*But their wonder-kid suggest re-introducing large Arctic herbivores to create holes in the snow to allow the cold Arctic wind to keep the permafrost frozen.* These Russian scientists wrote <http://media.longnow.org/files/2/REVIVE/The%20Past%20and%20Future%20of%20the%20Mammoth%20Steppe%20Ecosystem.pdf> : "*Albescent **pasture ecosystems promote the planet’s cooling. **They can be very useful to combat current climate warming. They can absorb more carbon from the atmosphere than forests and can reliably preserve this carbon from fires in the deep soil. These ecosystems must be returned to natur*e."
Some more explanations on their theory here <https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8a58/59de5bc3fa51574c7ab267d80930be01f666.pdf> 2017-11-21 20:37 GMT+01:00 Russell Seitz <[email protected]>: > Microbial metabolism of methane to CO2 went unmentioned by the fictive > Secretary. Just as agonomists have raised African crop production by > spiking conventional fertilizers with enzymatically vital micronutrients > like zinc and selenium , the rate of CH4 to CO2 conversion in thawing > permafrost might be raised, and radiative forcing feedback reduced by > aerial spraying of kg per km2 quantitities of such elements over > micronutrient deficient regions of tundra. > > On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 12:25:23 AM UTC-5, Andrew Lockley wrote: >> >> Good spot. >> >> The "solution" is likely to be counter-productive, if it works as you >> describe. Except in local anomalies, summer radiation is the main heat >> input. Late lying snow increases albedo, thus reducing seasonal heating. >> Overlying snow is indeed a good insulator, but I don't know of any bias >> towards net cooling from winds, with net warming assumedly as likely. In >> fact, as global warming acts to prevent heat escape generally, it is likely >> that the air will be providing a net warming effect. >> >> Therefore, reducing spring snow cover will exacerbate permafrost loss. In >> deep winter, less snow cover will be beneficial in the high Arctic (due to >> reduced insulation), but this would profoundly affect local hydrology, if >> it were possible. There is no plausible mechanism to suggest herbivores >> could clear snow in the deep winter.. >> >> However, grazing may have no such effect on spring snow. In fact grazing >> is more likely to reduce forest advance, which serves to maintain albedo - >> forest advance likely exacerbating local warming, as described above. >> >> Soil cover from dense, low-lying vegetation serves to improve methane >> metabolism by aerobic microorganisms. If grazing prevents forest advance, >> it will likely constrain methane release. If grazing reduces ground cover, >> but without controlling forest advance, it will likely exacerbate methane >> release. >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> >> On 21 Nov 2017 05:05, "Eric Durbrow" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> CBS (in the US) has a usually thoughtful political TV drama called Madame >> Secretary. In the latest episode, the heroine, the US Sec of State, has to >> brainstorm solutions to melting permafrost in Russia and elsewhere >> releasing smallpox and other pathogens. They abandon the ideas of mylar >> sheet over the permafrost and SRM. But their wonder-kid suggest >> re-introducing large Arctic herbivores to create holes in the snow to allow >> the cold Arctic wind to keep the permafrost frozen. >> >> Strength: This is one of the very few cases where climate disasters seem >> to be mention in primetime US TV. >> >> Questions: I’m familiar with the melting permafrost-pathogen situation >> and the methane situation but this fictional solution doesn’t seem very >> convincing. Is it even feasible? >> >> (If you subscribe to CBS Access you can get to the latest episode called >> North to the Future. You ***might**** also find it on youtube.com. Its >> also possible that people outside the US get CBS shows on Netflix.) >> >> -- >> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> >> -- > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
