Thank you for that information. It is as I expected, but had never put numbers to.
Your comment about underground fires reminded me of coal tip fires from my youth in a coal mining area. They would burn for years, often almost invisible unless it rained and the steam could be seen rising. They were impossible to put out.
As I recall, damp coal could self ignite. It could happen in steam ship coal stores, if the coal was loaded wet. Presumably something similar may happen in thawing peat beds.
Have you come across any information or assessments of methane clathrates and their current status underwater? As ocean waters are heating up faster than expected, one might expect that sedimentary coastal shelves may release increasing methane underwater. As I understand it, the quantities are massive, and could further accelerate warming very quickly.
One of my wives was from coal country in Appalachia so I knew about underground coal fires. I just didn't "see" it in my mental picture of the permafrost transition. My "framing" of it was thrown off by the idea that it would be too wet to burn.
This accelerates the timetable considerably.
Methane clathrates are one of those "End of the World" scenarios. I have been aware of the issue for decades and it has gotten a lot of discussion. Most agree that the deep ocean clathrates are probably "safe". It's HARD to heat the deep oceans. REALLY, REALLY, HARD.
Most of the discussion now is centered, as you point out, on the possibility of clathrates in shallow coastal waters around the Arctic Ocean. The BIG question is how much, if any, of these clathrates exist.
The evidence isn't clear at all.
There have only been a handful of studies by the Russians and what got published is contradictory and uncertain. One researcher found evidence of "vast deposits" of clathrate ice. The next guy found next to nothing. It's a BIG question mark.
However, CH4 levels in the atmo are now higher than we think they have been in like 15 million years. Hansen puts the CO2(e) level at 535ppm. A full +110ppm higher than the current CO2 level.
Obviously with methane, it relatively quickly gets converted and removed from the atmosphere, so if levels in the atmosphere are increasing quickly at the same time as so much is disappearing, then the actual quantities being released must be accelerating fast.
As an aside, I was fascinated by the idea that if a methane bubble is released at sea and came up under a ship, the ship would sink as it would lose all buoyancy. Even perhaps a low flying plane in the air directly above might drop in the lower density air.
I also recall an article some years ago that Japan was attempting to 'mine' underwater methane clathrates as a fuel source. I heard nothing more. Perhaps the Russian interest is similar, in which case they may have an interest in suppressing surveys and research showing high levels of a new fuel source?
Of course, attempting to mine methane clathrates would be an environmental disaster, but that isn't to say it wouldn't happen.
Lastly, I have to ask; How many wives do you have? 🤔😬
Thanks for that, Richard! However, you focused on the carbon burning and CO2 release issue, and I'm looking at the 144 BTUs of heat energy absorbed by one pound of melting ice, when the net tells me that 6mm of the top layer of permafrost are melting annually and 22% of the land area in the northern hemisphere is covered with permafrost. So that's roughly 140 X 10 to the 6th times 22% or about 30,000,000 sq. mi. of permafrost, with 6mm of ice melting annually. This enormous amount of heat energy absorption is never mentioned and it is the "canary in the coal mine" for global heat imbalance calculations. I'll let the next guy/gal work out the BTUs being absorbed, but I'm guessin' it approaches the amount of heat energy being absorbed by the 321 X 10 to the 6th cubic miles of oceans and just as important, especially when it's gone.
We just had a hurricane hit the Big Bend in Florida. No power, debrie all over, roads closed . . . it's easy to get caught up in the theories about warming. Then you live through the real life effects. If you have never lost power for an extended time you can't really appreciate how it takes you into the Dark Ages in one fell swoop. People become unstable, even dangerous. Fear grips you. I can see how little it takes for civilization as we know it to devolve into chaos. One bad night. That's all it takes. And we are facing a long future of bad nights.
Thank you for that information. It is as I expected, but had never put numbers to.
Your comment about underground fires reminded me of coal tip fires from my youth in a coal mining area. They would burn for years, often almost invisible unless it rained and the steam could be seen rising. They were impossible to put out.
