoms don't capture methane, they increase oxygen level and cause > aerobic > >> bacteria to bloom and this keeps out anoxic conditions and anaerobic > >> bacteria which would have produced methane. > >> > >> Diatoms can only reduce generation of fresh methane not consume existing > >> stock. > >> > >> regards > >> > >> Bhaskar > >> > >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 10:47 PM, John Nissen <[email protected] > >wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi Bhaskar, > >> > >> > Since we have to think "out of the box" on methane, I am wondering > about a > >> > biological means to capture the methane which bubbles to the surface > of the > >> > sea or lakes. The mat idea got me thinking that we could have a > >> > surface-floating mat (acting as a membrane) of some kind biomaterial > (not > >> > necessarily diatom) which would capture the bubbles - stopping the > methane > >> > getting into the atmosphere. And the same biomaterial could absorb > and > >> > process/digest the methane to create more biomaterial, possibly with > oxygen > >> > as a byproduct. The whole sea area would be "seeded" with a small > amount of > >> > the biomaterial, together with some "starter" nutrient, and then the > mat > >> > would grow naturally wherever the methane was venting. The mat would > have > >> > a high albedo upper surface, or at least be insulating, so that snow > would > >> > settle on the surface even when the water was a little above freezing > >> > point. The organisms of the biomaterial would die-off without the > methane > >> > or some nutrient (so there's no danger of them spreading uncontrolled > where > >> > not wanted). Occasionally the mats could be farmed as biomass as > input for > >> > a biochar process. Alternatively the mats would sink to the bottom > such as > >> > to sequester carbon for the long-term. > >> > >> > That's my ideal scenario, OK. Now, can anybody work out how to > produce > >> > such a system? > >> > >> > Cheers, > >> > >> > John > >> > >> > --- > >> > >> > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 7:45 AM, BHASKAR M V <[email protected] > >wrote: > >> > >> >> A good account of Iron Fertilization theory is available at - > >> > >> >>http://www.palomar.edu/oceanography/iron.htm > >> >> * > >> >> * > >> >> <http://www.palomar.edu/oceanography/iron.htm>*The Iron Hypothesis* > >> >> * > >> > >> >> John Martin's < > http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/Giants/Martin/> iron > >> >> hypothesis—fertilizing the sea with iron—was first put to the test on > the > >> >> open ocean in 1993. According to Martin's iron hypothesis, seeding > the ocean > >> >> surface with iron should make microscopic marine organisms like > diatoms > >> >> multiply dramatically, which might in turn cool the planet. > >> > >> >> "The scientists observed a 30-fold increase in chlorophyll levels, > well > >> >> beyond Martin's prediction of a 12-fold increase. "John won the > chlorophyll > >> >> pool," Johnson notes. > >> > >> >> Clumps of phytoplankton filled the fertilized patch. Of all the types > of > >> >> phytoplankton in the water, diatoms grew the most - to 85 times their > >> >> normal number - and consumed an estimated 367 tons of carbon dioxide. > To > >> >> honor Martin, the most abundant diatom in the mix was dubbed Nitschia > >> >> martini. > >> > >> >> Unfortunately the goal of Iron Fertilization is not clearly stated - > is to > >> >> cause a bloom of any phytoplankton or to cause a bloom of Diatoms. > >> > >> >> Diatoms are mentioned in all the literature but the actual goal and > impact > >> >> of bloom of each type of phytoplankton is not specified. > >> > >> >> regards > >> > >> >> Bhaskar > >> > >> >> * > >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 7:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> >>> Yes, I understand the difference between micro/macro. I am trying to > >> >>> understand how any diatom can be used in a controlled/prescribed way > >> >>> concerning Geoengineering. In my cursory scan of the diatom field, I > could > >> >>> not make the link, with the exception of possibly using macro forms. > As to > >> >>> micro diatom use in oxygenating methane vent floor areas, the > resident life > >> >>> forms are anoxic and micro diatoms (producing O2) would seem to be > >> >>> disruptive. The suggestion of using hydrosols was conditional on a > clear > >> >>> separation of the natural anoxic floor zone and the higher water > column. How > >> >>> would you suggest micro diatoms be used? > >> > >> >>> I am trying to get to the point of understanding the means and > motive for > >> >>> your suggesting the use of diatoms, micro or macro. The CO2 uptake > and > >> >>> sequestration is great for most species. The O2 production is needed > in may > >> >>> places. The potential for large scale oil production is well known. > Yet, I > >> >>> need your help in understanding "How" you plan on utilizing this > resource. > >> > >> >>> Respectfully > >> > >> >>> Michael > >> > >> >>> On , BHASKAR M V <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>> > Sargussum