This is not good.

[Vergent]

Yurganov is working on a paper on arctic methane that concludes:

The main conclusion of this paper is a detection of high and growing with years methane mixing ratios

in areas coinciding with predicted locations of methane hydrates. According to the satellite data this

emission was small before 2008.

It can be found here.

ftp://asl.umbc.edu/pub/yurganov/methane/draft/paperArcticV2.pdf

Warning this site can be slow it took me many tries.

edit= typo

[Vergent]

Scientists Defending Against The Methane Bomb

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/scientists-defending-against-the-methane-bomb//

[TerryM]

Has there been any word on S&S's activities this season?

Terry

[PhillipS]

There is a recent development in NOAA's monitoring of CH4 levels in the arctic - a development which took place without any notice that I am aware of. I believe most of the readers here are familiar with NOAA's ESRLand with the CH4 monitoring program they have had for years at observatories around the globe. Barrow Observatory is one of two in the arctic region and is the closest to the ESAS area where potential CH4 releases are predicted. Any plumes of CH4 released from the ESAS are likely to be detectable at Barrow soon after they occur.

Here is the full plot of the hourly CH4 data from Barrow:

About 26 years of data that shows the slowly rising average CH4 levels as well as the transient spikes of much higher concentrations. When I looked at the 2012 plot I noticed something odd:

Do you see it, too? I don't mean the dropping concentration, that's just the annual cycle in which CH4 levels drop in the spring before rising again in the summer and fall. And I don't mean the spike to about 2500 ppb in the spring (though that is pretty alarming). The oddity is the record halting in June. I emailed the NOAA POC, Kirk Thoning, to ask for info to understand why the data wasn't being displayed and got this reply:

Due to budget constraints, the in-situ methane measurement system at Barrow was shut down on June 1.

A program that's been in place for a quarter of a century shut down just as its data is sorely needed. Curses! But the CH4 flask sampling program is still active. Trouble is, flask sampling lacks the temporal resolution of in-situ sampling making it less likely to detect transient phenomena and there is a lag of several weeks in seeing the data because the flasks have to be shipped to labs for analysis. Here is the 2012 flask record for CH4:

The flask sampling program is much like a rear-view mirror - it shows you where you've been, not where you are. But I suppose it is better than no data at all. And the in-situ CH4 sampling program is still active at Mauna Loa so we should be able to observe any CH4 released from melting of the Hawaiian permafrost.

[Vergent]

Budgetary constraints B.S

Methane monitors start at $500

https://www.google.c...iw=1280&bih=713

[TerryM]

Vergent

If we just close our eyes it will disappear.

Canada has been shuttering monitoring facilities as rapidly as it can. I had hoped that the US under Obama would resist the urge.

Terry

[salbers]

These folks, also from ESRL/GMD are mentioning the value of in-situ measurements...

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/annualconference/abs.php?refnum=86-120409-A

[PhillipS]

These folks, also from ESRL/GMD are mentioning the value of in-situ measurements...

http://www.esrl.noaa...num=86-120409-A

Interesting timing since that was distributed just two weeks before they pulled the plug on in-situ monitoring of CH4 at Barrow.

[salbers]

Interesting timing since that was distributed just two weeks before they pulled the plug on in-situ monitoring of CH4 at Barrow.

This was during the annual GMD conference held in the building where I work. I think this desire for more obs has been expressed a number of times over the years. Curiously I didn't much see much reference to the Arctic Ocean and ESAS methane in this conference program.

[PhillipS]

This was during the annual GMD conference held in the building where I work. I think this desire for more obs has been expressed a number of times over the years. Curiously I didn't much see much reference to the Arctic Ocean and ESAS methane in this conference program.

DO you have any insight into why the in-situ CH4 program was shut down at Barrow yet is still on-going at Mauna Loa? I would think Mauna Loa would be an ideal site for flask sampling - it is thousands of miles from the major sources of release so the GHGs are well mixed by the time they reach the observatory. There is a very good match between the flask data and the in-situ data which to me indicates that the two programs are somewhat redundant.

By comparison, Barrow is ideal for in-situ sampling because it is very close to areas of concern such as the Alaskan permafrost, the Siberian permafrost, and the ESAS. That's what we should be monitoring in near real-time. We know from the data record that the in-situ monitoring picks up event very quickly. If a large release takes place I don't think it's helpful to wait several weeks to find out about it after the lab analyses the flask samples. The NOAA decision is like being concerned about a rumbling volcano but putting the sensors thousands of miles away and getting results by snailmail. WTF are they thinking?!

