Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Methane 'Fart' from the Earth Poses Enormous Global Warming Risk

By Steve Connor, The Independent UK. Posted September 24, 2008.


Melting in the Arctic has caused the release of millions of tons of methane -- a gas 20 times more damaging than carbon dioxide.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The first evidence that millions of tons of a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide is being released into the atmosphere from beneath the Arctic seabed has been discovered by scientists.

The Independent has been passed details of preliminary findings suggesting that massive deposits of sub-sea methane are bubbling to the surface as the Arctic region becomes warmer and its ice retreats.

Underground stores of methane are important because scientists believe their sudden release has in the past been responsible for rapid increases in global temperatures, dramatic changes to the climate, and even the mass extinction of species. Scientists aboard a research ship that has sailed the entire length of Russia's northern coast have discovered intense concentrations of methane - sometimes at up to 100 times background levels - over several areas covering thousands of square miles of the Siberian continental shelf.

In the past few days, the researchers have seen areas of sea foaming with gas bubbling up through "methane chimneys" rising from the sea floor. They believe that the sub-sea layer of permafrost, which has acted like a "lid" to prevent the gas from escaping, has melted away to allow methane to rise from underground deposits formed before the last ice age.

They have warned that this is likely to be linked with the rapid warming that the region has experienced in recent years.

Methane is about 20 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and many scientists fear that its release could accelerate global warming in a giant positive feedback where more atmospheric methane causes higher temperatures, leading to further permafrost melting and the release of yet more methane.

The amount of methane stored beneath the Arctic is calculated to be greater than the total amount of carbon locked up in global coal reserves so there is intense interest in the stability of these deposits as the region warms at a faster rate than other places on earth.

Orjan Gustafsson of Stockholm University in Sweden, one of the leaders of the expedition, described the scale of the methane emissions in an email exchange sent from the Russian research ship Jacob Smirnitskyi.

"We had a hectic finishing of the sampling programme yesterday and this past night," said Dr Gustafsson. "An extensive area of intense methane release was found. At earlier sites we had found elevated levels of dissolved methane. Yesterday, for the first time, we documented a field where the release was so intense that the methane did not have time to dissolve into the seawater but was rising as methane bubbles to the sea surface. These 'methane chimneys' were documented on echo sounder and with seismic [instruments]."

At some locations, methane concentrations reached 100 times background levels. These anomalies have been seen in the East Siberian Sea and the Laptev Sea, covering several tens of thousands of square kilometres, amounting to millions of tons of methane, said Dr Gustafsson. "This may be of the same magnitude as presently estimated from the global ocean," he said. "Nobody knows how many more such areas exist on the extensive East Siberian continental shelves.

"The conventional thought has been that the permafrost 'lid' on the sub-sea sediments on the Siberian shelf should cap and hold the massive reservoirs of shallow methane deposits in place. The growing evidence for release of methane in this inaccessible region may suggest that the permafrost lid is starting to get perforated and thus leak methane… The permafrost now has small holes. We have found elevated levels of methane above the water surface and even more in the water just below. It is obvious that the source is the seabed."

The preliminary findings of the International Siberian Shelf Study 2008, being prepared for publication by the American Geophysical Union, are being overseen by Igor Semiletov of the Far-Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Since 1994, he 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 on board the Jacob Smirnitskyi.

Dr Semiletov has suggested several possible reasons why methane is now being released from the Arctic, including the rising volume of relatively warmer water being discharged from Siberia's rivers due to the melting of the permafrost on the land.

The Arctic region as a whole has seen a 4C rise in average temperatures over recent decades and a dramatic decline in the area of the Arctic Ocean covered by summer sea ice. Many scientists fear that the loss of sea ice could accelerate the warming trend because open ocean soaks up more heat from the sun than the reflective surface of an ice-covered sea.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: methane, arctic

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Okay, okay, I get the picture.
Posted by: NoMcCainPalin on Sep 24, 2008 12:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, we are fucked
Posted by: bryangalt on Sep 24, 2008 3:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On the Discovery channel, there is a show where a group of scientists trek around Alaska and try their hand at survival in the Arctic. On one episode, they went to a lake that was boiling all over the place from methane release. They looked a bit scared to say the least.

The secondary time bomb in Alaska is the surface permafrost. It has been melting rapidly as well. My aunt's home in Wasilla was actually had the foundation sinking so fast that the support beams that help prop up the ceiling had a gap form of about 6 inches in just over a year.

Once the Alaskan permafrost reaches that critical point of no return, it is estimated that 7 gigatons of C02 (14,000,000,000,000,000 lbs of C02 instantly added to the air)will be released from the Alaskan tundra. And, Siberia is even bigger and experiencing the exact same problem.