is a macro algae and not a micro algae. > >> >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargassum > >> > >> >>> > Live Diatoms rise and sink every day. > >> >>> > In lake they rise at sunrise and sink after a few hours. > >> > >> >>> > I am not sure about marine diatoms in oceans. > >> > >> >>> > Dead diatoms loose their buoyancy and sink. > >> > >> >>> > Some Diatoms also expel the lipids and in tanks and ponds you can > see > >> >>> the oily film floating on the surface. > >> > >> >>> > regards > >> > >> >>> > Bhaskar > >> > >> >>> > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Michael Hayes > [email protected]> > >> >>> wrote: > >> > >> >>> > Hi All, > >> > >> >>> > MV, thank you for the input and I have spent a few days reading up > on > >> >>> the basics of the subject. I am just learning this field and so I > ask your > >> >>> patience. With that, I would like to ask two questions, if possible. > Are > >> >>> there diatoms that can regulate their buoyancy with intracellular > lipids to > >> >>> counter sinking. Would a Sargassum mat be considered a diatom mat? > >> > >> >>> > I obviously need a little clarity on these points. > >> > >> >>> > Michael > >> > >> >>> > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:15 AM, M V Bhaskar > [email protected]> > >> >>> wrote: > >> > >> >>> > Hi Michael > >> > >> >>> > A few points about Diatoms. > >> > >> >>> > Most diatoms are consumed by zooplankton and fish and do not > >> > >> >>> > accumulate, unlike other phytoplankton. > >> > >> >>> > That is why you SEE fewer Diatom blooms in photos. > >> > >> >>> > Diatoms sink, other phytoplankton float. > >> > >> >>> > This is another reason why we SEE less diatoms. > >> > >> >>> > To answer the two points you raised - > >> > >> >>> > >First is their natural existence in the coastal areas of the > ocean > >> >>> gyre that they will be "farmed" in. > >> > >> >>> > Diatoms exist in all natural waters, they account for about 40 to > 50% > >> > >> >>> > of the oxygen and primary production in oceans. > >> > >> >>> > >Second is their ability to form mats. > >> > >> >>> > As mentioned above they rarely form mats, most are consumed or the > >> > >> >>> > dead diatoms sink. > >> > >> >>> > Any attempt to 'farm' or grow diatoms to accumulate them will be > very > >> > >> >>> > expensive. > >> > >> >>> > best regards > >> > >> >>> > Bhaskar > >> > >> >>> > On May 18, 2:54 am, Michael Hayes [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> >>> > > Hi All, > >> > >> >>> > > Bhaskar has brought the use of diatoms up and I find the thought > path > >> > >> >>> > > interesting. I would like to start this thread off in an effort > to > >> >>> keep the > >> > >> >>> > > issue organized in one thread for easy reference and focused > >> >>> discussion on > >> > >> >>> > > his suggestion/concept. > >> > >> >>> > > The main benefits of diatoms are O2 production and CO2 > sequestration. > >> > >> >>> > > How can those benefits be practically exploited on a significant > >> >>> enough > >> > >> >>> > > scale to impact Global Warming? > >> > >> >>> > > What would be the environmental impact of large-scale use be? > >> > >> >>> > > What environments can this biotic enhancement be practically > carried > >> >>> out > >> > >> >>> > > within? > >> > >> >>> > > What type of diatoms can/should be used and in which > environment? > >> > >> >>> > > These were my first questions in trying to understand Bhaskar's > >> >>> ongoing > >> > >> >>> > > effort to bring the use of diatoms up. If a focused attention > can be > >> > >> >>> > > produced through this dedicated thread, the issue may find the > >> >>> fullest > >> > >> >>> > > evaluation this group can offer. > >> > >> >>> > > Here is a link to the Google results on scholarly papers > concerning > >> >>> diatom > >> > >> >>> > > and CO2 transport to the ocean floor. > >> >>> > http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Efficiency+of+the+CO2-concentrati... > >> > >> >>> > > is a repeat from my earlier post on the "Lecture on Methane" > thread. > >> >>> I think > >> > >> >>> > > it might help the effort if all relative links are made > available > >> >>> here. > >> > >> >>> > > Here is the Google search results on diatoms and O2 production. > >> >>> > http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=diatom+and+oxygen&hl=en&as_sdt=0&;... > >> > >> >>> > > Here is the Google search results on diatom nutrient > uptakehttp:// > >> >>> scholar.google.com/scholar?q=diatom+nutrient+uptake+rate&hl=en... > >> > >> >>> > > Here are the marine species lists that I am initially finding; > >> > >> >>> > http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=156607http://u... > >> > >> >>> > > There are many more. > >> > >> >>> > > I proposed the use of gyres of large-scale diatom farms to > provide > >> > >> ... > >> > >> read more » > > > > -- > > 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. > > > > > > -- > 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. > > -- 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.