[TerryM]

When governments chose to hide the data, it's hard not to assume the worst.

Terry

[Vergent]

When governments chose to hide the data, it's hard not to assume the worst.

Terry

This is particularly true when they shut it down just after getting the highest readings in twenty years.

[salbers]

Maybe I'll get some insight on this at some point. Off hand I'd suggest that before going too far with the conspiracy theories there have been lots of issues with budget cuts in our lab. It would be interesting though to find out the rationale for the details of these cuts. Additional email inquiries might be useful potentially as well.

[Vergent]

Maybe I'll get some insight on this at some point. Off hand I'd suggest that before going too far with the conspiracy theories there have been lots of issues with budget cuts in our lab. It would be interesting though to find out the rationale for the details of these cuts. Additional email inquiries might be useful potentially as well.

They already have the equipment. The system is automated. It only takes minutes to calibrate and do quality control. What are they saving on? The electric bill?

[PhillipS]

Maybe I'll get some insight on this at some point. Off hand I'd suggest that before going too far with the conspiracy theories there have been lots of issues with budget cuts in our lab. It would be interesting though to find out the rationale for the details of these cuts. Additional email inquiries might be useful potentially as well.

If you think emails to NOAA and our senators and congressmen might help, well, that's easy to do. Sadly, the Texas Senators are in the pocket of the fossil fuel contingent, but my congressman has a good track record with environmental issues.

[salbers]

On a related note I was considering going to the GMD conference in May, however I recall being pretty busy around then (in my more weather related day job) and I didn't see too much on methane in the agenda. I was even wondering if S&S would show up. We should consider encouraging them to do so at next May's conference, or even to give a seminar at GMD at another time.

My main suggestion for now is to contact the authors of the abstract I mentioned earlier (post #702) about methane monitoring. Are there any labor type issues in addition to the electric bill? It seems to me that the community is more focused on the arctic land emissions of methane and may not all be aware of S&S's work (as noted in this abstract and others).

The trick is that the ESAS emissions may not be that large in the global methane budget right now, but need monitoring to be on top of the trend with ongoing and future developments. Is the recent global uptick in methane due to the ESAS, or emissions in other latitude zones? NOAA is working on a so-called methane tracker (extension of carbon tracker) to help with this. I'm unsure what time scales it operates on. I certainly like to look at the hourly data, though it could be a challenge to model this with sparse locations having the high temporal frequency. Almost seems more suited to some type of case study or statistical analysis where we try and gain insight into plume sources associated with the transient events. Yet more data will always help in some fashion. We might ask whether the already observed transient events correlate with wind trajectories. Are these ESAS emissions, or some land source (even from drilling?).

Funding for monitoring has been discussed for a long time - always an interesting challenge in a large gov't organization within a constrained global economy and following political influences. The congress has been cutting climate and weather in general and may not consider or appreciate the details about Barrow vs. Mauna Loa. I will note that Mauna Loa in general has support being one of the longest running monitoring stations. The folks at the NOAA/ESRL level would probably be more familiar with these types of distinctions between stations, compared with congress.

So perhaps the more feedback various people get on this the better? At the moment I'm on vacation so that's a short term factor for me.

[salbers]

Here is the full text of the abstract I've been referring to...

Monitoring and Detecting Arctic Greenhouse Gas Budgets: The Importance of Long-term Surface Observations and the Role of CarbonTracker-CH₄

L. Bruhwiler¹, E. Dlugokencky¹, K. Masarie¹ and C. Sweeney²

¹NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305; 303-497-6921, E-mail: [email protected]

²Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309

Vast stores of organic carbon are thought to be frozen in Arctic soils; as much as 1,700 billion tonnes of carbon, several times the amount emitted by fossil fuel use to date and about equal to known coal reserves. If mobilized to the atmosphere, this carbon would have significant impacts on global climate, especially if emitted as CH₄. A recent study suggests that permafrost carbon climate feedbacks have had profound impacts on past climate, possibly driving the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum 55 Million years ago. Model studies project that by the middle of the 21^st Century, the Arctic will be a net source of carbon to the atmosphere.

