Dear Graham,
We have to keep clear heads. The dangers from global warming have been
consistently understated or ignored by the scientists, but, of these
dangers, the Arctic methane problem seems to have the highest risk, even
with the uncertainties, because it could take out the whole of
civilisation, through causing many degrees of global warming with
associated famine, war and pestilence, as in a Malthusian catastrophe
[1], plus flooding from sea level rise.
You are right to be concerned about rapid global warming in the past.
The Arctic sea ice serves as a powerful amplifier of a relatively small
(Northern Hemisphere) warming signal largely through the Gulf Stream
carrying this signal towards the Arctic, producing "albedo positive
feedback" as sea ice retreats. This amplification can "run-away" but
has in the past been moderated by negative feedback in the form of
melt-water flowing into the North Atlantic [2], and diverting the Gulf
Stream and associated currents southwards - and sometimes even switching
off the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation) - allowing
the Arctic sea ice to advance again.
It is just possible that we get a sudden negative feedback in the form
of Greenland ice sheet disintegration, and/or a fresh water pulse
through the Fram Straits. This is a fear of Albert Kallio. It is a
possibility that has to be addressed, though the repercussions will be
hard to assess.
However, without such a freak negative feedback, or geoengineering to
provide negative forcing, the runaway warming scenario is most likely,
provoked by massive emissions of methane.
Fortunately we have some good geoengineering ideas, and engineers like
Stephen Salter who are not phased by a problem of this magnitude. So we
have to think and act positively.
BTW, I still have space for one or two more people at the workshop, here
in Chiswick London W4, next weekend (15-16th October), for continued
brainstorming on the Arctic methane problem. The objective is to
establish the scope and magnitude of this problem and produce a credible
plan for emergency action that can be taken to policy makers. We need
the best brains we can get plus a full range of expertise relevant to
the problem.
Cheers,
John
Last chance saloon, Chiswick.
P.S. My wife is just reading about M Louis Agassiz, a handsome man (she
notes), who in 1837 proposed the Earth had been subject to a past ice
age! She is writing a book about a lady who, in 1860, visited the
Grindelwald glacier reaching down to her hotel in the village and read
his book on glaciers, published 1840. The glacier has since retreated 2
km, out of sight from the village. It is amazing to contrast photos
from 1860 and 2003 - a dramatic sign of global warming.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusian_catastrophe
[2] e.g. from lake Agassiz - a vast lake dammed up by ice, whose
discharge into the Arctic Ocean and thence into North Atlantic may have
triggered the Younger Dryas cold period.
---
On 09/10/2011 09:22, Omega Institute wrote:
Dear John,
I think Your last email clearly defines that We are certainly in an
emergency, involving the entire Northern Hemisphere. The forcasts of
Zero ice for six months, by 2020, are of even greater significnce than
this years dire ice record.
However, I have to mention something that has been worrying me for a
long time.
In 1956, there was a joint US/Denmark expedition, to do core drilling
on the Greenland cap, right down to bedrock. The cores were stored,
and recently apparantly they do show that some thousands of years ago,
at he end of the last glacial, there was an abrupt discontinuity in
the ice record, showing a period of only two years when the
temperature switched abruptly, over only two years, and there was
massive Arctic ice melting, which carried on for some time.
There was almost immediate climate change, very abrupt, and the only
thing I can think of that hve triggered this, is disappearance of the
sea ice to a critical level, and reaching a threshold. This was
disasterous.There was, apparantly, massive change in Northern
hemisphre weather, and Global warming. Leaving aside whether the
Global warming was the trigger for the ice collapse, (probably) this
means a temperature surge over a very short time period.
The weather "Cauldron" over the Poles is already showing very
disturbed behavior, apparantly, witha disrupted Jet stream, and very
high winter temperatures, (EG Prudhoe Bay, 30C+ during winters). If
there is such an abrupt climate change, in the near future, then,
sadly, Game Over. Anthropic Extiction event, or civilizational
collapse, over period 2012-2060(max).
The situation may be even more serious than we thought. This HAS to be
looked at. Peter Wadhams comments, especialy, would be welcome.
But assuming this is true, we hve the Vostock Ice cores, showing very
cler links of 1C rise in temperature for each 16ppm of carbon in the
atmosphere.
This also applies to the appropriate amount of methane, I assume. it
would be an intelligent idea to look at the Vostock Methane elevels,
as well.
My personal view, is that the precautionary principle applies here. We
now have to look, at not only carbon limits, and methane issues, but
emergency planning and preparations for abrupt, whip-saw type climate
event(s), in the next 10 years, or less. I think we should discuss
some emergency policies, this all gives, of course, more force to the
central argument, about mthane and it's dangers. But we must have a
clear, hard, brave look at the time issue, and the ice core data.
I am full of dark forbodings.
Regards
Graham Ennis.
----- Original Message -----
*From:* John Nissen <mailto:[email protected]>
*To:* PR CARTER <mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc:* P. Wadhams <mailto:[email protected]> ; Mark Serreze
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Graham Innes
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Matt Watson
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Brian Launder
<mailto:[email protected]> ; John Shepherd
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Geoengineering
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Stephen Salter
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Jon Egill Kristjansson
<mailto:[email protected]> ; David Mitchell
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Ivar S A Isaksen
<mailto:[email protected]> ; Mark Massmann
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, October 08, 2011 11:44 PM
*Subject:* Arctic methane workshop: Rapid cooling for the Arctic
Dear Peter,
Thanks for this NSIDC press release [1] and for your call for an
emergency plan. The NSIDC press release contrasts with Cryosphere
Today, which reckons this year was a record low for sea ice
extent, i.e. below 2007. But we have much less time for emergency
action than is suggested.
