+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 3 7 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 136

Thread: The Methane Problem

  1. Link to Post #41
    United States Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    30th March 2014
    Location
    Zero Sum
    Age
    62
    Posts
    2,937
    Thanks
    12,979
    Thanked 15,293 times in 2,822 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Can cyclic events be stopped or slowed (significantly) in the course of their action? Can the sun be suspended from rising in the morning or setting in the evening?

    In the apparent universe the only constant is change. The change is labeled good or bad depending on ones perspective and perspective is skewed by position. All position are covered within probability waves.


  2. Link to Post #42
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    34,206
    Thanks
    207,997
    Thanked 456,565 times in 32,726 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    [...]
    ...the Arctic is melting, but the Antarctic is freezing...
    [...]
    Actually, they are currently both freezing!

    Winter up North and ice-breaker needed down South:

    http://iceagenow.info/2015/02/u-s-ic...antarctic-ice/

    http://iceagenow.info/2015/02/antarc...oat-stuck-ice/
    Yes, Robert Felix (Ice Age Now) gave references to the freezing Antarctic. But this slide was shown by Stuart Scott in video #1, and John Nissen in video #2:



    John Nissen points out that the clear trend of the graph heads straight to what he calls a "Blue Ocean Event" — a pleasant enough name, but catastrophic when it comes — which may possibly occur as early as September of this year (2015).

    That's the point of no return, and of no ice... after which the Arctic would be ice-free. And after that, says Nissen, global weather will rapidly get REALLY unstable.

    In his presentation, Nissen said it was the most important day of his life. He is enormously concerned, and is convinced he and Dr Peter Wadhams have the engineering models correct. He points out that according to the historic global climate record, the last 8,000 years have been so stable compared with all the previous ages that's it's actually a 'fluke' that that happened at all.

    That 'fluke', he says, permitted the human population to thrive and grow to 7 billion in that short time — but that stability will soon end very dramatically.

  3. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Atlas (16th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Hervé (15th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), regnak (16th February 2015), sigma6 (16th February 2015), Sophocles (16th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015)

  4. Link to Post #43
    Avalon Member Carmody's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th August 2010
    Location
    Winning The Galactic Lottery
    Posts
    11,389
    Thanks
    17,597
    Thanked 82,315 times in 10,234 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Quote Posted by Snowflower (here)

    By pointing out the fact that ice is melting in one area and increasing in another (the same goes for Antarctica) I am positing that not only are we heading into an ice age, but the location of the north and south poles are shifting. This necessarily means that new areas get frozen while frozen ones (methane-rich) are melting.
    Paul Beckwith (University of Ottawa‚ the same guy in video #3, with his cats ) explains starting at 22:12 in the first video why the Arctic is melting, but the Antarctic is freezing... the same topic as in my thread here:

    The Arctic is melting, the Antarctic is freezing. What does this mean?
    Also, striation and extremes. Ie, gas planet striations.



    More potent storms, more demarcated lines, or - striations.

    It's really interesting to me that this was all discussed back in the early 80's, if anyone cared to look at the time. I'm quite sure of that, as I still have the public school atlas I had at the time, in order to look up and understand the changes in the map that would occur due to rising sea levels.
    Last edited by Carmody; 15th February 2015 at 17:21.
    Interdimensional Civil Servant

  5. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Carmody For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), Bob (17th February 2015), Ernie Nemeth (16th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015)

  6. Link to Post #44
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    20th November 2012
    Location
    gone
    Age
    40
    Posts
    4,873
    Thanks
    15,814
    Thanked 18,722 times in 4,284 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Bill, thanks a million for this article.

    Macondo opened my eyes to the risk of methane saturation.
    I also started researching what happened to Mars.

    Needless to say, there are scientists out there who agree with some of our hunches here --
    their hands are tied, but if they could I think some would chime in here and tell you more.



    Methane incidents predate most ice ages and mass extinctions.
    Outgassing, that is.