NOAA/ESRL, Environment Canada, and other agencies have collected observations of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the Arctic and the rest of the world for at least several decades. Analysis of this data does not currently support increased Arctic emissions of CO₂ or CH₄. However, it is difficult to detect changes in Arctic emissions because of transport from lower latitudes and high inter-annual variability. Arctic surface emissions are also especially difficult to detect from space, and current satellite platforms do not provide useful information about GHG budgets in the lower Arctic troposphere. Modeling/assimilation systems, such as NOAA’s new CarbonTracker-CH₄ system can help untangle the Arctic budget and trends of GHGs. CarbonTracker-CH₄ has shown success in simulating the inter-annual variability of Arctic fluxes, and it is able to distinguish Siberian fluxes from Boreal North American fluxes.

We address the plausibility of monitoring the Arctic GHG emission trends. How large would Arctic emission trends have to be before they could be identified in network observations? What spatial information could be recovered? How would the spatial density of observations affect our ability to perceive and attribute trends in Arctic emissions? Could emission have already been increasing during the close of the 20^th Century? Trends in emissions need to be large before they can be discerned in network observations; our calculations show that emissions of methane must increase by at least 5TgCH₄/yr to be seen in a 10-year observational record. Long-term surface observations of GHGs are crucial to monitoring the fate the vast and currently frozen Arctic soil carbon reservoir.

Figure 1. Daily average of the pressure-weighted mean mole fraction of methane simulated by CarbonTracker-CH₄. Units are nanomoles of CH₄ per mole of dry air (nmol mol-1), and the values are given by the color scale depicted under the graphic. Gradients in CH₄ concentration are due to exchange between the atmosphere and the earth surface, including fossil fuel emissions, emissions from agriculture and waste, wildfire emissions, and emissions from wetlands.

[salbers]

I guess only pretty general budget information can be found in this NOAA summary around page 450-460.

http://www.corporate...NOAAFY12_PB.pdf

Carbon Tracker is mentioned in the FY2013 document on page 3-52 in a request to increase the budget. Carbon cycle and the Arctic is also mentioned on page 3-50. Carbon tracker is kind of a selling point, though it clearly needs high quality observational data to realize its potential.

http://www.corporate...13_Web_Full.pdf

[TerryM]

The ESAS is definitely at risk with this storm, but I wonder about another possible source.

The water off the Yukon coast has seen Mediterranean like temperatures in the past weeks. The sea is shallow and was probably inundated about the same time as the ESAS. and there is a lot of buried Methane.

The last few days have seen 3M waves riding 2M swells mixing the water, so some of that surface heat is reaching the shallow bottom.

The ESAS is at least being monitored. What about the Mackenzie Delta Basin?

Terry

[dabize]

The ESAS is definitely at risk with this storm, but I wonder about another possible source.

The water off the Yukon coast has seen Mediterranean like temperatures in the past weeks. The sea is shallow and was probably inundated about the same time as the ESAS. and there is a lot of buried Methane.

The last few days have seen 3M waves riding 2M swells mixing the water, so some of that surface heat is reaching the shallow bottom.

The ESAS is at least being monitored. What about the Mackenzie Delta Basin?

Terry

Hi Terry,

The heat may be less of an issue than the pressure.........see my post at Nevens.

[salbers]

Has there been any word on S&S's activities this season?

Terry

Yes, they have (or are involved with) three abstracts submitted to the AGU Fall 2012 conference to be held in San Francisco this December. Depending on my own schedule at the conference I hope to be able to attend. Here is the AGU link and text for all of them (albeit with a small font):

http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2012/scientific-program/

CONTROL ID: 1500396 TITLE: NEW EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF GAS MIGRATION PATHWAYS THROUGH SUB-SEA PERMAFROST IN THE EAST SIBERIAN ARCTIC SHELF ABSTRACT BODY: To assess whether sudden, large-scale releases are taking place in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS) or are likely to occur in the future we investigated the migration pathway characteristics and identified controlling factors of methane (CH4) flux from the seabed, through the water column, and into the atmosphere.