That will be the siren that announces the rush of methane releases as well. Of course, the answer to this crisis is to drill for more oil in Alaska as you all know. If they try hard enough, they may be able to puncture a vast methane deposit now so that it won't pile up on us later on.

Jesus will know that its time to come save us as the atmosphere takes on a brownish glow instead of its almost lost blue one. We can then use our worthless money to roll some really good joints and smoke them to our heads, while there is still enough 02 in the air to sustain us.

I always find it the funniest thing that we consider ourselves the smartest species on the planet, yet look how fast we have placed ourselves and every other creature on Earth on the edge of the abyss--just a couple hundred years of since the industrial revolution and look at us...pathetic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yes, we are fucked Posted by: helenahanbasquet
Wait one minute.
Posted by: BlammDaddy on Sep 24, 2008 4:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's no such thing as that thar global warmin'.
pResident Moron said so and he speaks directly to the Baby Jesus so he should know !
Gawd Blas Amurka !

Hey.They made a lot of money !
BTW.
Angie and Brad adopthed a three headed Ethipian albino !!! Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
Idiots.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reality Cuts Through Egocentric Fantasies
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 24, 2008 5:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Cormac McCarthy's novel "The Road", I couldn't figure out how the Northern Hemisphere would suffer forest fires in wintertime. Then I noticed the news item about methane. So, it's not a fictional prop, but quite real indeed, and the sprawl of industrial pollution is making it so much worse, soon we will ALL be on the road South, unless Bush & Company decide to attack Iran or Venezuela to provoke war with Russia, or the economic Recession slips into Depression and social chaos, or....it looks like the human race is bent on suicide by any means necessary. Those whom God would destroy are first made mad.

Is there still time to peacefully reduce our human population, shrink our economy, recycle 100% of our garbage and sewage and create continental networks of self-reliant villages to live in balance with Nature? Do we have a last chance, or not?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kivalina v. ExxonMobil
Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale on Sep 24, 2008 5:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A lawsuit has been filed against all of the corporations who established front groups to dupe people into thinking global warming did not exist.

Flooded Village Files Suit Citing Corporate Link to Climate Change

Exxon, Conoco, BP, Chevron among others are being sued for conspiracy. The suit seeks redress in the form of paying the costs to move the islanders village, which is literally being eroded out from under them.
The lawyer spearheading the suit actually worked for Big Tobacco in the 1980's and knows all about the dirty tricks corporations play.
He was interviewed on Democracy Now! in July.

Here's the direct link to the complaint filed in US District Court:

Native Village of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil.

But of course the press can't ask Palin about this because it would be offensive and not deferential enough to her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kivalina v. ExxonMobil Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Kivalina v. ExxonMobil Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
MY FAMILY WILL DIE - NOT THINKING ABOUT JOKES SO MUCH
Posted by: dmstern on Sep 24, 2008 5:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When is this country going to stop with the gags. When the rot of all this is in their face. That moment is around the corner. So we'll go from joking about smoking joints to killing each other for food in about a day. Just like scumbag free market republicans switch to big government in the blink of an eye. We are a nation that plays it cool until the panic seeps out - like the methane under the ocean. Then all hell breaks loose. None of you tough guys are going to be laughing then, I promise you that. So stop acting tough now, do something, ANYTHING TO STOP THIS MADNESS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Methane is Fuel? It’s a Tool! Use it!
Posted by: Ottomatic on Sep 24, 2008 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Siberia is Farting,
Light a match!
This is one Consequence of Global Warming,
Some we can do something about and some we are defenseless against.
We must do the best we can with the tools we have.
First: Stop rebuilding along the Coastlines.
Everyone pays for this ignorance, arrogance and stupidity
The Floods will continue.
The Storms are getting bigger and the flooding is getting worst.
We must move to higher ground morally and physically.
Populations must be relocated to Green Sustainable Model Communities at least 200 feet above sea level.
These Floods are warnings.
Will we heed the warnings in time?

The World is in Flux.
The Poles are shifting
An Eco-Social-Economic Calamity is Brewing as we speak.
We must be bold and seize the initiative!
Change Direction!
While Bush, Wall Street and Corporations are playing the Fiddle.
The People are suffering.
The People are in Need!
The Corporations have failed us.
They’ve ruined everything they’ve touched and squandered our trust.
Is this the best we can do?
Is this the best Humanity has to offer?
I think we can do better.
We must!
Wasting any more Time or Money following Bush: The Pied Piper of Corporate Greed is FATAL.
Too many lies, failures, deaths and broken promises.
Just follow his Trail of Tears cut across this Country.
The ruined lives and broken bodies are scattered everywhere.
We need the best and the brightest, positive, progressive minds, we have today, to help solve the colossal problems facing Humanity today.
It’s:
This Planet,
This Time and
This Place!
We must come to grips with the Cor-pirate Monster they’ve created.
It must be dismantled.
Corporate GREED is Evil.
Selfishness is Evil
They’re capturing, imprisoning, spying on, torturing and paralyzing Humanity
With there Poisonous Lies and Propaganda.
They’re preventing us from getting anything done.
Kick Bush/Cheney out of Office.
Impeach the Crooks!
Stop Bush/Cheney and the Forty Thieves!