    When a teenager I read about Lake Monoun (Africa) and the carbon outgassing taking place there.
    Then realized thru reading more that the methane outgassing we saw in the Macondo well area, and then later in the New Zealand region (the pumice raft that was over 1' tall and 10x size of Rhode Island),
    from a volcano on the ocean floor...

    we're not always told the whole truth about how delicate our world is.

    <3

  7. Link to Post #45
    France On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,763
    Thanks
    60,315
    Thanked 95,889 times in 15,481 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    [...]

    John Nissen points out that the clear trend of the graph heads straight to what he calls a "Blue Ocean Event" — a pleasant enough name, but catastrophic when it comes — which may possibly occur as early as September of this year (2015).

    That's the point of no return, and of no ice...

    [...]
    ... that's the trouble with theoretical models, they rarely match reality:

    Quote Contrary to predictions
    The Kronen Zeitung then explains how the climate models have failed in that they predicted the very opposite to happen and that some scientists even desperately claimed that the measurements were wrong.

    The situation is similar in the Arctic: Even the prestigious BBC predicted not too long ago that the North Pole would be completely ice-free by 2013. But now, even before winter starts properly, a huge ice sheet covers the North Pole, ranging from the islands of Canada to the northern coasts of Russia.

    29 percent more ice at the North Pole
    Yachting adventurers who wished to sail through the ice-free North had to return empty-handed because of the ice – half the size of Europe – blocked their passage.

    Researchers at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Boulder (Colorado) to admit any event that takes a more global warming is global cooling underway. According to their latest data, the cool northern cap has seen an increase of as much as 29 percent!

    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post890654
    I am not dismissing the potential threat of methane starting to bubble up, as long as the models that are developed are firmly anchored in reality
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  8. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Atlas (16th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), christian (15th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), Limor Wolf (15th February 2015), ponda (16th February 2015), Reinhard (16th February 2015), Sophocles (16th February 2015)

  9. Link to Post #46
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd June 2013
    Location
    North America
    Age
    72
    Posts
    6,884
    Thanks
    12,723
    Thanked 29,293 times in 6,140 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    This is a global distribution map of locations planetwide which are producing CH4 (Methane).


    Source: Etiope, G. 2004. New directions: GEM—Geologic emissions of methane, the missing source in the
    atmospheric methane budget. Atmospheric Environment 38(19): 3099-3100.

    Organic matter in the soil in sedimentary basins (which generally are responsible for natural gas and oil formation, are called "Petroliferous Sedimentary Regions" ). Locally, more modern sources of Methane, are local LANDFILLS (Garbage dumps).


    Natural Methane emission from the Earth itself, estimation is 72,752,546,520 pounds per year (2004 study).

    The majority of human hydrocarbon release comes from NATURAL GAS FLARING from oil well production (associated gas or primary methane gas from a gas well).

    CO2 release from burning, is estimated at 54,400,000,000,000 pounds per year.

    Methane has 84 times the global-warming potential of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period and 28 times over a 100-year period. Methane breaks down over time in other words.

    (Natural methane gas is therefore a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide due to the greater warming potential of methane.)

    DAMAGE FACTOR:
    Running the "potency comparison" between CO2 verses CH4 allowing for the 84 times potency, we compute at:
    72,752,546,520 (methane) times 84 = 6,111,213,907,680 (6.1 trillion pounds/year)

    54,400,000,000,000 (carbon dioxide) times "1" = 54,400,000,000,000 (54.4 trillion pounds/year)

    There is 9 times MORE CO2 damage than Methane damage released per year allowing for the 84X potency factor for Methane.

    The combination of METHANE plus CO2 plus raw carbon release from FLARING (oil/gas wells) is horrendous and is contributing to atmosphere damage.
    Last edited by Bob; 9th October 2015 at 05:30.