Evidence of the existence of migration pathways through permafrost is provided by seismic data, specifically as low-amplitude anomalies sometimes referred to as washed-out or semi-blanked zones. In the marine environment, widespread washed-out zones often have been attributed to gas hydrates. In permafrost, low seismic amplitude may also result from variations of physical properties or property changes associated with development of deep taliks. The most prominent features of the seafloor morphology associated with the bubble releases observed in the mid-outer shelf (water depth >30 m) were morphological features that could be attributed to gas release from permeable/unconsolidated sediments: pockmarks (PMs), PM-induced erosion channels, collapse depression, and features related to mass wasting and sub-marine sediment slides. Acoustic anomalies observed in high-resolution seismic images obtained in mid-outer shelf reflect large volumes of free gas ascending within highly permeable sediments, so-called “gas curtains” and “gas blankets”. Where such acoustic anomalies were observed, we detected very high concentrations of bubble seeps, which appeared not as single bubble streams (i.e. individual bubbles released continuously) that were mostly observed in the inner part of the ESAS, but as columns of bubbles (termed flares) rising to the sea surface. One of the most prominent morphological features observed in the ESAS (water depth <90 m) was associated with temporal gas releases was caused by ice scouring. The effect of this scouring is the creation of a long linear furrow that follows a relatively straight line and extends from only a few tens of meters to many tens of kilometers in length. In the ESAS, ice scouring penetrated up to 8 m deep into the sediments, and where surface sediments are underlain with gas fronts, gas releases have occurred. Since shallow gas fronts appeared to be a ubiquitous feature observed over the entire ESAS, ice scouring provides an important mechanism in the inner and mid shelf, allowing CH4 to escape from the sediments to the atmosphere by avoiding slow diffusion and aerobic oxidation in the sulfate-reduction zones.

Additional pathways for CH4 release from the inner-mid shelf could be provided by completely submerged thaw lakes, underlain by taliks, which formed on the Siberian coastal plain prior to inundation. A number of such lakes have been transformed into sea lagoons or left seabed depressions in the ESAS interpreted as a typical thermokarst terrain landscape similar to the terrain of the Siberian Lowland. In such areas, we observed so-called “gas columns,” which are characteristic of locally permeable sediments (within taliks), or gas movement within low-permeability sediments observed as “gas plumes”.

CURRENT SECTION/FOCUS GROUP: Cryosphere CURRENT SESSION: C004. Climate Change and Cryospheric Systems INDEX TERMS: [0475] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Permafrost, cryosphere, and high-latitude processes, [0428] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Carbon cycling, [1621] GLOBAL CHANGE / Cryospheric change, [3045] MARINE GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS / Seafloor morphology, geology, and geophysics. AUTHORS/INSTITUTIONS: N.E. Shakhova, I.P. Semiletov, IARC, Univerrsity Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK;

N.E. Shakhova, I.P. Semiletov, A. Salomatin, V. Yusupov, V. Karnaukh, D. Kosmach, D. Chernikh, Laboratory of Arctic Research, VI Il'ichov Pacific Oceanological Institute, Vladivostok, RUSSIAN FEDERATION;

L. Lobkovsky, N. Dmitrievsky, R. Anan'ev, , PP Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Moscow, RUSSIAN FEDERATION; SPONSOR NAME: Natalia Shakhova CONTACT (E-MAIL ONLY): [email protected] TITLE OF TEAM: (No Image Selected) (No Table Selected)

CONTROL ID: 1482929 TITLE: DEGRADING SUB-SEA PERMAFROST AND SEDIMENTARY METHANE RELEASE IN THE SOUTHERN LAPTEV SEA, ARCTIC OCEAN

ABSTRACT BODY: There remains substantial uncertainty regarding several aspects of CH4 release from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS). To accurately predict future CH4 releases, we must understand the size of the reservoir (the amount of trapped CH4 that potentially could be released: hydrates, free gas, modern production), as well the processes that have kept it trapped and those that control its release. The main results to be considered here are related to permafrost stability and biological methane production: 1) Are changing ESAS thermal conditions causing the permafrost to thaw? 2) Do accelerated rates of permafrost degradation lead to development of taliks that act as CH4 vents to the overlying seawater and to the atmosphere? 3) Does biological CH4 production occur in permafrost and the overlying sediments? 4) How do CH4 oxidation rates compare to CH4 production rates?