The Industrial Age is over.
We must take a bold step for man in a New Direction.
Our dependence on Dirty Fossil Fuels is hastening our own demise.
It is poisoning the well, we drink from.
Pure Water and Clean Air are the building blocks of life.
How will we survive?

Will you help save the Planet?
We can do it,
With cooperation, hard work, foresight and everyone doing their part.
If you become more Self Reliant, Self Sufficient, Economize and Conserve in your daily life, everyone benefits.
Take this all important first step in a new Direction.
Signal the start of a New Age:
Where we can live in: Peace, Harmony and Cooperation as Sisters and Brothers,
Realizing the fullness of our human potential.
We are all tied together by this one common denominator.
Let’s make this a cleaner, safer, better place for our Children and Grand Children to live.
Celebrate our Humanity:
The Brotherhood and Sisterhood of Man.
It is all about the quality of the life you live.
The cleanliness of the Air you breathe and purity of the Water you drink.
This belongs to everyone.
This is a basic human right.

The answer lies in the complete Decentralization of the Corporate Nanny State.
The tools are here.
We must employ them.
The path lies before us.
Take a step.
Go Local,
Go Green,
Join The Green Revolution!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You know, you all could give HEMP, Solar, Wind, etc ... a push to the finish line a bit more.
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 24, 2008 6:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every day when my wife and I go to work we hear more "clean" coal and pro-nuclear advertisements and very little on others. Even when we do hear a few ads on solar and wind, they sound more "personal" because it's only a private company bragging about harnessing wind or solar. You have to INFILTRATE both the private and public sector to WIN.

And for Christ's sake, please stop calling Industrial Hemp "pot". Cannabis comes in different varieties and has different levels of THC.

P.S.: Are you all "happy" now that the House REFUSED to reinstate the ban on offshore drilling all the while forcing Ron Paul's second attempt at legalizing hemp on the backburner? I expected a Republican-led house to do this, not a Democrat-led one. Oops, I forgot, FDR signed the OBSCENE tax increase on marijuana which led the way to outright ban. No wonder

GOD WILL CONTINUE TO SEVERELY PUNISH AMERICA TO ETERNAL DAMNATION FOR WAGING WARS FOR OIL ALL THE WHILE BANNING PEACEFUL SOLUTIONS !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The government should start talking to paleontologists
Posted by: akai ringo on Sep 24, 2008 6:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the government had talked years ago to a reputable paleontologist, particularly one specializing in chemo-synthetic communities, which actually live on (consume) methane, they might already be on the way to trying to find a solution. Who knows? My own son's research area, which is paleo- and modern chemosynthetic communities, may yet find itself in demand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Algae as a fuel
Posted by: MyLeftFoot on Sep 24, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
short video here;

http://www.evtv1.com/player.aspx?itemnum=12572

please stop with the doom and gloom, the solutions are out there. don't wait for anyone, especially the gov't. bypass them and do it yourself or form co-ops or team up with neighbors or like minded folks and start thinking outside the system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm scared. This wasn't supposed to happen yet.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 24, 2008 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Downloaded from:
http://www.marklynas.org/
2007/4/23/six-steps-to-hell-
summary-of-six-degrees-as-
published-in-the-guardian

'Six steps to hell' - summary of Six Degrees as published in the Guardian
23 April 07:

1ºC Nebraska ...shortened... These innocuous-looking hills were once desert, part
of an immense system of sand dunes that spread across the Great Plains from
Texas in the south to the Canadian prairies in the north. Six thousand years ago,
when temperatures were about 1C warmer than today in the US, these deserts may
have looked much as the Sahara does today. ....shortened... devastating
agriculture and driving out human inhabitants on a scale far larger than the 1930s
“Dustbowl” exodus.....shortened...

2ºC ....shortened...Two degrees is also enough to cause the eventual complete
melting of the Greenland ice sheet, which would raise global sea levels by seven
metres. ...shortened...

3ºC Scientists estimate that we have at best 10 years to bring down global carbon
emissions if we are to stabilise world temperatures within two degrees of their
present levels. ....shortened... 3C may be the “tipping point” where global
warming could run out of control, leaving us powerless to intervene as planetary
temperatures soar. The centre of this predicted disaster is the Amazon, where the
tropical rainforest, which today extends over millions of square kilometres, would
burn down in a firestorm of epic proportions. ...shortened... Once the trees have
gone, desert will appear and the carbon released by the forests’ burning will be
joined by still more from the world’s soils. This could boost global temperatures
by a further 1.5ºC – tippping us straight into the four-degree world.
....shortened...

