Ag Weather Forum
Bryce Anderson DTN Ag Meteorologist and DTN Analyst

Friday 03/05/10

Arctic Methane Release Concerns

One of the major greenhouse gases--methane--is starting to leak from underneath the Arctic Ocean. Here is a wire service rundown on this subject.--Bryce

Methane bubbles in Arctic seas stir warming fears

* Greenhouse gases seeping from seabed north of Russia

* At worst, may herald big leaks spurring global warming

* Unsure if thaw so far is caused by warming

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO, March 4 (Reuters) - Large amounts of a powerful greenhouse gas are bubbling up from a long-frozen seabed north of Siberia, raising fears of far bigger leaks that could stoke global warming, scientists said.

It was unclear, however, if the Arctic emissions of methane gas were new or had been going on unnoticed for centuries -- since before the Industrial Revolution of the 18th century led to wide use of fossil fuels that are blamed for climate change.

The study said about 8 million tonnes of methane a year, equivalent to the annual total previously estimated from all of the world's oceans, were seeping from vast stores long trapped under permafrost below the seabed north of Russia.

"Subsea permafrost is losing its ability to be an impermeable cap," Natalia Shakhova, a scientist at the University of Fairbanks, Alaska, said in a statement. She co-led the study published in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

The experts measured levels of methane, a gas that can be released by rotting vegetation, in water and air at 5,000 sites on the East Siberian Arctic Shelf from 2003-08. In some places, methane was bubbling up from the seabed.

Previously, the sea floor had been considered an impermeable barrier sealing methane, Shakhova said. Current methane concentrations in the Arctic are the highest in 400,000 years.

GLOBAL WARMING

"No one can answer this question," she said of whether the venting was caused by global warming or by natural factors. But a projected rise in temperatures could quicken the thaw.

"It's good that these emissions are documented. But you cannot say they're increasing," Martin Heimann, an expert at the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry in Germany who wrote a separate article on methane in Science, told Reuters.

"These leaks could have been occurring all the time" since the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago, he said. He wrote that the release of 8 million tonnes of methane a year was "negligible" compared to global emissions of about 440 million tonnes.

Shakhova's study said there was an "urgent need" to monitor the region for possible future changes since permafrost traps vast amounts of methane, the second most common greenhouse gas from human activities after carbon dioxide.

Monitoring could resolve if the venting was "a steadily ongoing phenomenon or signals the start of a more massive release period," according to the scientists, based at U.S., Russian and Swedish research institutions.

The release of just a "small fraction of the methane held in (the) East Siberian Arctic Shelf sediments could trigger abrupt climate warming," they wrote.

The shelf has sometimes been above sea level during the earth's history. When submerged, temperatures rise by 12-17 degrees Celsius (22-31 F) since water is warmer than air. Over thousands of years, that may thaw submerged permafrost.

About 60 percent of methane now comes from human activities such as landfills, cattle rearing or rice paddies. Natural sources such as wetlands make up the rest, along with poorly understood sources such as the oceans, wildfires or termites.

Most studies about methane focus on permafrost on land. But the shelf below the Laptev, East Siberian and Russian part of the Chuckchi sea is three times the size of Siberia's wetlands.