To address these questions, in April of 2011 and March-April of 2012 we drilled five boreholes (with depth up to 58 m below sediment surface) in the seasonally ice-covered eastern part of the shallow shelf, east off the Lena Delta, where specific geochemical and geophysical surveys were conducted in summer 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. The study area includes three main types of sub-sea degradation and talik formation: 1) fault zones, with significant upward heat flux, 2) areas impacted by a river, with downward heating effect, and 3) background areas (with more-or-less stable sub-sea permafrost). Therefore, we can extend the obtained results to the entire ESAS. The thermal regime at different sites differed significantly between sites. We did not encounter sub-sea permafrost at four sites from five. At site located east of the Sardahskaya channel of the Lena River mouth the temperature along the borehole was positive and increased from 0.5C in the sediment upper boundary layer to 2.7C at 15 m depth while the temperature at the freezing point deviated between -.08C and -1.3C, decreasing with depth, assuming the salt content in pore water equals 12-15 psu. That temperature distribution indicates the existence of an open talik at this site that is impacted by the Lena River heating effect and anomalous geothermal flux in the axis of the Ust’-Lena Rift. High concentrations of CH4 and non-CH4 hydrocarbons and free hydrogen were found along the sediment cores. An important feature of the vertical CH4 profile is a maximum at ~4.5-5 m depth associated with a sharp acoustical reflector which is spatially correlated with the existence of the ancient dried soil layer rather than with the permafrost table, as was stated previously. Seismoprofiles made during our 2008 and 2011 cruises covering the entire shallow ESAS area showed the sharp acoustical reflector (and blanking zone beneath) in the upper sediment layer which we associate with the existence of a gas front (GF). For the first time this hypothesis has been validated by drilling and CH4 measurements. An electromagnetic survey accomplished at 15 fast ice stations and analyzed jointly with the seismo-profiling data demonstrated the existence of deep “talik-like” roots at sites with wide GF zones accompanied by an anomalously high concentration of dissolved CH4 (and air CH4 in summer). It was shown that the sediment CH4 production plays a negligible role in the observed dynamics of dissolved CH4 in the study area.

CURRENT SECTION/FOCUS GROUP: Cryosphere CURRENT SESSION: C004. Climate Change and Cryospheric Systems INDEX TERMS: [0475] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Permafrost, cryosphere, and high-latitude processes, [0490] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Trace gases, [1621] GLOBAL CHANGE / Cryospheric change, [4820] OCEANOGRAPHY: BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL / Gases. AUTHORS/INSTITUTIONS: I.P. Semiletov, N.E. Shakhova, IARC, Univ Alaska, Fairbanks, AK;

I.P. Semiletov, N.E. Shakhova, O. Dudarev, D. Kosmach, A. Charkin, Laboratory of Arctic Research, Pacific Oceanological Institute, Vladivostok, RUSSIAN FEDERATION;

V. Tumskoy, B. Bukhanov, E. Chuvilin, N. Romanovskii, Geological Department, Moscow State University, Moscow, RUSSIAN FEDERATION;

V. Samarkin, S.B. Joye, Microbiological Lab, University Georgia Athens, Athens, GA;

SPONSOR NAME: Natalia Shakhova CONTACT (E-MAIL ONLY): [email protected]

CONTROL ID: 1503641 TITLE: Methane carbon stable isotope signatures in waters and sediments of the Laptev Sea Shelf ABSTRACT BODY: There are a number of areas characterized high water column methane concentrations and active seafloor methane seepage zones along the shelf of the Laptev Sea. Degrading subsea permafrost, which is rich in organic carbon and possibly containing metastable methane gas hydrates, is considered a potent source of methane in this area. To better understand possible methane sources generating high methane areas of the Laptev Sea, carbon stable isotope signatures of water column methane and in surface and deep drill core sediment samples were obtained during summer 2011 and spring 2012 field campaigns. The δ¹³C values of methane dissolved in seawater at the drill site varied from -37.8 to -75.7 ‰. The range of δ¹³C values of methane in the surface sediments was from -51.3 to -58.2 ‰ and in drill core samples (up to 26.5 m depth) values ranged from -77.8 to -100 ‰. Methane carbon isotope signatures in seawater reflect various sources of methane and the influence of active aerobic methane oxidation in seawater and surface sediments. Significant depletion of methane from drill core with δ¹³C (to -100‰) is characteristic of hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis at cold near 0°C in situ temperatures, which was confirmed with δ¹⁴C-radiotracer rate incubations.