4ºC At four degrees another tipping point is almost certain to be crossed; indeed,
it could happen much earlier. ....shortened... hundreds of billions of tonnes of
carbon locked up in Arctic permafrost – particularly in Siberia – enter the melt
zone, releasing globally warming methane and carbon dioxide in immense
quantities. ....shortened...

5ºC ....shortened... methane hydrates. This unlikely substance, a sort of ice-like
combination of methane and water that is only stable at low temperatures and high
pressure, may have burst into the atmosphere from the seabed in an immense
“ocean burp”, sparking a surge in global temperatures ....shortened... . Today vast
amounts of these same methane hydrates still sit on subsea continental shelves. As
the oceans warm, they could be released once more in a terrifying echo of that
methane belch of 55 million years ago. In the process, moreover, the seafloor
could slump as the gas is released, sparking massive tsunamis ....shortened...

6ºC ....shortened... end of the Permian period, 251 million years ago. By the end
of this calamity, up to 95% of species were extinct. The end-Permian wipeout is
the nearest this planet has ever come to becoming just another lifeless rock drifting
through space. ....shortened... most of the world’s plant cover was removed in a
catastrophic bout of soil erosion. Rocks also show a “fungal spike” as plants and
animals rotted in situ. Still more corpses were washed into the oceans, helping to
turn them stagnant and anoxic. ....shortened...
Whatever happened back then to wipe out 95% of life on Earth ....shortened... we
mess with the climatic thermostat of this planet at our extreme – and growing –
peril.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'm scared. -- The Six Steps Posted by: editnetwork
too bad they can't predict the day our deaths will come
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Sep 24, 2008 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
too bad they can't predict the day our deaths will come so we can stop worrying and start planning out the rest of our time here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nuclear power makes the least CO2
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 24, 2008 6:59 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reference: "Power to Save the World; The Truth About Nuclear Energy" by Gwyneth Cravens, 2007

Page 13 gives life cycle CO2 per kilowatt hour:
Source of energy ............... CO2 per kilowatt hour
Wind turbines .............................. 58 grams
Nuclear ......................................... 30 grams ** The Winner
Coal ............................. 966 to 1306 grams depending on the coal
Solar ........................................... 100 to 280 grams
Hydro ............................................ 240 grams
Natural gas ............................... 439 to 688 grams, gas varies

Nuclear power is also the cheapest, at 30% less than coal, in spite of the best efforts of the coal industry to drive up cost by demanding absurd levels of safety.

Page 75: A coal fired power plant gives you 100 to 400 times as
much radiation as a nuclear power plant. Worldwide, an average
person gets 0.01 millirem/year from nuclear power plants, the same
as eating one banana.

Page 71: The natural background radiation in northeastern
Washington state is 1700 millirem/year.
The natural background radiation on the Zuni uplift is 500 to 700
millirem/year.
The natural background radiation in New Mexico is greater than the
calculated dose from the Three Mile Island meltdown, if you were
next to the reactor.
A chest x-ray gives you 10 millirem.

Page 98: There is a table of millirems per year from the background in a list of inhabited places.
Chernobyl: 490 millirem/year
Guarapari, Brazil: 3700 millirem/year
Tamil Nadu, India: 5300 millirem/year
Ramsar, Iran: 8900 to 13200 millirem/year
Zero excess cancer deaths are recorded. All are natural except for
Chernobyl.

Page 269: "[E]very day the collective households and industries of America throw away nearly a million tons of garbage containing toxic heavy metals and dangerous chemicals, as well as plastics that will never break down. That garbage will be our culture's real legacy, enduring for millions of years after all the present nuclear waste has decayed."

Reference: "The Revenge of Gaia" by James Lovelock page 102.
Deaths per terrawatt year [twy] for energy industries, including Chernobyl. terra = mega mega

fuel......... ........fatalities... .....who......... .......deaths per twy
coal......... .........6400...... ......workers........... .........342
natural gas..... ..1200...... .....workers and public... ...85
hydro........ .......4000..... .......public............ ............883
nuclear........ .........31...... ......workers............ .............8