Posted at 7:09AM CST 03/05/10 by Bryce Anderson
Comments (17)
With all the potential possible ramifications of staying on fossil fuels and positive reasons to reduce our carbon foot print why is it even a question that we need to change? Seems like a "no brainer" that we need to find alternatives. Rural areas will be the place and benefit the most from an alternative energy portfolio.
Posted by Jay Mcginnis at 9:49AM CST 03/05/10
an interesting bit of geology here but you global warming nuts better not hang your hat on this one.
Posted by SCOTT HOWATT at 10:22AM CST 03/05/10
OMG mother earth is passing gas. Better get her a big bottle of beano.
Posted by Paul Beiser at 5:09PM CST 03/05/10
Didn't you get the memo, Bryce? The global warming myth has been exposed. Flat out exposed as a lie. You are misleading your readers with these articles. We don't need to perputuate these lies to support alternative fuels. Renewable energy is needed with or without global warming. Shame on you DTN...
Posted by smitty at 5:44PM CST 03/05/10
It would be nice if all you fox news consumers would educate youself just a little before you let loose with you assertions of fact. With respect to your claim that renewable fuels are needed with or without climate change, talk about cherry picking. I think all of you that are so sure of your facts should be willing to give up your ethanol subsides and your farm program subsidies. If we need renewable energy, one way or the other it should then be able to stand on its own. If climate change is built on falseified data then your renewable fuel argument is also built on sand. You cannot have it both ways. I bet if you turned off Glen Beck for one night and would be willing to read and or listen to an alternative view point you might find that there is room for reasonable debate. How willing are you to give up your subsidies to prove your point? Good luck
Posted by BRENT JOHNSON at 6:53PM CST 03/05/10
Brent, how much socialism is it ok to have in America? What are your solutions to Global Warming? Lets have a reasonable debate.
Posted by Paul Beiser at 11:15PM CST 03/05/10
Do you really feel that the US is socialist??? Maybe corporate socialism with corporations "too big to fail". Oil corporations have PLENTY of subsidies, look at the public land open to exploration, tax credits and everything else up to wars in the Mid East/ Afganastan,,, all in the name of democracy? We need renewables even if climate change is not real ( I believe it is) and while I believe renewables would stand on their own they can't as long as big oil lobbies run the country. I am not a "Faux News" consumer Brent and I do read, in fact I don't watch ANY TV. Also I believe the figures point to man made global warming and that a few bad scientists embellished figures for their own vanity, that DOESN"T invalidate the whole science world or make the situation any less a threat.
Posted by Jay Mcginnis at 7:14AM CST 03/06/10
Gov owns GM Chrystler a bunch of financial institutions. Its gonna control the sick care industry. Then there are all the entitlement programs. Countless subsidies to dozens of industries. Please tell me what part of America isn't socialist? Gov workers are mostly unionized. They make on average more than private sector jobs and rate of unemployment in that sector is about 3 percent. Who has ever died from global warming? tell me who can't pay their mortgage because the climate changes constantly.
Posted by Paul Beiser at 9:17AM CST 03/06/10
Brent, If it weren't for short sighted, ignorant socialists (Democrats) we would have plenty of nuclear power. I'll bet you were one of the protestors (if you are old enough.) Now that there is a genuine energy crisis, Dems think nuclear is a good idea...too late. I believe that we should subsidize alternative sources of energy as long as they are making progress towards profitability. Ethanol and wind are making great strides. I am not a Glen Beck nut. We will run out of energy soon if we don't aggressively persue alternative's to fossil fuel.
Posted by smitty at 10:04AM CST 03/06/10
Just got my $60/month increase in health insurance,,,, can't see how you call that socialist???? Looks more like insurance companies own me, not government and they are much more capitalist since their stock owners should be making some money! Tea baggers are just use to calling progressives socialists, thats because they have their roots in Mc Carthyism! The private sector has little concern about the environment and I invite you guys to go to countries where there are no or little environmental laws, your so called "private sector" heaven where the rivers run as open sewers, air is choked in coal smog and its populations work for 10 cents an hour,,,, capitalist paradises like Communist China???? We need a level playing field for energy, that means taking AWAY subsidies for oil/coal or cap and trade to increases renewables. The US decided when Reagan was elected that renewable energy was not important and to drill baby drill for the last barrels of cheap crude with no vision other then the bottom lines of corporate America.
Posted by Jay Mcginnis at 7:35AM CST 03/08/10
I find it interesting that by suggesting that your ethanol subsidy should be taken away you go off on this socialist rant. You have proven my point you take data you like to make your case and throw out what you dislike. The article was about the prospect of methane gas being released as a by product of polar ice melting possibly conected to climate change. You hear GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE CANNOT BE TRUE BECAUSE IT SNOWED IN IOWA AND MINNESOTA. What time of the year is it? Should the precip fall as snow or rain? With respect to socialism I would suggest to you that you owe the treasury a whole lot of money as a result of your farm program payments. Can't have it both ways can you? I wish all you socialism nuts would have had this much fire in your belly before you allowed the Bush administration to spend a trilllion dollars fighting ghosts in Iraq. Hurry down to your local post office and return all your socialized farm payments, then I might take your argument more seriously.
Posted by BRENT JOHNSON at 10:23AM CST 03/08/10
Smitty did you see that they removed your comment and mine supporting yours on the Useful Climate Change Commentary blog?
Posted by Aaron R. Ritchie at 1:46PM CST 03/08/10
Brent I do not partisipate in the farm programs cause I choose not to. I don't buy crop insurance either. I also proudly pay my taxes so please refrain from the name calling. Jay I think we are going to see a lot of inflation in the next 2 years. Its the only way the gov can support the national debt. Both pol parties are to blame for that mess.
Posted by Paul Beiser at 6:55PM CST 03/08/10
G G that's some funny stuff. I find it interesting that men who do research on a subject that constantly changes and has forever can come to a definite consensus in the blink of an eye. They get caught committing fraud, admit to it and nothing is done about it. If there research would have come to a different conclusion, they would have lost their gravy train. Even if man caused global warming is true, maybe it will benefit mankind by keeping the earth out of an iceage cycle. I believe that history will be kind to those who believe that god knows a little more than a couple thousand men with an agenda.
Posted by Paul Beiser at 8:21PM CST 03/08/10
It is said that 99 percent of all species that ever lived have gone extinct. Earth, it seems, is a tough place to call home. Our planet has gone through Ice Ages and global warming trends, it has been hit by comets and asteroids (leading, in one case, to a mass extinction that felled the mighty dinosaurs), and the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere has risen and fallen over time. Our planet is always in a state of flux, and life must adapt to these changes or die. It is a known geological fact that CO2 released into the atmosphere is primarily caused by tectonic activity. According to Sasselov, Earth's mass helps keeps tectonics in action. The more massive a planet, the hotter its interior. Tectonic plates slide on a layer of molten rock beneath the crust called the mantle. Convective currents within the mantle push the plates around. For smaller planets like Mars, the interior is not hot enough to drive tectonics. Continents bang together, forming mountains, only to be later torn apart. Islands grow from underwater volcanoes, and elements are liberated from rocks when they are melted beneath the crust. While all this geologic activity makes us literally stand on shaky ground, scientists have come to believe that tectonics is one of the key features of our planet which makes life possible. If not for tectonics, carbon needed by life would stay locked within rocks. The fear today is that too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will lead to global warming. Yet too little carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would make Earth a much colder place, and the photosynthetic plants and algae that rely on CO2 would perish. The demise of these oxygen-producing organisms would leave us all gasping for breath. I lifted this from another article, just sharing....
Posted by Paul Beiser at 12:27AM CST 03/09/10
Brent, subsidies are in place to keep the prices of commodities down. Without subsidies, prices for farm commodities would be almost double, and food prices would be at least twice as high as they currently are. Few people realize the true purpose of subsidies. Yes, they are to help keep farmers in business, but you should realize that farmers do not get to set the price of their goods to sell; they must take what prices they are offered. When the prices they receive for these goods rise, the costs of their inputs usually follow. This is called the Cost-Price Squeeze. That being said, farmers do not have set incomes, so subsidies keep farmers in business without the need for commodity prices to rise in order to keep farmers in business. I would gladly turn down the subsidies if I could get the true value of my crops, but then consumers would complain that everything is priced too high.
Posted by JAMES WROBLISKI at 4:42PM CST 03/09/10
A comment by "G G", which had nothing to do with the blog post subject, has been deleted.
Posted by Bryce Anderson at 6:39PM CST 03/09/10
Post a Blog Comment:
Your Comment:
DTN reserves the right to delete comments posted to any of our blogs and forums, for reasons including profanity, libel, irrelevant personal attacks and advertisements.