  10. Link to Post #47
    United States Avalon Member ghostrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2011
    Location
    Sand Springs Ok
    Age
    58
    Posts
    7,427
    Thanks
    9,893
    Thanked 28,794 times in 6,634 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Edward Meier and Ptaah have been warning about this since 1958 , it is partly the reason Mars lost it's atmosphere and they had to escape to Earth ... http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Bil...act_Report_444 http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Bil...opulation_Bomb http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Bil...ainst_All_Life I could keep going with their words and links but you get the point ... they the ET's have been trying to warn us , the Earth is connected to us , we are living things living together , mankind has no idea that his thoughts and actions have energy that affects his environment ... Earth responds in kind ...
    Raiding the Matrix One Mind at a Time ...

  11. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ghostrider For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), golden lady (15th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Limor Wolf (15th February 2015), Reinhard (16th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015), yelik (15th February 2015)

  12. Link to Post #48
    United States Avalon Member ghostrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th February 2011
    Location
    Sand Springs Ok
    Age
    58
    Posts
    7,427
    Thanks
    9,893
    Thanked 28,794 times in 6,634 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    they closed the seed vault last year , and have been building underground cities for 50 years ... they know living above ground may become a problem ... too many ignore the reality of climate change ... it was 80 yesterday IN FEBRUARY here , today it's supposed to snow and the high 33 ... but they deny our climate is broke , and deny the causes ... I ask you where do we go if our air has too much Co2 ??? it causes headaches , and extreme tiredness , those are just some of the effects our ET friends have made known to mankind ...
    Raiding the Matrix One Mind at a Time ...

  13. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ghostrider For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), Elainie (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), TraineeHuman (19th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015), yelik (15th February 2015)

  14. Link to Post #49
    Great Britain Avalon Member
    Join Date
    2nd May 2014
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,282
    Thanks
    6,142
    Thanked 6,647 times in 1,188 posts

    Wink Re: The Methane Problem

    Good informative video Bill, thanks

    Climate change has been known about for a long time, in fact the famous alternatives 1,2 and 3 involved planning for climate disaster. I read somewhere that in the 1990's politicians didn't think we'd reach the year 2000.

    It is evident that politicians have sold their soul to the anti- human banking and energy cartels for the sake of money, the route of all evil.

    The video indicates we are doing too little too late and could have a mere 20 years left before things get really bad unless you head for the Arctic.

    I think humanity faces a number of risks, not least the cabal who may use this information to support their main agenda, the NWO and depopulation. Also the video fell short in that they failed to mention things like illegal Chemtrailing supposedly designed to reflect heat away from Earth, this is not working but has likely put trillions into the hands of the elites, yet again. Even when they appear to be concerned about life on Earth they still want to strip its wealth and keep us enslaved.

    No mention of the widespread radiation contamination from Fukushima and leaks from older facilities around the world which is lurking in the atmoshere with idiots like David Cabal Cameron pushing for more.

    No mention of the sun getting warming and likely expansion of the earth taking place, but you cannot tax that.

    Also no mention of technologies like zero point energy and the development of other exotic technologies and weapons stripping even more wealth, yet more crime against humanity.

    Unfortunately I have no faith in our mind controlled politicians doing a dam thing about it, I do not believe they have the desire, capability or enough compassion or respect for humanity, I think they'd rather die in a bed of money and greed than change their ways.

    Because no one could be really so stupid as to continue polluting our own environment, regardless of climate change, I can only assume it is intentional re- terraforming of the the planet, but for who? I also read where the idiot military were firing scar weapons (haap) above the atmoshere in the artic where they may have blasted a hole, I don't know how true this is, but nothing is beyond believe when it comes down to the cabal and their mind controlled minions.
    Last edited by yelik; 15th February 2015 at 18:35.

  15. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to yelik For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), Elainie (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), Limor Wolf (15th February 2015), Reinhard (16th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015)

  16. Link to Post #50
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,974 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    It's a vicious-circle process.
    This is the positive feedback mechanism. The following article shows how systems like climate are chiefly characterized by negative feedback. ‘No new strange attractors: strong evidence against both positive feedback and catastrophe’. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/0...d-catastrophe/

    Quote In an open system in a locally stable phase, the oscillations (fluctuations) couple to the dissipation so that more fluctuation makes more dissipation — negative feedback. If this is not true, the locally stable phase is not stable.