As you can see, nuclear is by far the safest source of electricity for which I have statistics. Wind turbines can fall off of their towers and crush you. You can fall off of your roof while installing solar panels. Wind and solar are by far the most expensive options by 600 times or so, and both are intermittent. The lead required to make batteries for wind and solar would remain poisonous forever. Nuclear fuel is recyclable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» LOL Posted by: gellero1
» Great idea Posted by: truthlover
» RE: Great idea Posted by: bornxeyed
» Whatever technology is used -- Posted by: Last Chance
» How? Posted by: truthlover
» Emergency Education Programs Posted by: Last Chance
» That's not nearly enough Posted by: truthlover
Look on the bright side....
Posted by: Jasonix on Sep 24, 2008 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
According to the US Geological Survey - that government agency known for exaggerating its estimates of how much oil exists in the ground - projects that there is 90 billion barrels of oil, about a year's worth of supply at current levels of global demand, beneath the arctic ice. When global warming makes all that ice melt, we can send our warships to do battle with Russia for that last little tidbit of oil, the recoverable amount of which is likely to be a mere fraction of the USGS estimate. Isn't it worth sinking Boston and New York beneath the waves to get a couple month's worth of oil sometime in the 2030s? (By that time, we probably won't be able to maintain industrial civilization in order to even work on extracting that oil anyway, but hey, let's be optimists.) I know that Sarah Palin and her coup-minded buddies are excited about anything that can melt the ice faster.

Vote McCain, you die.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is still time brother
Posted by: crazy carlos on Sep 24, 2008 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have an energy shortage--drill for oil in Alaska??? And we have in methane, a qas which can be changed into a liquid form and burned in cars. Lets capture this gas in hugh tanker-proce3ssor ships and transport to storage sites. We already have the pipe lines in place all over the world and we still have time if we usa our hears for somethig other than a place to hang our hair. We have a solution to our energy problem dropped in our laps and don't have the friggin sense to see it. But of course big oil will not have that by God, not if there is not a profit in it for them.
carlos

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Who do you think... Posted by: Bbear41
I perceive a connection to the Naomi Wolf article
Posted by: Gregory Kruse on Sep 24, 2008 9:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suspect that in spite of the present government's denial of global warming, it may be that everything they have done is in response to the threat of global warming. The relentless transfer of wealth to the capable elite, the capture of middle east oil, the training of troops and development of riot control methods and equipment, and the systematic destruction of constitutional democracy, all foreshadow the onset of massive climate change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THEY SHOULD TITLE THIS 'GLOBAL WARMING for DUMMIES'
Posted by: gellero1 on Sep 24, 2008 9:18 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because that's who this piece is directed at.

The Guardian is hardly a peer reviewed scientific journal.

No self respecting scientist would use a newspaper to disseminate scientific 'fact'.

I wonder how many posters have a doctorate in a scientific field........

PS..........I do have a doctorate in a scientific field

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» sure........... Posted by: gellero1
» So? Posted by: heid
» Oh Look... Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Oh Look... Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Oh Look... Posted by: bornxeyed
» Yes it is. Posted by: heid
» Point Well Taken........ Posted by: gellero1
» RE: Point Well Taken........ Posted by: bornxeyed
» Sorry Fanny.......... Posted by: gellero1
» Don't be ridiculous Posted by: gellero1
» Don't be ridiculous Posted by: gellero1
» Sorry, that's Abbe Posted by: gellero1
Oh really?
Posted by: sagelike on Sep 24, 2008 9:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's interesting. I read an article the other day in Toronto's Globe and Mail that came out with the opposite discovery.

The article stated that researchers had discovered 700,000 year old ice that didn't melt earlier in history when the earth was actually hotter than it is now. What's up with that, eh!

I believe that global warming is more or less fact though I don't believe the sky is falling as some would have us believe. This story definitely shows how certain groups will spin things things to get the results they want and the global warming proponents are not above manipulation.

Here's the link:

Globe article

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» MH2? Posted by: bornxeyed
Time-lapse movie of the cryosphere
Posted by: fanny666 on Sep 24, 2008 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the website The Cryosphere Today

Here is a time-lapse movie- The video is essentially a time- lapse film of the past 30 or so years. When the video first starts, pay attention to the borders of the ice at it smallest size (late summer). Then compare to late summer of 2005. You can scroll back and forth between September 1979 (at 0:17) and August 2005 (at 9:03)
Download Quicktime Video (Right click and "SAVE AS" - It's a large file; about 45 MB)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Earth's ...
Posted by: Bbear41 on Sep 24, 2008 10:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...Great age begins anew,
The Golden years return.
The Earth doth like a snake renew,
Her winter weeds outworn.

Except that several billion people will die horribly or live out lives of abject misry in the mean time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Earth's ... Posted by: Last Chance
Don't you know
Posted by: sre on Sep 24, 2008 10:55 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we only elect Barak Obama as the US president, He can solve all of our problems, environmental and economic, at least that's what I hear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't you know Posted by: helenahanbasquet
2 decades lost
Posted by: Pugi! on Sep 24, 2008 12:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It makes me sad when I read articles like this. 20 to 15 years ago I was subscribed to a dutch science magazine called 'Natuur & Techniek'. They already had an article that warned for the melting of the permafrost due to global warming and that it would accelerate global warming. They said it would cause a chain reaction and if we have any hopes of fighting global warming we must do it before the permafrost starts to melt and release methane.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2 decades lost Posted by: bornxeyed
RE: The warnings go back at least to the 1970's.
Posted by: bornxeyed on Sep 24, 2008 1:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think the first direct evidence was found in the 1950s at the geological station on Mauna Loa, Hawaii.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You're right
Posted by: Hans B on Sep 24, 2008 3:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I first heard of global warming when I studied tropical agriculture and forestry, in the 1970s. We actually derived comfort from it back then, saying that the obvious need to do something against climate change would lead to rainforest protection, among other good things. How wrong we were to think mankind was sane.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We have nuclear fuel for 5000 years
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 27, 2008 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have enough nuclear fuel for FIVE THOUSAND YEARS according to "Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy", by B. Comby. "Breeding" fissionable fuel and recycling nuclear fuel greatly extends the supply. We have many possible uranium mines that we haven't started mining. The reasons we are not doing so are political and psychological. Most people have an irrational fear of anything nuclear caused by coal industry propaganda. Rather than waste fuel by putting it in Yucca Mountain, we should be recycling.

Everything, including yourself, is made of atoms. All atoms have nuclei. You have many atomic nuclei inside yourself since you are made of atoms. The simplest nucleus is one proton [hydrogen]. That would be a hydrogen atom. An oxygen atom has 8 protons and either 8, 9 or 10 neutrons in its nucleus. All other nuclei also have neutrons. Uranium has 92 protons and either 143 or 146 neutrons. If it has 143 neutrons it is U235. If it has 146 neutrons, it is U238. Nuclear fuel is only 2% to 8% U235, the kind that fissions/divides, providing energy. The rest is U238 that doesn't fission. A nuclear reaction happens when a neutron is captured by a nucleus. If a U235 nucleus captures a neutron, the nucleus and the atom split approximately in half and 2 or 3 neutrons are released because the 2 smaller nuclei don't need so many neutrons. If a U238 nucleus captures a neutron, it ejects an electron and the neutron becomes a proton. The U238 thus becomes Plutonium 239 [Pu239]. In a power reactor, the Pu239 quickly captures another neutron, becoming Pu240. Pu240 is useless for making bombs, which is why governments that have plutonium bombs have their own special reactors to make Pu239. Plutonium is fissionable, which means that plutonium is a good fuel. If you add Thorium to the fuel, you can make more fissionable uranium. If a Thorium atom nucleus captures a neutron, it ejects an electron and the neutron becomes a proton. The Thorium atom thus becomes U233. U233 is fissionable.

Depending on the design of the reactor and the mix of the fuel, the fuel % in the reactor can either grow or shrink. It is kind of like the fuel gauge can go either up or down, but it is more like the reactor can run hotter or cooler over time. The temperature is kept constant by adjusting the control rods. A breeder reactor is a reactor designed to make the fissionable part of the fuel load grow rapidly. In the US, fuel is left in the reactor for about 10 years, or 10% of the fuel is replaced each year. The reprocessing step sorts out the fuel and puts the percentage of fissionable fuel back to the starting percentage. In the process, plutonium may be removed and either wasted or used as fuel. If we add thorium to the fuel, we can make more uranium than we put in. Since the earth contains more than twice as much thorium as uranium, it would be wise to make thorium into uranium. By reprocessing nuclear fuel, we get an enormous, many centuries long fuel supply. The products of fission are also removed when fuel is reprocessed. These are just other ordinary atoms that are no longer useful as fuel. The quantity is very small. We should reprocess fuel to keep the fuel load at the correct percentage of fissionable fuel for the particular reactor design. Instead, we go through the expensive process of making more "virgin" fuel for each new fuel load. This greatly increases the price you pay for electricity. We are not reprocessing nuclear fuel for political reasons. France reprocesses fuel and France has a nuclear waste repository.

I have zero financial interest in nuclear power, and I never have had a financial interest in nuclear power. My sole motivation in writing this is to avoid extinction by H2S gas. H2S is how global warming kills everybody if we don't act. The H2S is made by sulfur bacteria in hot oceans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Recycling nuclear fuel
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 27, 2008 7:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yucca Mountain contains an enormous supply of nuclear fuel that
should not be wasted. We don't recycle nuclear fuel because
spent fuel is valuable and people steal it. The place it went that it
wasn't supposed to go to is Israel. This happened in a small town
near Pittsburgh, PA circa 1970. A company called Numec was in
the business of reprocessing nuclear fuel. I almost took a job
there, designing a nuclear battery for a heart pacemaker. [The
army offered me more money to work on nuclear weapons
effects.] [A nuclear battery would have the advantage of lasting
many times as long as any other battery, eliminating many
surgeries to replace batteries.] Numec did NOT have a reactor.
Numec "lost" a quantity of reactor grade uranium. It wound up in
Israel. The Israelis have fueled both their nuclear power plants
and their nuclear weapons by stealing nuclear "waste." See:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/
x/pittsburghtrib/news/specialreport
s/buriedlegacy/s_87948.html
It could work for any other country, such as Iran or the United
States. It is only when you don't have access to nuclear "waste"
that you have to do the difficult process of enriching uranium,
unless you have a Canadian "CANDU" reactor or a British
Magnox reactor, both of which run on unenriched uranium.
Numec is no longer in business. The reprocessing of nuclear fuel
in the US stopped. That was the only politically possible solution
at that time, given that private corporations did the reprocessing.
My solution would be to reprocess the fuel at a Government
Owned Government Operated [GOGO] facility. At a GOGO
plant, bureaucracy and the multiplicity of ethnicity and religion
would disable the transportation of uranium to Israel or to any
unauthorized place. Nothing heavier than a secret would get out.

I have no financial stake in the nuclear power industry, and I
never have. Nobody is paying me to say this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We can still avoid extinction:
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 27, 2008 9:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Environmental policy = energy policy
Energy policy = environmental policy
because Global Warming
can lead to Hydrogen Sulfide gas coming out of the oceans.

Hydrogen Sulfide gas will Kill all people. Homo Sap will go
EXTINCT unless drastic action is taken.

October 2006 Scientific American

"EARTH SCIENCE
Impact from the Deep
Strangling heat and gases emanating from the earth and sea, not
asteroids, most likely caused several ancient mass extinctions.
Could the same killer-greenhouse conditions build once again?
By Peter D. Ward
downloaded from:
http://www.sciam.com/
article.cfm?articleID=
00037A5D-A938-150E-
A93883414B7F0000&
sc=I100322
....................Most of the article omitted......................
But with atmospheric carbon climbing at an annual rate of 2 ppm
and expected to accelerate to 3 ppm, levels could approach 900
ppm by the end of the next century, and conditions that bring
about the beginnings of ocean anoxia may be in place. How soon
after that could there be a new greenhouse extinction? That is
something our society should never find out."

Press Release
Pennsylvania State University
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, Nov. 3, 2003
downloaded from:
http://www.geosociety.org/meetings/2003/prPennStateKump.htm
"In the end-Permian, as the levels of atmospheric oxygen fell and
the levels of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide rose, the upper
levels of the oceans could have become rich in hydrogen sulfide
catastrophically. This would kill most of the oceanic plants and
animals. The hydrogen sulfide dispersing in the atmosphere would
kill most terrestrial life."

www.astrobio.net is a NASA web zine. See:

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/modules.php?op=
modload&name=News&
file=article&sid=672

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/modules.php?op=
modload&name=News&
file=article&sid=1535

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/article2509.html

http://astrobio.net/news/
modules.php?op=modload
&name=News&file=article
&sid=2429&mode=thread
&order=0&thold=0

These articles agree with the first 2. They all say 6 degrees C or
1000 parts per million CO2 is the extinction point.

The global warming is already 1.3 degree Farenheit. 11 degrees
Farenheit is about 6 degrees Celsius. The book "Six Degrees" by
Mark Lynas agrees. If the global warming is 6 degrees
centigrade, we humans go extinct. See:
http://www.marklynas.org/
2007/4/23/six-steps-to-hell-
summary-of-six-degrees-as-
published-in-the-guardian

"Under a Green Sky" by Peter D. Ward, Ph.D., 2007.
Paleontologist discusses mass extinctions of the past and the one
we are doing to ourselves.

ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS MUST BE
CONVERTED TO NUCLEAR IMMEDIATELY TO AVOID
THE EXTINCTION OF US HUMANS. 32 countries have
nuclear power plants. Only 9 have the bomb. The top 3
producers of CO2 all have nuclear power plants, coal fired power
plants and nuclear bombs. They are the USA, China and India.
Reducing CO2 production by 90% by 2050 requires drastic action
in the USA, China and India. King Coal has to be demoted to a
commoner. Coal must be left in the earth. If you own any coal
stock, NOW is the time to dump it, regardless of loss, because it
will soon be worthless.
I have no financial connection to the nuclear power industry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spinning Reserve [coal] is required for wind or solar
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 27, 2008 10:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wind energy requires that Direct Current [DC] be transmitted
over enormous distances [more than one continent] to provide
continuous power because wind varies from minute to minute. By connecting distant places, there would be at least one place on
the line where the wind would be blowing at any given moment.
Direct current is required because the voltage and frequency of
AC would change minute by minute with wind speed. Long
distance DC transmission requires superconducting cable. DC
just doesn't go far otherwise.
Reference:
http://www.terrawatts.com: Liquid nitrogen is still required.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/69888

Following the http://www.terrawatts.com lead, you arrive at the
statement that the "high temperature" superconductor will be
cooled by liquid nitrogen. See:
http://www.azom.com/details.asp?
ArticleID=942#_When_will_HTS
The need for liquid nitrogen or liquid helium is the Achilles heal
of this scheme. It isn't really a "room" temperature
superconductor. Any accidental warming brings the grid to a
halt. Energy is required to make liquid nitrogen. Dry nitrogen
must be cooled to 77 degrees Kelvin to make it a liquid. [Zero
degrees Kelvin is absolute zero, -273.15 degrees Centigrade.]
Liquid helium is at 4 degrees Kelvin or colder. Superconduction
usually means a requirement for liquid helium. High temperature
superconductors only need liquid nitrogen, or something nearly
that cold. The cable has to be thermally insulated and cooled its
entire length. As stated in the article I gave you the URL of, it
won't be cheap.