As I recall, damp coal could self ignite. It could happen in steam ship coal stores, if the coal was loaded wet. Presumably something similar may happen in thawing peat beds.
Have you come across any information or assessments of methane clathrates and their current status underwater? As ocean waters are heating up faster than expected, one might expect that sedimentary coastal shelves may release increasing methane underwater. As I understand it, the quantities are massive, and could further accelerate warming very quickly.
One of my wives was from coal country in Appalachia so I knew about underground coal fires. I just didn't "see" it in my mental picture of the permafrost transition. My "framing" of it was thrown off by the idea that it would be too wet to burn.
This accelerates the timetable considerably.
Methane clathrates are one of those "End of the World" scenarios. I have been aware of the issue for decades and it has gotten a lot of discussion. Most agree that the deep ocean clathrates are probably "safe". It's HARD to heat the deep oceans. REALLY, REALLY, HARD.
Most of the discussion now is centered, as you point out, on the possibility of clathrates in shallow coastal waters around the Arctic Ocean. The BIG question is how much, if any, of these clathrates exist.
The evidence isn't clear at all.
There have only been a handful of studies by the Russians and what got published is contradictory and uncertain. One researcher found evidence of "vast deposits" of clathrate ice. The next guy found next to nothing. It's a BIG question mark.
However, CH4 levels in the atmo are now higher than we think they have been in like 15 million years. Hansen puts the CO2(e) level at 535ppm. A full +110ppm higher than the current CO2 level.
All of that CH4 has to be coming from somewhere.
Obviously with methane, it relatively quickly gets converted and removed from the atmosphere, so if levels in the atmosphere are increasing quickly at the same time as so much is disappearing, then the actual quantities being released must be accelerating fast.
As an aside, I was fascinated by the idea that if a methane bubble is released at sea and came up under a ship, the ship would sink as it would lose all buoyancy. Even perhaps a low flying plane in the air directly above might drop in the lower density air.
I also recall an article some years ago that Japan was attempting to 'mine' underwater methane clathrates as a fuel source. I heard nothing more. Perhaps the Russian interest is similar, in which case they may have an interest in suppressing surveys and research showing high levels of a new fuel source?
Of course, attempting to mine methane clathrates would be an environmental disaster, but that isn't to say it wouldn't happen.
Lastly, I have to ask; How many wives do you have? 🤔😬
I've been married 4 times. Sequentially, not concurrently. I am a serial monogamist.
I am very pleased to hear it. I shall leave you to explain any inadvertent Freudian slip to your current wife and your three ex-wives.
Bon chance with that! 😂
Thanks for that, Richard! However, you focused on the carbon burning and CO2 release issue, and I'm looking at the 144 BTUs of heat energy absorbed by one pound of melting ice, when the net tells me that 6mm of the top layer of permafrost are melting annually and 22% of the land area in the northern hemisphere is covered with permafrost. So that's roughly 140 X 10 to the 6th times 22% or about 30,000,000 sq. mi. of permafrost, with 6mm of ice melting annually. This enormous amount of heat energy absorption is never mentioned and it is the "canary in the coal mine" for global heat imbalance calculations. I'll let the next guy/gal work out the BTUs being absorbed, but I'm guessin' it approaches the amount of heat energy being absorbed by the 321 X 10 to the 6th cubic miles of oceans and just as important, especially when it's gone.
As you point out.
That melting happens ONLY ONCE.
Once it's done, warming accelerates.
We just had a hurricane hit the Big Bend in Florida. No power, debrie all over, roads closed . . . it's easy to get caught up in the theories about warming. Then you live through the real life effects. If you have never lost power for an extended time you can't really appreciate how it takes you into the Dark Ages in one fell swoop. People become unstable, even dangerous. Fear grips you. I can see how little it takes for civilization as we know it to devolve into chaos. One bad night. That's all it takes. And we are facing a long future of bad nights.
Glad to hear you are OK. I thought about you while I was watching the news on the hurricane.