    This is a strong argument against catastrophe! The point is that given that CO_2 is making only small, slow, local shifts of the attractors compared to the large shifts of the system between the attractors, if there was a point where the system was likely to fall over to a much warmer stable point — the “catastrophe” threatened by the warmists — it almost certainly would have already done it, as the phase oscillations over the last ten thousand years have on numerous occasions made it as warm as it is right now.

    The fact that this has not happened is actually enormously strong evidence against both positive feedback and catastrophe. Yes, anthropogenic CO_2 may have shifted all the attractor temperatures a bit higher, it may have made small rearrangements of the attractors, but there is no evidence that suggests that it is probably going to suddenly create at new attractor far outside of the normal range of variation already visible in the climate record. Is it impossible? Of course not. But it is not probable.

    I’ll close with an analogy. When physicists were getting ready to test the first nuclear bomb, there was some concern expressed by the less gifted physicists present that in doing so they might “ignite the Earth’s atmosphere” or somehow turn the Earth into a Sun (note that this was before there was any understanding of fusion — the sun’s energy cycle was still not understood). I’ve read (far more recently) some concern that collisions at the LHC could have the same effect — create a mini-black hole or the like that swallows the Earth.

    Both of these are silly fears (although offered up, note well, by real scientists, because they could see that these outcomes were possible, at least in principle) and here’s why.

    The temperature and pressure created by the nuclear bomb is not unique! Although it is rare, asteroids fall to the earth, and when they do they create pressures and temperatures much higher than those produced by nuclear bombs. A very modest sized asteroid can release more energy in a few milliseconds than tens of thousands of times the total explosive energy of all of the man-made explosives, including nuclear bombs, on Earth! In a nutshell, if it could happen (with any reasonable probability), it already would have happened.

    Ditto the fears associated with the LHC, or other “super” colliders. Sure, it generates collisions on the order of electron-teravolts, but this sort of energy in nuclear collisions is not unique! The Earth is constantly being bombarded by high energy particles given off by extremely energetic events like supernovae that happened long ago and far away. The energies of these cosmic rays are vastly greater than anything we will ever be able to produce in the laboratory until the laboratory in question contains a supernova. The most energetic cosmic ray ever observed (so far) was a (presumably) proton with the kinetic energy of a fastball-pitched baseball, a baseball travelling at some 150 kilometers per hour. Since we’ve seen one of these in a few decades of looking, we have to assume that they happen all the time — literally every second a cosmic ray of this sort of energy is hitting the Earth (BIG target) somewhere. If such a collision could create a black hole that destroyed planets with any significant probability, we would have been toast long, long ago.

    Hence it is silly to fear the LHC or nuclear ignition. If either were probable, we wouldn’t be here to build an LHC or nuclear bomb.

    It is not quite that silly to fear CAGW. The truth is that we haven’t been around long enough to know enough about the climate system to be able to tell what sorts of feedbacks and factors structure the multistable climate attractors, so one can create a number of doomsday scenarios — warming to a critical point that releases massive amounts of methane that heats things suddenly so that the ocean degasses all of its CO_2 and the ice caps melt and the oceans boil and suddenly there we are, Venus Earth with a mean temperature outside of 200 C. If we can imagine it and write it down, it must be possible, right? Science fiction novels galore explore just that sort of thing. Or movies proposing the opposite — the appearance of attractors that somehow instantly freeze the entire planet and bring about an ice age. Hey! It could happen!

    But is it probable?

    Here is where the argument above provides us with a great deal of comfort. There is little in the climate record to suggest the existence of another major stable state, another major attractor, well above the current warm phase attractor. Quite the opposite — the record over the last few tens of millions of years suggest that we are in the middle of a prolonged cooling phase of the planet, of the sort that has happened repeatedly over geological time, such that we are in the warm phase major attractor, and that there is literally nothing out there above it to go to. If there were, we would have gone there, instead, as local variations and oscillation around the many> minor warm phase attractors has repeatedly sampled conditions that would have been likely to cause a transition to occur if one was at all likely. At the very least, there would be a trace of it in the thermal record of the last million years or thereabouts, and there isn’t. We’re in one of the longest, warmest interglacials of the last five, although not at the warmest point of the current interglacial (the Holocene). If there were a still warmer attractor out there, the warmest point of the Holocene would have been likely to find it.

    Since it manifestly did not, that suggests that the overall feedbacks are safely negative and all of the “catastrophe” hypotheses but one are relatively unlikely.

    The one that should be worrisome? Catastrophic Global Cooling. We know that there is a cold phase major attractor some 5-10C cooler than current temperatures. Human civilization arose in the Holocene, and we have not yet advanced to where it can survive a cold phase transition back to glacial conditions, not without the death of 5 billion people and probable near-collapse of civilization. We know that this transition not only can occur, but will occur. We do not know when, why, or how to estimate its general probability. We do know that the LIA — a mere 400-500 years ago — was the coolest period in the entire Holocene post the Younger Dryas excursion; in general the Holocene appears to be cooling from its warmest period, and the twentieth century was a Grand Solar Maximum, the most active sun in 11,000 years, a maximum that is now clearly past.

    IMO we are far more likely to be hanging out over an instability in which a complete transition to cold phase becomes uncomfortably likely than we are to be near a transition to a superwarm phase that there is no evidence of in the climate record. The probability is higher for two reasons. One is that unlike the superwarm phase, we know that the cold phase actually exists, and is a lot more stable than the warm phase. The “size” of the quasistable Poincare cycle oscillations around the cold phase major attractor is much larger than that around the warm phase attractors, and brief periods of warming often get squashed before turning into actual interglacials — that’s how stable they are.


  17. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Hym (15th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), ponda (16th February 2015)

  18. Link to Post #51
    Jamaica Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st April 2014
    Posts
    512
    Thanks
    247
    Thanked 2,160 times in 444 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    This is probably a stupid question.. but here goes anyway. With all the energy needs in the world, is it not possible to capture this methane and use it as energy? 2 birds/1 stone deal?

  19. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to jake gittes For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), Bob (16th February 2015), christian (15th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), yelik (16th February 2015)

  20. Link to Post #52
    Germany Avalon Member christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th February 2011
    Location
    Berlin
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,262
    Thanks
    15,586
    Thanked 23,119 times in 2,959 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Harvesting methane is possible but hard. It can be used as an energy source.

    I think the main questions to answer in this thread are:
    • How much methane in the atmosphere is tolerable?
    • How much methane release (and uptake) can realistically be expected in the foreseeable future?
    When looking for answers, I'd be very cautious not to take anybody's word for it though. Climate science still seems to be a lot of guesswork and is politically charged on top of that.

  21. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to christian For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), Bob (16th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), Limor Wolf (15th February 2015)

  22. Link to Post #53
    Retired
    Join Date
    7th December 2010
    Location
    Beyond
    Age
    50
    Posts
    3,689
    Thanks
    34,680
    Thanked 27,050 times in 3,027 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Quote Posted by Operator (here)
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    ---
    Scott quotes the second paragraph: (my bold emphasis added)[INDENT][INDENT][INDENT][INDENT]
    Even with a deal to stop the current rate of greenhouse gas emissions, scientists warn, the world will become increasingly unpleasant. Without a deal, they say, the world could eventually become uninhabitable for humans.
    ---
    Unless life adapts itself again to changing circumstances as it has always done ...

    Was methane on Pandora in Avatar a shot across the bow ?

