Poster's note : surprisingly rigorous deconstruction of the skeptical
Science methane post from the UK's ever earnest (but notoriously
unreliable) guardian newspaper

A
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Emily L-B" <[email protected]>
Date: Aug 5, 2013 8:26 AM
Subject: Fw: Seven facts you need to know about the Arctic methane timebomb
To: "Andrew Lockley" <[email protected]>
Cc:

Hi fyi
Best
Emily
Sent from my BlackBerry
------------------------------
*From: * "Alexis Rowell" <[email protected]>
*Date: *Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:55:36 +0100
*To: *'Emily'<[email protected]>
*Subject: *Seven facts you need to know about the Arctic methane timebomb

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/05/7-facts-need-to-know-arctic-methane-time-bomb
****

Dismissals of catastrophic methane danger ignore robust science in favour
of outdated mythology of climate safety****

Debate over the plausibility of a catastrophic release of methane in coming
decades due to thawing Arctic
<http://www.theguardian.com/world/arctic>permafrost has escalated
after a
new Nature 
paper<http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/24/arctic-thawing-permafrost-climate-change>warned
that exactly this scenario could trigger costs equivalent to the
annual GDP of the global economy. ****

Scientists of different persuasions remain fundamentally divided over
whether such a scenario is even plausible. Carolyn Rupple of the US
Geological Survey (USGS) Gas Hydrates Project told NBC
News<http://www.nbcnews.com/science/claims-arctic-methane-disaster-stir-controversy-6C10786434>the
scenario is "nearly impossible." Ed Dlugokencky, a research scientist
at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) said there
has been "no detectable change in Arctic methane emissions over the past
two decades." NASA's Gavin Schmidt said that ice core records from
previously warm Arctic periods show no indication of such a scenario having
ever occurred. Methane hydrate expert Prof David Archer reiterated that
"the mechanisms for release operate on time scales of centuries and
longer." These arguments were finally distilled in a lengthy, seemingly
compelling essay posted on Skeptical
Science<http://www.skepticalscience.com/toward-improved-discussions-methane.html>last
Thursday, concluding with utter finality:
****

"There is no evidence that methane will run out of control and initiate any
sudden, catastrophic effects."****

But none of the scientists rejecting the plausibility of the scenario are
experts in the Arctic, specifically the East Siberia Arctic Shelf (ESAS).
In contrast, an emerging consensus among ESAS specialists based on
continuing fieldwork is highlighting a real danger of unprecedented
quantities of methane venting due to thawing permafrost.****

So who's right? What are these Arctic specialists saying? Are their claims
of a potentially catastrophic methane release plausible at all? I took a
dive into the scientific literature to find out. ****

What I discovered was that Skeptical Science's unusually skewered analysis
was extremely selective, and focused almost exclusively on the narrow
arguments of scientists out of touch with cutting edge developments in the
Arctic. Here's what you need to know.****
1. The 50 Gigatonne decadal methane pulse scenario was posited by four
Arctic specialists, and is considered plausible by Met Office scientists****

The authors of the controversial new Nature paper on costs of Arctic
warming<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v499/n7459/full/499401a.html>didn't
just pull their decadal methane catastrophe scenario out of thin
air. The scenario was first postulated in
2008<http://meetings.copernicus.org/www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU2008/01526/EGU2008-A-01526.pdf>by
Dr Natalie Shakhova of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, Dr Igor
Semiletov from the Pacific Oceanological Institute at the Russian Academy
of Sciences, and two other Russian experts. ****

Their paper noted that while seabed permafrost underlaying most of the ESAS
was previously believed to act as an "impermeable lid preventing methane
escape," new data showing "extreme methane supersaturation of surface
water, implying high sea-to-air fluxes" challenged this assumption. Data
showed: ****

"Extremely high concentrations of methane (up to 8 ppm) in the atmospheric
layer above the sea surface along with anomalously high concentrations of
dissolved methane in the water column (up to 560 nM, or 12000% of super
saturation)." ****

One source of these emissions "may be highly potential and extremely mobile
shallow methane hydrates, whose stability zone is seabed permafrost-related
and could be disturbed upon permafrost development, degradation, and
thawing." Even if the methane hydrates are deep, fissures, taliks and other
soft spots create heat
pathways<http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010EGUGA..12.1046S>from the
seabed which warms quickly due to shallow depths. Various
mechanisms<http://www.geol.ucsb.edu/faculty/luyendyk/Luyendyk_pdf/Leifer_etal_GBC_06_SeepBoom.pdf>for
such processes have been elaborated in detail.
****

The paper then posits the plausibility of a 50 Gigatonne (Gt) methane
release occurring abruptly "at any time." Noting that the total quantity of
carbon in the ESAS is "not less than 1,400 Gt", the authors wrote:****

"Since the area of geological disjunctives (fault zones, tectonically and
seismically active areas) within the Siberian Arctic shelf composes not
less than 1-2% of the total area and area of open taliks (area of melt
through permafrost), acting as a pathway for methane escape within the
Siberian Arctic shelf reaches up to 5-10% of the total area, we consider
release of up to 50 Gt of predicted amount of hydrate storage as highly
possible for abrupt release at any time. That may cause ∼12-times increase
of modern atmospheric methane burden with consequent catastrophic
greenhouse warming."****

So the 50 Gt scenario used by the new Nature paper does not postulate the
total release of the ESAS methane hydrate reservoir, but only a tiny
fraction of it. ****

The scale of this scenario is roughly corroborated elsewhere. A 2010
scientific analysis led by the UK's Met
Office<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010RG000326/full>in
Review of Geophysics recognised the plausibility of catastrophic
carbon
releases from Arctic permafrost thawing of between 50-100 Gt this century,
with a 40 Gt carbon release from the Siberian Yedoma region possible over
four decades.****

Shakhova and her team have developed these findings from data derived from
over 20 field expeditions from 1999 to
2011<http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/1/015201>.
In 2010, Shakhova et. al published a paper in
Science<http://www.sciencemag.org/content/327/5970/1246.abstract>based
on their annual research trips which
highlighted<http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=116532&org=NSF&from=news>that
the ESAS was a key reservoir of methane "more than three times as
large as the nearby Siberian wetland... considered the primary Northern
Hemisphere source of atmospheric methane." Current average methane
concentrations in the Arctic are: ****

"about 1.85 parts per million, the highest in 400,000 years" and "on par
with previous estimates of methane venting from the entire World Ocean."****

As the ESAS is shallow at only 50 metres, most of the methane being
released is escaping into the
atmosphere<http://www.ncas.ac.uk/index.php/en/climate-blog/61-submarine-methane-hydrate-a-threat-under-anthropogenic-climate-change>rather
than being absorbed into water.
****

The existence of such shallow methane hydrates in
permafrost<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ppp.422/abstract>-
at depths as small as 20m - was confirmed by Shakhova in the Journal
of Geophysical 
Research<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009JC005602/abstract>.
There has been direct
observation<http://epic.awi.de/28435/1/Polarforsch1998_26.pdf>and
sampling <http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005AGUFM.C11A1059C> of these
hydrates<http://research.iarc.uaf.edu/NICOP/DVD/ICOP%201998%20Permafrost%207th%20conf/CD-ROM/Proceedings/PDF001189/151104.pdf>by
Russian
geologists<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165232X00000124>in
recent
decades<https://c666043.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/hidden/Papers/Ext-10,Relict%20gas%20hydrates.pdf>until
now; this has also been confirmed by US
government 
scientists<http://www.jhuapl.edu/ClimateAndEnergy/Book/Author/Coffin,%20Richard.pdf>
.****
2. Arctic methane hydrates are becoming increasingly unstable in the
context of anthropogenic climate
change<http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-change>and it's
impact on diminishing sea ice
****

The instability of Arctic methane hydrates in relation to sea ice
retreat<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304420310000290>-
not predicted by conventional models - has been increasingly
recognised
by experts. In 2007, a study in Eos,
Transactions<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2007EO130001/abstract>found
that:
****

"Large volumes of methane in gas hydrate form can be stored within or below
the subsea permafrost, and the stability of this gas hydrate zone is
sustained by the existence of permafrost. Degradation of subsea permafrost
and the consequent destabilization of gas hydrates could significantly if
not dramatically increase the flux of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, to
the atmosphere."****

In 2009, a research team of 19 scientists wrote a paper in Geophysical
Research 
Letters<http://www.soes.soton.ac.uk/staff/ejr/Rohling-papers/2009-Westbrook%20et%20al%20JR211%20plumes%20GRL.pdf>documenting
how the past thirty years of a warming Arctic current due to
contemporary climate change was triggering unprecedented emissions of
methane from gas hydrate in submarine sediments beneath the seabed in the
West Spitsbergen continental margin. Prior to the new warming, these
methane hydrates had been
stable<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090814103231.htm>at
water depths as shallow as 360m. Over 250 plumes of methane gas
bubbles
were found rising from the seabed due to the 1C temperature increase in the
current: ****

"... causing the liberation of methane from decomposing hydrate... If this
process becomes widespread along Arctic continental margins, tens of
Teragrams of methane per year could be released into the ocean."****

The Russian scientists investigating the ESAS also confirmed that the
levels of methane release they discovered were
new<http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html>.
As Steve Connor reported in the Independent, since 1994 Igor Semilitov: ****

"... has led about 10 expeditions in the Laptev Sea but during the 1990s he
did not detect any elevated levels of methane. However, since 2003 he
reported a rising number of methane 'hotspots', which have now been
confirmed using more sensitive instruments."****

In 2012, a Nature
study<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n6/abs/ngeo1480.html>mapping
over 150,000 Arctic methane seeps concluded that:
****

"... in a warming climate, disintegration of permafrost, glaciers and parts
of the polar ice sheets could facilitate the transient expulsion of
14C-depleted methane trapped by the cryosphere cap."****

3. Multiple scientific reviews, including one by over 20 Arctic
specialists, confirm decadal catastrophic Arctic methane release is
plausible****

A widely cited 2011 Nature
review<http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/methane-hydrates-and-contemporary-climate-change-24314790>dismissed
such a catastrophic scenario as implausible because methane "gas
hydrates occur at low saturations and in sediments at such great depths
below the seafloor or onshore permafrost that they will barely be affected
by [contemporary levels of] warming over even [1,000] yr." ****

But this study and others like it completely ignore the new empirical
evidence on permafrost-associated shallow water methane hydrates on the
Arctic shelf. Scientific reviews that have accounted for the
empirically-observed dynamics of permafrost-associated methane come to the
opposite conclusion.****

In 2007, scientists Matthew Reagan and George Moridis at the Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory published a paper in Geophysical Research
Letters<http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/publications/Hydrates/reports/G302_GeophysicalReview_Nov07.pdf>exploring
the vulnerability of methane gas hydrates. They concluded based
on simulations of different types of oceanic gas hydrate responding to
seafloor temperature changes:****

"... while many deep hydrate deposits are indeed stable under the influence
of rapid seafloor temperature variations, *shallow deposits, such as those
found in arctic regions* or in the Gulf of Mexico, *can undergo rapid
dissociation and produce significant carbon fluxes over a period of decades*
."****

A 2010 scientific analysis led by the UK's Met Office in Review of
Geophysics <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010RG000326/full>found:
****

"The time scales for destabilization of marine hydrates are not well
understood and are likely to be very long for hydrates found in deep
sediments but *much shorter for hydrates below shallow waters, such as in
the Arctic Ocean*... Overall, uncertainties are large, and it is difficult
to be conclusive about the time scales and magnitudes of methane feedbacks,
but *significant increases in methane emissions are likely, and
catastrophic emissions cannot be ruled out*... *The risk of a rapid
increase in [methane] emissions is real* but remains largely unquantified."
****

Another extensive scientific review of data from the ESAS gathered between
1995 and 2011 by over twenty Arctic specialists published in the
Proceedings of the Russian Academy of
Sciences<http://link.springer.com/article/10.1134%2FS1028334X12080144%E2%80%8E>similarly
concluded that:
****

"The [ESAS] is a powerful supplier of methane to the atmosphere owing to
the continued degradation of the submarine permafrost, which causes the
destruction of gas hydrates. *The emission of methane in several areas of
the [ESAS] is massive to the extent that growth in the methane
concentrations in the atmosphere to values capable of causing a
considerable and even catastrophic warning on the Earth is possible*."****

Other recent scientific <http://m.ppg.sagepub.com/content/35/3/281.short>
reviews 
<http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-5757-8_15>corroborate
these findings.
****
4. Current Arctic methane levels are unprecedented****

A 2011 Nature 
paper<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7414/full/nature11392.html>found
that ten times more carbon than thought is escaping via thawing
coastal permafrost at the ESAS. Although it is not yet clear whether or how
the quantities of Arctic methane are impacting on total atmospheric methane
emissions, a number of scientists argue that the increasing spikes in
methane detected in the Arctic in recent years is indeed unprecedented.****

Despite NOAA scientist Dr
Dlugokencky<http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/annualconference/abs.php?refnum=71-130415-A>'s
reassurances that current Arctic methane emission levels are nothing to be
"alarmed" about, his own data shows that Arctic methane levels were 1850
ppb in yr 2000, rising up to 1890 ppb in 2012. ****

Indeed, Dr Leonid Yurganov, Senior Research Scientist at the NASA/UMBC
Joint Centre for Earth Systems Technology, and his co-scientists from NOAA
and Harvard (Shawn Xiong and Steven Wofsy) disagree with Dlugokencky.
In a paper
for the American Geophysical
Union<http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2012/files/2012/11/AGU12ch4v2.pdf>last
December they charted a worrying "global increase of methane" since
2007-8, with particular spikes in 2009 and 2011-12 in the northern
hemisphere, with maximum methane concentrations in the
Arctic<http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2012/eposters/eposter/a31d-0062/>
:****

"IASI data for the autumn months (October-November) clearly indicate
Eurasian shelf areas of the Arctic Ocean as a significant methane emitter.
The maximal methane concentrations were found over Kara and Laptev Seas.
According to IASI data, during the last three years in autumn time, methane
over Eurasian shelf has been increased by 25 ppb, over the N. American
shelf, by 23 ppb, and over the land between 50 N and 70 N for both Eastern
and Western hemispheres, by 20 ppb."****

Yurganov et. al point out that between January 2009 and 2013, Arctic
methane levels ramped steadily higher by about 10-20 ppb on average each
year. They also note that maximum Arctic methane emissions occur annually
between September and October - coinciding with the Arctic sea ice minimum.*
***
5. The tipping point for continuous Siberian permafrost thaw could be as
low as 1.5C****

New research led by Prof Antony Vaks published this year in
Science<http://www.climategeology.ethz.ch/publications/2013_Vaks_et_al.Scienceexpress.pdf>analysing
a 500,000 year history of Siberian permafrost found that "global
climates only slightly warmer than today are sufficient to thaw significant
regions of permafrost." The study by eight experts found that there is a
tipping point for continuous thawing of permafrost at 1.5C which "can
potentially lead to substantial release of carbon trapped in the permafrost
into the atmosphere."****
6. Arctic conditions during the Eemian interglacial lasting from 130,000 to
115,000 years ago are a terrible analogy for today's Arctic****

Two recent studies challenge the relevance of Arctic conditions in the
Eemian interglacial. A 2012 Geophysical Research Letters study rejects the
idea that the Arctic experienced ice free summers in the Eemian, noting
that Arctic temperatures were cooler than previously
thought<http://phys.org/news/2012-06-climate-cold-arctic-eemian.html>,
with evidence that ice sheets were more resistant - partly due to vastly
different Arctic ocean currents. Similarly, a new Nature
study<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v493/n7433/full/nature11789.html>found
that the Greenland ice sheets experienced only modest melting in the
Eemian, such that the extensive sea level rise at the time could only be
explained by melting in
Antarctica<http://www.nature.com/news/greenland-defied-ancient-warming-1.12265>.
Both studies suggest that the Arctic sea ice simply had not retreated
enough to expose permafrost.****

According to Prof Paul Beckwith of the University of Ottawa Laboratory for
Paleoclimatology and Climatology, this can be explained by a number of
factors: ****

"... the key distinction is that the warming today is from Greenhouse gases
being higher and occurs 'twenty-four seven', namely the cooling at night is
much less (diurnal variation smaller); in the Eemian the tilt of the Earth
was much greater so there was much more seasonality, thus winters were much
colder so the sea ice extent, thickness, and thus volume could build up
much more, and the summers were warmer in the daytime, however the cooling
at night was much greater than now (less greenhouse gas [GHG], more diurnal
variation); net result is that the ice was much more durable in the Eemian.
Greenland temps were higher during the daytime, but cooled off much more
during the nighttime in the lower GHG concentration world."****

7. Paleoclimate records will not necessarily capture a large, abrupt
methane pulse****

Prof Beckwith also poured (ice cold) water on the claim that we know an
abrupt methane release cannot occur, because it has never occurred before -
purportedly proven as such an event is not detected in the ice cores:****

"The length of time for the methane pulse is very important here. If most
of the methane came out in a decade, for example then within a subsequent
decade or so most of the methane will have been broken down to CO2 and H20
and also been dispersed/distributed around the planet, away from the pulse
source area in the Arctic. The CO2 produced would have been small (CO2
stayed within 180-280 ppm range). It takes about 50 years or even more
(depending on the snowfall rate and surface melt rates) for snow at the
surface to be compacted into firn that closes off the air spaces creating
the bubbles in the ice that are reservoirs of the methane and other
atmospheric gases. Because of that 50 year bubble closure time, the large
pulse of methane that was burped out of the marine sediments and
terrestrial permafrost would be long gone and not result in a detectable
signal in the ice core record. Just because the record does not capture it
does not mean that it was not produced."****

These comments are confirmed by an in-depth American Geophysical Union
study<http://www.agu.org/books/sp/v054/>which notes that it "remains
unclear if the full magnitude of atmospheric
[methane] changes are recorded in ice cores because of diffusional
smoothing of the [methane] while in the firn" as well as "signal smoothing"
caused by "atmospheric effects." ****

But studies do indicate past precedent. A 2009 Science
paper<http://www.sciencemag.org/content/324/5926/477.summary>argues
that abrupt, catastrophic emissions from Arctic methane clathrates
including from thawing permafrost played a key role 11,600 years ago at the
end of the Younger Dryas cold period in driving wetland emissions,
generating sudden massive warming.****
So what?****

All this proves that the $60 trillion price-tag for Arctic warming
estimated by the latest Nature commentary should be taken seriously,
prompting further urgent research and action on mitigation - rather than
denounced on the basis of outdated, ostrich-like objections based on
literature unacquainted with the ESAS.****

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to