CURRENT SECTION/FOCUS GROUP: Biogeosciences CURRENT SESSION: B069. Vulnerability of Permafrost Carbon to Climate Change INDEX TERMS: [0429] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Climate dynamics, [0456] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Life in extreme environments, [0475] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Permafrost, cryosphere, and high-latitude processes, [0490] BIOGEOSCIENCES / Trace gases. AUTHORS/INSTITUTIONS: V. Samarkin, N. Finke, S.B. Joye, Marine Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA;

I.P. Semiletov, N.E. Shakhova, , International Arctic Research Center, Fairbanks, AK;

I.P. Semiletov, N.E. Shakhova, , Pacific Oceanological Institute, Vladivostok, RUSSIAN FEDERATION;

SPONSOR NAME: Samantha Joye CONTACT (E-MAIL ONLY): [email protected] TITLE OF TEAM:

[salbers]

Has this been commented on with the hemispheric methane imbalance we could observe?

http://www.ameg.me/index.php/methane

Dr. Ed Dlugokencky (methane monitoring head for the US federal government) said in a December 2011 interview that if the recent increase had been coming solely from the Arctic, he was fairly certain that science would have detected that by comparing measurements from the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

In 2007, excess rainfall in the tropics and excess warmth in the Arctic may have led to higher methane emissions from wetlands in both regions, and the excess tropical emissions probably continued into 2008. The methane level of the atmosphere kept rising in 2009, but the reason it did that year is a bit of a mystery. In 2010, excessive rainfall in the tropics may again have been a culprit. Results are still being analyzed for 2011, but so far it looks as though the increase has continued.

The big question now is, will the atmospheric methane continue to increase.

[blizzard1024]

I have to agree that this is BS scare mongering. 8000 years ago during the Holocene climatic

optimum the Arctic was 2-4C warmer than today. There is postulated to have been a complete

melt of the Arctic sea ice in summer and the climate rapidly warmed. Why was there not a huge

release of methane that spun the climate out of control with that warm period? The climate

is a self regulating machine with a lot of feedbacks and "states". Yes is could warm...but it

would stabilize at a new equilibrium level. Otherwise, anytime it warms, or cools for that matter,

the climate would spin out of control. We are here now and life abounds on earth BECAUSE

our climate stabilizes. This article and "research" is pure stupidity. Shameful.

[TerryM]

I have to agree that this is BS scare mongering. 8000 years ago during the Holocene climatic

optimum the Arctic was 2-4C warmer than today. There is postulated to have been a complete

melt of the Arctic sea ice in summer and the climate rapidly warmed. Why was there not a huge

release of methane that spun the climate out of control with that warm period? The climate

is a self regulating machine with a lot of feedbacks and "states". Yes is could warm...but it

would stabilize at a new equilibrium level. Otherwise, anytime it warms, or cools for that matter,

the climate would spin out of control. We are here now and life abounds on earth BECAUSE

our climate stabilizes. This article and "research" is pure stupidity. Shameful.

Have you researched the source of the ESAS methane at all?

If you had you'd know that Holocene climatic optimum couldn't have had an effect, and if you researched Clathrates along with the Holocene Max you probably would have learned why England is now an island.

Could it be you've been straying over into Watts World, and got confused?

Terry

[blizzard1024]

So you are saying that this ESAS source of methane is going to spiral out of control

and forever change our climate. I am sorry.... prior to the Holocene, there were very rapid

fluctuations both warming and cooling of our climate and somehow melting/freezing permafrost

and CH4 releases/uptakes did not spiral the planet's climate out of control. We are talking trace gases here...ppm

and ppb for CH4! I believe the Earth is warming due to GHG (don't say I am an Anthony

Watts worshiper)...but 3C warming I don't believe over a 100-200 years will be that bad.

I think the climate models are warming us up too quickly and there is a lot of warming in the pipeline

as Hansen has said. But we will adapt. It is even possible that the water vapor feedback is

overstated and we see only 1-2C additional warming. Generally warmer climates are

good for mankind. If it was the other way around...then people would be scared.

I am of the camp that the oceans provide a huge dampening effect on the climate.

So forcings led to slow responses. Very slow. That I believe is fundamentally how

life survived all the chaos that volcanoes, asteroids etc have wrecked on the planet

in the past.

Releases of methane from a source in the Arctic somehow is going to wreck the Earth's

climate...COME ON MAN!

[salbers]

I happen to think a 3C change is too much of a human contribution. And if the 50Gt noted in the ESAS were to be released the warming would be more than that. Kind of a gamble to totally ignore this.

[blizzard1024]

I happen to think a 3C change is too much of a human contribution. And if the 50Gt noted in the ESAS were to be released the warming would be more than that. Kind of a gamble to totally ignore this.

So what do you propose we do? Cut down CO2 emissions and throw the world's economy back to the stone age?

There are 7 billion of us on the planet and most are extremely poor and destitute. They need energy and many

third world countries have coal, natural gas and oil but are being forced to use clean energy alternatives that

are not efficient. Hundreds of millions or more are living shortened life spans because they use

charcoal for heating and cooking. They abuse their local environment by cutting down all their trees for

charcoal and their average life span because of the smoke in their homes is in the 40s!! We have got

to let these third world nations develop a power grids. "Green" energy just is not efficient enough at this

time. Pure and simple. So basically we should continue to emit to keep the world's economy from

imploding (God knows we are close to this anyway) and let science work on making more efficient

carbon neutral energy sources...solar panels....geothermal....waves...and maybe wind. I hate wind energy

because it destroys the beautiful mountain tops where I live and is a bird and bat shredder. I see wind

as a mean form of green. We will have to learn to adapt to the changes in climate...however severe.

But climate change seem to be slow right now...what? around .2C/decade. I think this is the lesser of

two evils. World anarchy or a warmer climate? Winners and losers, that is what it will be. If you look at

history...there are always winners and losers as centuries go by for whatever reason. So this climate

change issue will introduce another factor that mankind will somehow adapt to.

But please don't wipe out the world's economies!!!! It's bad enough already....

[dabize]

But please don't wipe out the world's economies!!!! It's bad enough already....

Blizzard, take some advice: Stick to forecasting local Wx

You have a red tag - presumably you can do that well enough.

But complaining about wind farms killing birds in a world where whole mountaintops are being removed to mine coal tells me that you'd better leave the "big picture" stuff to others.

And I don't mean Rushbo.

[blizzard1024]

But please don't wipe out the world's economies!!!! It's bad enough already....

Blizzard, take some advice: Stick to forecasting local Wx

You have a red tag - presumably you can do that well enough.

But complaining about wind farms killing birds in a world where whole mountaintops are being removed to mine coal tells me that you'd better leave the "big picture" stuff to others.

And I don't mean Rushbo.

That is an ad hominiem attack. Rush Limbaugh is a right wing wacko who is a big reason why our middle class

is buying into the BS that lowering taxes on wealthy will solve our problems. He is disgusting.

Just because I view things differently than the mainstream climate folks...and still yet believe in GHG climate change...

still invites such attacks.

By the way, I am an operational meteorologist for 21 years published many papers on weather...have a

MS in meteorology too and have taken many climate courses including one recently at the graduate level just to learn...

not for any degree. And oh yeah...I got an A and was the top student in the class.

I have been monitoring our climate since the 80s. So don't write me off as a non climate scientist. I understand to a very

high degree how the atmosphere and climate system works including radiative tranfer. My GPA for my BS was 3.92 and for my MS was

3.95 while working a full time job and raising kids and I went to PSU a very tough program!!! I also authored a landmark paper on forecasting

heavy snowstorms that still gets referenced today. So don't write me off as just a meteorologist that knows squat about climate.

That is condescending. I remember when all the meteorologist who couldn't hack the hard core math changed majors and

became climatology majors back in the 80s! It is a lot different now and there are very very smart people working in climo

studies. So I take nothing away from their intelligence now...it is totally different. Some of the best and brightest students

go into climate studies and there is heavy duty math now....

Also I am an avid bird watcher and it kills me to see all these wind farms ruining habitat and killing many many birds.

There are very inefficient and not able to sustain themselves without government subsidies.

Yes I don't agree with the mining practice either and that pisses me off too. But coal, oil and natural gas

is the way to go for now until a better cost effective alternative is available unless we want too go

back to the 1800s....many many people would suffer and die. I know some of the radical left would

like to see the earth's population crash...humans are the scourge or cancer of the Earth according to them.

So let climate change happen and kills billions....

Man is this f'ed up.... you people have no clue what cutting back CO2 emissions would do to the world's economy

and our standard of living. I want my kids to enjoy a middle class existence not excessive just what they need.

anyway...this is a feudal argument.

[nflwxman]

How could one worry about wind mills and not complain about the massive amount of ecological and human damage fossil fuels have caused? House cats and automobiles kill about a million times more birds than all windmills in the world combined.

Sorry for the off topic.