    Example:
    Quote Life in the Abyss

    If there is a harsher place to live than a hydrothermal vent, it hasn't been found yet. Pitch darkness, poison gas, heavy metals, extreme acidity,
    enormous pressure, water at turns frigid and searing—this seafloor environment seems more like something from deep space than from our own
    deep sea.
    ---
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/nature/...the-abyss.html
    Here is Wade Frazier's take on that -(Links from his 'Energy and the human journey' essey)

    Quote If you take the time to begin learning about Earth's carbon cycle, for instance, the role of greenhouse gases in Earth's climate becomes evident. Every paleoclimate study I ever saw considered carbon dioxide the most important greenhouse gas, and scientific careers have been devoted to the subject, as well as the role of oxygen on Earth. It is a young science and full of controversy, but none of the players deny the role of greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide is certainly not the only one. Water is more influential, but it is ephemeral and there is a positive feedback with temperature (a warmer climate means more evaporation, which makes it warmer as water vapor traps more radiation, and it works in reverse for cooling, to intensify it). There seems to be a sporadic but potentially great impact by methane, which is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. But methane is also taken out of the atmosphere quickly, so only in a few instances in the eon of complex life has methane been implicated in Global Warming. The main way was when the poles and ocean floor warmed up enough so that trapped methane was released into the atmosphere. This is in danger of happening as I write this, which is probably what scares climate scientists the most. The last time it seems to have happened, it created the warmest climate in the past 500 million years, with global temperatures about 14 degrees Celsius (25 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than today. It led to a Golden Age of life on Earth, when alligators lived in Greenland and forests extended nearly to the poles, but after the mass extinction that the warming caused, and it was still a Greenhouse Earth when that event began. We are living in an Icehouse Earth today, and the last time that Earth went from Icehouse to Greenhouse conditions, Earth had its greatest mass extinction ever. We are toying with turning Earth from Icehouse to Greenhouse conditions, and that has climate scientists terrified.
    I am not 100% sure, but I think Paul La violette has somehow connected his 'Galactic superwave' theory to all the other failing layers of the earth, as if all is happening at once.. sun anomalies, electric current bulding around earth that distributes heat, trapped gases being realesed as a consequence, techtonic triggerings etc.

    And perheps this comment does not belong to a thread on methane, but it seems that indeed everything is converging to be happening all at once. The list contains a man made dangers as well as some 'natural' (artificial?) ones and a cosmic ones, as if all is correlated in some type of synergy...

    And sadly here is what may seem as a faithful reflection of the human part -

    Last edited by Limor Wolf; 15th February 2015 at 20:52.

  23. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Limor Wolf For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015), Bob (16th February 2015), Earthship (15th February 2015), Ernie Nemeth (16th February 2015), Jean-Marie (15th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), Operator (16th February 2015), Sophocles (16th February 2015), vmk22 (19th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015)

  24. Link to Post #54
    Avalon Member sigma6's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th July 2011
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    3,428
    Thanks
    8,906
    Thanked 12,729 times in 2,903 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem



    And if it's not aliens it sure is hell one great platform to push for a Global Carbon "TAX" 2.0... how many tiers of taxation would that make now ?

    So make sure you do your part and pay your taxes, or this will be your fault! (and stop blaming corporations making 20,30,40,50... billion dollar profits per year) it's up to YOU! Help raise the standard of living by contributing your share to the Global Carbon Tax Plan today...

    ...give now and give generously... (this message is brought to you by the political leadership of all G-8 countries(-1) (after 100 years of burning fossil fuels), the United Banking Families for a peaceful earth, the Holy Brethren Vatican Trust for Healthy Methane Levels and Al Gore's PR assistant to the Executive Secretary Treasurer.

    See below contact information for new hiring positions with unlimited growth potential...
    Last edited by sigma6; 16th February 2015 at 02:30. Reason: added commentary
    We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time
    By faith we understand things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sigma6 For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (15th February 2015)

  26. Link to Post #55
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    20th November 2012
    Location
    gone
    Age
    40
    Posts
    4,873
    Thanks
    15,814
    Thanked 18,722 times in 4,284 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    did you ladies and gents catch the CNN article yesterday about the NASA prediction of decades-long droughts on earth?
    they mentioned greenhouse gases but NOT which ones, neither carbon nor methane,

    my bet is on methane @@

  27. Link to Post #56
    Avalon Member Tesseract's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th October 2012
    Posts
    834
    Thanks
    1,740
    Thanked 3,393 times in 744 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Quote Posted by jake gittes (here)
    This is probably a stupid question.. but here goes anyway. With all the energy needs in the world, is it not possible to capture this methane and use it as energy? 2 birds/1 stone deal?
    It's not a stupid question..

    A quick internet search reveals the atmospheric methane concentration is almost 2 ppm (parts per million, by volume). This is low, but not extremely low in the world of chemistry. There are chemists who specialize in detecting chemicals at ppt (part per trillion) levels, which is a million times more dilute than atmospheric methane, such analysis normally involves capturing and concentrating those chemicals prior to the detection step. Also, people have suggested extracting lithium from sea water which contains 0.1 to 0.2 ppm lithium. Of course, the atmosphere is less dense that water so that has to be taken into account, but on the plus side the diffusion of gases is very fast. Methane can be very easily absorbed by activated carbon, which is mass produced for a few dollars a kilogram, mostly from waste products. Whether or not it absorbs efficiently at 2 ppm I'm not sure, but I suspect that it would. On a similar topic, I think Richard Branson some years ago announced a prize for anyone who could design and demonstrate a system that captured CO2 from the atmosphere (which is present at a few hundred ppm). I believe there was a team that successfully demonstrated direct conversion of atmospheric CO2 to liquid fuel.


    All that said, I think it would make the most sense to capture methane at the source, where the concentration would be much richer. Indeed, there are already operations that do this, such can be found at some landfill sites. However, there are many many methane sources that are not being exploited and the methane just goes to waste into the atmosphere.

  28. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Tesseract For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (16th February 2015), Bob (16th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), sigma6 (16th February 2015)

  29. Link to Post #57
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd June 2013
    Location
    North America
    Age
    72
    Posts
    6,884
    Thanks
    12,723
    Thanked 29,293 times in 6,140 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Whence methane (IF) captured, there remains the transport issue. In Nigeria for instance, probably THE number 1 or number 2 contributor to global hydrocarbon waste gas emission into the atmosphere besides Russia, is that if methane would be captured, there is no infra-structure to contain it or transport it.

    As it comes down to $$$ being pocketed by tptb controlling the resource being emitted, spending many billions for a pipeline is not conducive to a ptb structure who would rather pocket the $$$ and let the emissions happen.. That is the reality in the majority of the methane AND CO2 and carbon black (soot) producers..

    The PTB mindset is ignore it, and take the $$$ and stall. This is a political issue..

    World Bank has said, no more loans to those countries who still allow for emissions from for instance associated methane gas release or burning.. The likelihood that the methane and CO2 producers will listen is snoball chance in hades..

  30. Link to Post #58
    United States Avalon Member Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    11th June 2011
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Age
    56
    Posts
    2,980
    Thanks
    19,508
    Thanked 24,418 times in 2,845 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    Thanks Bill for raising this important topic.

    Back in the late-80s, I read a sci-fi book by Greg Barnes called "Mother of Storms".

    Quote In the early 21st century, the earth suffers from a giant hurricane spawned by the release of clathrate compounds, as the result of a nuclear explosion. While the hurricane spawns hundreds of progeny, which by novel's end kill at least 1 billion people, two massively computer augmented human intelligences, both of whom witness their organic bodies die, race to corral a comet from beyond Pluto's orbit. They use the ice from the comet to reduce earth surface temperatures, and quell the mother of storms.
    Needless to say it affected my outlook and probably contributed to my desire to learn more about the world and what these "methane clathrates" were. Perhaps it even contributed in some way to me deciding to become a "geographer" and study these issues in more depth.

    I think this particular threat is so scary that to give it mainstream acknowledgement would lead directly to change. And there remain some elements who, for whatever reason, do not want that.

  31. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Mark For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (16th February 2015), Flash (17th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015)

  32. Link to Post #59
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    34,206
    Thanks
    207,997
    Thanked 456,565 times in 32,726 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    -------

    Here's a good one.

    From http://iflscience.com/environment/cl...*cked%E2%80%9D

    Excuse the smiley above. To open the link, copy it and substitute a 'u' for the asterisk in the URL.


    Climatologist Says Arctic Carbon Release Could Mean “We're F*cked”

    August 4, 2014 | by Stephen Luntz

    Photo credit: Pete Hill. These tiny bubbles may be the scariest thing you'll ever see.


    Climatologists have spent decades politely warning that we are cooking our planet, but now one has decided to stop sugar coating it. Professor Jason Box of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland tweeted: “If even a small fraction of Arctic sea floor carbon is released to the atmosphere, we're f*cked.”

    Box was responding to research by Stockholm University reporting “vast methane plumes escaping from the seafloor” in the Arctic Ocean.

    The scientists who made the discovery were more restrained. “This was somewhat of a surprise,” chief scientist Orjan Gustafsson wrote. Although there have been plenty of reports of methane plumes in the Arctic before, these have been a forewarning of danger, rather than a direct threat themselves. Microorganisms in the water column scavenge methane as it rises. Provided they can get to it before it reaches the surface the climate change damage is small.

    However, at some locations the Swedish team saw bubbles reaching the surface. Dissolved methane concentrations were 10-50 times background levels, and expedition members report “sniffing methane”.

    “While there has been much speculation about the vulnerability of regular marine hydrates along the continental slopes of the Arctic rim, very few actual observations of methane releases due to collapsing marine hydrates on the Arctic slope have been made,” Gustafsson wrote.

    The methane was released from a steep continental shelf 250-500m beneath the Laptev Sea off Siberia. There is evidence that the last vestige of the Gulf Stream, which reaches this point having wrapped around Scandinavia, has become warmer in recent years, and this may be triggering the release.

    Explorations of the Arctic Ocean are so recent we don't know whether such events are unprecedented, but we do know the area has warmed dramatically in recent decades.

    Simultaneously, evidence is building that methane release is the cause of the craters that have suddenly started appearing in other parts of Siberia. When interviewed by Vice Box said if he knew the tweet was going to attract so much attention he would have included the methane in permafrost, since this could be equally dangerous, but says he doesn't know enough about the holes to comment on their relation to climate change.

    Box is a highly credentialed scientist, whose main area of research is dark snow, snow that has had soot and black carbon fall on it, speeding its melting. He blogs at Meltfactor, where he says we need “an aggressive atmospheric decarbonization program. We have been too long on a trajectory pointed at an unmanageable climate calamity; runaway climate heating. If we don’t get atmospheric carbon down and cool the Arctic, the climate physics and recent observations tell me we will probably trigger the release of these vast carbon stores, dooming our kids’ to a hothouse Earth. That’s a tough statement to read when your worry budget is already full as most of ours is.”
    Last edited by Bill Ryan; 16th February 2015 at 00:33.

  33. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Atlas (16th February 2015), Bob (16th February 2015), Elainie (16th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Hervé (16th February 2015), Karma Ninja (18th February 2015), Mark (16th February 2015), sigma6 (16th February 2015), Sophocles (16th February 2015), vmk22 (19th February 2015), william r sanford72 (17th February 2015)

  34. Link to Post #60
    United States On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    14th October 2013
    Location
    Here I am
    Age
    63
    Posts
    1,324
    Thanks
    5,253
    Thanked 3,602 times in 1,157 posts

    Default Re: The Methane Problem

    A plan is being developed in Wisconsin to use manure from dairy cows for a methane energy source and still provide fertilizer in a less polluting manner. Initial stages of implementing. Making progress.
    http://www.uwosh.edu/biodigester/new...ews/local-news
    http://www.are.wisc.edu/

  35. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Fairy Friend For This Post:

    arwen (17th February 2015), Bill Ryan (16th February 2015), fourty-two (16th February 2015), Magnus (18th February 2015), sigma6 (16th February 2015), vmk22 (19th February 2015)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 3 7 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts