Posted on 10/31/2008 3:37:15 AM PDT by xcamel
Boston (MA) - Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man's contributions.
Methane - powerful greenhouse gas
The two lead authors of a paper published in this week's Geophysical Review Letters, Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn, the TEPCO Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry in MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, state that as a result of the increase, several million tons of new methane is present in the atmosphere.
Methane accounts for roughly one-fifth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, though its effect is 25x greater than that of carbon dioxide. Its impact on global warming comes from the reflection of the sun's light back to the Earth (like a greenhouse). Methane is typically broken down in the atmosphere by the free radical hydroxyl (OH), a naturally occuring process. This atmospheric cleanser has been shown to adjust itself up and down periodically, and is believed to account for the lack of increases in methane levels in Earth's atmosphere over the past ten years despite notable simultaneous increases by man.
More study
Prinn has said, "The next step will be to study [these changes] using a very high-resolution atmospheric circulation model and additional measurements from other networks. The key thing is to better determine the relative roles of increased methane emission versus [an increase] in the rate of removal. Apparently we have a mix of the two, but we want to know how much of each [is responsible for the overall increase]."
The primary concern now is that 2007 is long over. While the collected data from that time period reflects a simultaneous world-wide increase in emissions, observing atmospheric trends now is like observing the healthy horse running through the paddock a year after it overcame some mystery illness. Where does one even begin? And how relevant are any of the data findings at this late date? Looking back over 2007 data as it was captured may prove as ineffective if the data does not support the high resolution details such a study requires.
One thing does seem very clear, however; science is only beginning to get a handle on the big picture of global warming. Findings like these tell us it's too early to know for sure if man's impact is affecting things at the political cry of "alarming rates." We may simply be going through another natural cycle of warmer and colder times - one that's been observed through a scientific analysis of the Earth to be naturally occuring for hundreds of thousands of years.
Project funding
Rigby and Prinn carried out this study with help from researchers at Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Bristol and Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Methane gas measurements came from the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment (AGAGE), which is supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Australian CSIRO network.
It's called Google. Try it.
32,600 real scientists say AGW is a hoax. Deal with it.
We must stop all Democrats from exhaling. To save the Earth. It’s the only way to be sure.
The overwhelming majority of Earth's geological history didn't have a climate system like now. Ever hear of plate tectonics? Quick quiz: what happened to global climate when the Panamanian isthmus closed? Answer in 200 words or less. This link should get you started:
Panama: Isthmus that Changed the World
Other questions on upcoming quizzes will concern the impact of Himalayan uplift on global temperatures and the puzzle of glaciation during the Ordovician. Keep asking questions: it's healthy.
I have no idea how well any of those 32,600 signatories have actually analyzed the issue, so the number is meaningless. I've dealt with it. Let's discuss science.
What’s the proximity to McMurdo Sound and Mt. Erebus?
sound of crickets...
First they can’t sell AGW, then they can’t sell GW, now they resort to “alinsky-ish” scientific arguments to try to sell “climate change” - HINT - at no time in the last billion-and-a-half years has the climate not been changing...
Shifting ocean currents, especially near polar ones may be implicated; BTW, the Arctic cap is filling in at a rate almost a full month ahead of 2007.
After hibernation we’ll take another peek.
Our local Woolyworm Lady left us a couple years ago, her daughter is trying to carry on but she admits she doesn’t have the touch.
Methane is a trace gas that has more than doubled in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times, due mainly to human activities. After water vapor and carbon dioxide, it is the most important greenhouse gas and accounts for approximately 20 percent of the human-influenced greenhouse gas warming potential.
While methane is emitted to the atmosphere by some natural sources, such as wetlands, more than 70 percent of total emissions are due to human activities including fossil fuel production and use, intestinal gas from livestock and farm animals, and cultivation of rice paddies. Since many methane sources are the result of human activities, increased industrialization in developing countries and stepped up global food demand could result in increased emissions in the future.
political correctness and financial instruments
YES!
They both result in financial and political disaster.
With twenty five times more heat-trapping potential than carbon dioxide, methane's overall climate impact is nearly half that of carbon dioxide despite atmospheric concentrations of around 1,800 parts-per-billion..
Still think that methane's contribution to warming potential is negligible?
1400 km
The rates of climate change during the Holocene are the most relevant to effective consideration of the current climate state. Factors affecting climate change on 10-100,000 year timescales would barely be detected (if in fact they could be detected) over a century or two.
Maybe the recent cooling of the rhetoric surrounding the issue of warming will be one blessing of this world-wide recession currently trumping the Act-Now crowd.
NOAA/NASA/Hansen - nope, no political agenda there...
I guess you haven't heard the recent news about Antarctica. Try Google News. Use the logical keywords.
mogno-green-freeks - great link there caruso...
This one?
“Antarctic volcanoes identified as a possible culprit in glacier melting”
By Kenneth Chang Published: January 20, 2008
Another factor might be contributing to the thinning of some of the Antarctica’s glaciers: volcanoes.
In an article published Sunday on the Web site of the journal Nature Geoscience, Hugh Corr and David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey report the identification of a layer of volcanic ash and glass shards frozen within an ice sheet in western Antarctica.
“This is the first time we have seen a volcano beneath the ice sheet punch a hole through the ice sheet” in Antarctica, Vaughan said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.