NSIDC are still only talking about the sea ice disappearing in
decades. Here's sea ice expert, Mark Serreze:
/Climate models have suggested that the Arctic could lose almost
all of its summer ice cover by 2100, but in recent years, ice
extent has declined faster than the models predicted. Serreze
said, "The big summer ice loss this year is setting us up for
another big melt year in 2012. We may be looking at an Arctic
Ocean essentially free of summer ice only a few decades from now."
/
But there's no mention of sea ice volume. The Piomas model of sea
ice volume shows a non-linear trend towards an ice-free September
in 2015, and 6 months ice free by 2020 or 2021, see PIOMAS graph
with "exponential trend", fifth graph down on this page [2]. The
PIOMAS modelling is strongly supported by Peter Wadhams, currently
on expedition to Greenland to measure ice thickness, brought
forward from next year due to the paucity of ice!
With respect to 1979 sea ice level, when satellite records began,
the present the sea ice is 40-50% of way towards complete sea ice
disappearance. By 2015 it could be 70-80% of the way. The
albedo radiative forcing could approach its maximum (i.e. 100%) by
2020 or 2021, when the Arctic would be free of sea ice most of the
year.
This is why it is a race against time to apply the geoengineering
cooling technogies to halt the sea ice retreat. This has to be
one of the messages from the Arctic methane workshop, here next
weekend, 15-16 October. The other messages will be about tackling
the methane itself, whose atmospheric level is rising ominously.
These messages will contribute to a "plan of emergency action"
that can be put to policy makers, with figures to back it up. For
example:
1) the radiative forcing from sea ice retreat could amount to over
half a petawatt of heat flux this year, reaching well over one
petawatt by 2021 - a huge challenge for geoengineering techniques
to overcome in trying to halt Arctic warming;
2) if 50 Gt methane, representing only about 2% of total carbon
locked away in the Arctic (as methane hydrates or in/below
permafrost), were released over a decade or two, there would be 9
W/m-2 of climate forcing globally - amounting to 4.5 petawatts -
dwarfing the forcing from CO2, currently 1.6 W/m-2 or 0.8
petawatts globally [3].
The geoengineering must be belts and braces, so we must consider
stratospheric aerosols (or dust), cloud brightening, and cloud
removal techniques. Stephen Salter can present his cloud
brightening strategy at the workshop (on Sunday); I'm hoping Matt
Watson can join the workshop to discuss stratospheric aerosol
deployment; and am looking forward to Jon Egill Kristjansson for
presenting the case for cloud removal, as espoused by David
Mitchell, and other cloud issues. The possible uses of LAIR
should be discussed. We should work together towards an approach
to cool critical regions of the Arctic as quickly as possible.
Cheers,
John
Chiswick, London W4
[1] http://nsidc.org/news/press/20111004_MinimumPR.html
[2] http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2011/09/piomas-august-2011.html
[3] I am hoping to check these figures with Ivar Isaksen, who is
unable to attend the workshop. They are derived from his paper,
taking a conservative interpretation:
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/academics/classes/2011Q2/558/IsaksenGB2011.pdf
--
On 08/10/2011 18:32, PR CARTER wrote:
http://nsidc.org/news/press/20111004_MinimumPR.html
_We need a thoroughly documented Arctic methane catastrophic risk
emergency plan. _
_
_
I suggest this is a top priority that the Arctic methane workshop
can achieve - no one else is going to do it.
There is evidence gathered over many years that subsea methane
hydrates are unstable in many regions of the Arctic shelves- the
Beaufort, off Svalbard Is., off Alaska as well as Laptev and EES.
With the loss of the summer Arctic sea ice the Arctic warming
will be boosted suddenly 50% or more.
It can only be assumed that it will not be many years after that
that all these hydrates will be pouring out large and increasing
amounts of methane.
Methane over vast regions of the Arctic is bound to escape into
the atmosphere.
But this will be catastrophic to the ocean as well as to the rate
of global warming.
The only practical response (at least the all essential one) to
this enormous risk is to make sure the Arctic stays frozen by
artificial albedos - atmospheric, on the Arctic ocean and
northern hemisphere land.
This means, as many have proposed, a great global emergency
Appollo Manhattan type R and D project. This then is the first
goal that must be achieved.
Who would support and arrange such a venture. It would have to be
proposed by the science academies. But they have advised govts
that the fossil fuel dominated economy is inevitable for decades
ahead with no sense of urgency (Interacademy on climate change
and on energy). They see an increase in natural gas to keep the
world economy going.
Judging from reports perhaps the military would help but they
want coal to liquids and shale oil to run the military machine.
Coal to liquids and shale oil, are already planned by the US and
many nations.
A big reason why world powers are not worried about methane
hydrates is that most nations are planning on MHs as the next
source of world energy- to start coming on line quietly in a few
years from now.
The time taken to prepare and launch the response is the critical
factor. That makes atmospheric albedo the best of the bunch.
But other longer term methods must be applied to operate while
CO2 extraction is deployed world wide which will take a great
many decades to get atmospheric CO2 levels down enough for the
Arctic ice to stay frozen year round.
What is needed is a thoroughly documented Arctic methane
catastrophic risk emergency plan.
Peter C
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1410 / Virus Database: 1520/3943 - Release Date:
10/07/11
--
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.