Since solar power only works in the daytime, solar power likewise
requires a superconducting transmission line all the way around
the earth, or that energy storage system we can't afford, or a
spinning [coal fired] reserve.

Any warming above the superconducting temperature or too much
magnetic field will cause the cable to quit superconducting at that
point. The cable will instantly melt, creating an electric arc. All
of the energy that was flowing through that spot will instead be
dumped there. The power grid will be disabled for some time
since repairing a superconducting cable is not as easy as splicing a
wire. We really don't have the technology yet.

What about storing wind energy as compressed air? Check the
efficiency, the availability of leak proof caverns, etc. Storing
wind energy as compressed air is a pie in the sky. What about
storing wind energy in batteries? We can't make that many
batteries. Another pie in the sky. The lead required to make lead-acid batteries would remain poisonous forever.

Wind energy wastes energy because the wind varies so much that
a "spinning reserve" is required in most locations. If you are
running the steam powered generator at the spinning reserve rate,
you may as well use the steam as your energy source and forget
about the wind. Wind turbines are decorations, not sources of
energy for the grid until we have room temperature
superconductors. There are special locations and circumstances
where wind energy is useful, but wind cannot replace coal and
nuclear any time soon. Nuclear power is the only kind that can
actually take coal fired power plants off line. If allowed to
compete, nuclear power would already have replaced coal fired
power because nuclear is 30% cheaper and 24000 American lives
per year safer. We have been researching nuclear safety for 60
years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Coal contains uranium.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 27, 2008 10:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reference:
OUR NUCLEAR FUTURE:
THE PATH OF SELECTIVE IGNORANCE
by Alex Gabbard
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, TN
Selections from the 19th Annual Conference
SOUTHERN FUTURE SOCIETY
March 14,15,16, 1996
Nashville, Tennessee

Published by the
SOUTHERN FUTURE SOCIETY
1996
Edited by Jack D. Arters, Ed.D.
Conference Director
The truth is, all natural rocks contain most natural elements. Coal is a rock.
The average concentration of uranium in coal is 1 or 2 parts per million. Illinois
coal contains up to 103 parts per million uranium. A 1000 million watt coal
fired power plant burns 4 million tons of coal each year. If you multiply 4
million tons by 1 part per million, you get 4 tons of uranium. Most of that is
U238. About .7% is U235. 4 tons = 8000 pounds. 8000 pounds times .7% =
56 pounds of U235. An average 1 billion watt coal fired power plant puts out 56
to 112 pounds of U235 every year. There are only 2 places the uranium can go:
Up the stack or into the cinders.
Since a reactor full fuel load is around 11 tons of 2% U235 and 98% U238, and
one load lasts about 10 years, and what one coal fired power plant puts into the
air and cinders fully fuels a nuclear power plant.
Compare 4 Million tons per year with 1.1 tons per year. 1.1 divided by 4 Million
= 2.75 E -7 = .000000275 =.0000275%. Remember that only 2% of that is
U235. The nuclear power plant needs ~44 pounds of U235 per year. The coal
fired power plant burns coal by the trainload. The nuclear power plant consumes
U235 in such small quantities yearly that you could carry that much weight in a
briefcase.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tipping points
Posted by: Gracchus on Oct 1, 2008 1:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please note: Methane oxidizes to CO2 and H2O, both of which are greenhouse gases. The reaction releases heat.

We are not going to get out of this mess by changing the fuel we burn.

I doubt that we are going to get out of this mess at all. There is going to be a big drop in the human population, whatever we do. There is going to be widespread desertification, whatever we do. There is going to be a disastrous rise in sea level whatever we do. There are going to be more and larger storms whatever we do. There is going to be civic unrest, volkerwanderung, war, and widespread social collapse whatever we do.

And it is unlikely that we will do anything useful. Anything we do will most likely be too little, too late. Most human beings are not smart, and our politicians are not among our smartest. Human beings are greedy and arrogant and our politicians are among our greediest and most arrogant.

I doubt we can get out of this mess. Most of the species will not live through it. A few might, in a world where the habitable zone is confined to the polar regions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tipping points Posted by: davmills
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement