Arctic methane emergency called off?

and the acidification of the world’s oceans is pretty much in an advanced state, meaning….. SHTF!!! uptake ability for CO2 going down, cycle is running….. not good.

Oh there will be great wailing and much gnashing of teeth!

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/05/review-paper-finds-growth-of.html
A new review paper from SPPI and CO2 Science finds the growth rate of atmospheric methane has significantly decreased over the past 30 years, the opposite of IPCC predictions. Separately, a new paper finds, “Warming may not release Arctic carbon – Element could stay locked in soil, 20-year study suggests.”
Atmospheric methane’s contribution to anthropogenic climate forcing is estimated to be about half that of CO2 when both direct and indirect components to its forcing are summed (see Figure 1, below); and nearly all models project atmospheric methane (CH4) concentrations will increase for at least the next 3 decades, with many of the scenarios assuming a much larger increase throughout the 21st century. A quick fact-check, however, reveals that observations lie far below the model projections, as shown in each of the four prior Assessment Reports of the IPCC. So what has caused the IPCC to get things so wrong?

“Arctic methane emergency called off”
I would be interested how you can infer this from a paper that does not mention methane once.
At most this paper could find the response of moist acidic tussock ecosystem, nothing about other terrestrial and marine sources of methane in the Arctic.
REPLY: I’m not talking about marine sources such as clathrates, I’m talking about earthen sources. Decomp = methane. They point out decomp sped up initially, then leveled off as plant systems started to manage better.
Unless of course you want to refute this headline story too: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/27/501221/arctic-methane-release-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it/?mobile=nc
-Anthony

Extract the worrisome methane and burn it for fuel. Methane has 21 times the greenhouse potential than methane. Problem solved and we have fuel. Or, don’t worry about apocalypse from sudden release of arctic methane.
[Rather, “potential than CO2”? Mod ]

richard telford says:
May 15, 2013 at 4:23 pm …………..

Methane was not a problem when the Arctic was ice free during summers of the Holocene. So no problem this century bearing in mind climate sensitivity is off somewhat according to observations.

Abstract
We therefore conclude that for a priod in the Early Holocene, probably for a millenium or more, the Arctic Ocean was free of sea ice at least for shorter periods in the summer. This may serve as an analogue to the predicted “greenhouse situation” expected to appear within our century.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AGUFMPP11A0203F
Abstract
Arctic sea ice cover was strongly reduced during most of the early Holocene and there appear to have been periods of ice free summers in the central Arctic Ocean. This has important consequences for our understanding of the recent trend of declining sea ice, and calls for further research on causal links between Arctic climate and sea ice.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379110003185
Abstract
Calcareous nannofossils from approximately the past 7000 yr of the Holocene and from oxygen isotope stage 5 are present at 39 analyzed sites in the central Arctic Ocean. This indicates partly ice-free conditions during at least some summers. The depth of Holocene sediments in the Nansen basin is about 20 cm, or more where influenced by turbidites.
http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/content/21/3/227.abstract
Abstract
….Nevertheless, episodes of considerably reduced sea ice or even seasonally ice-free conditions occurred during warmer periods linked to orbital variations. The last low-ice event related to orbital forcing (high insolation) was in the early Holocene,…
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.02.010
Abstract
A 10,000-Year Record of Arctic Ocean Sea-Ice Variability—View from the Beach
We present a sea-ice record from northern Greenland covering the past 10,000 years. Multiyear sea ice reached a minimum between ~8500 and 6000 years ago, when the limit of year-round sea ice at the coast of Greenland was located ~1000 kilometers to the north of its present position. The subsequent increase in multiyear sea ice culminated during the past 2500 years and is linked to an increase in ice export from the western Arctic and higher variability of ice-drift routes
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6043/747.abstract

During the Eemian interglacial Hippopotamus frolicked in the rivers Thames and Rhine. Some Warmists will tell you that it was about as warm as the present. The Arctic’s methane was kept under control. Relax good people, the climate (false) alarm is almost over. Did I mention the even warmer PETM? Did I mention methane eating microbes? Did I mention…………..oh, forget it.

It looks like “the canary in the coal mine” Methane measurements from Barrow Alaska have ticked up again this year – a few parts per billion.
http://s22.postimg.org/det0rzc1t/ccgg_BRW_ch4_1_none_discrete_2008_2013.png
Overall, Methane levels in the atmosphere have nearly flatlined now – a little known fact it seems. 6 years ago, it looked like Methane had peaked but it seems to be increasing slightly again – probably the increased activity in the natural gas industry (natural gas being about 97% Methane – don’t blame the cows please since they have nothing to do with it).
Barrow is the leading indicator for the world and the leading indicator for Arctic methane releases I guess.
Methane does not appear to be an issue that should be worried about (unless you are a professional worrier – paid to be a worrier that is – as in doomsday prognisticator, please send money to save us from the few parts per billion trend of Methane).

Funny how all these skeptic points we pointed out over the years are all coming to pass.

nigelf, just a rewording:
Funny how all those warmist points that skeptics pointed out were completely wrong…
It’s almost as if warmists are completely unaware of how the planet works. There’s this little thing called “LIFE” that changes everything. To some creatures, methane is food. Increased methane means more food for the little guys, who experience a population boom. Once they’ve eaten all that is available, they starve and die, their microscopic bodies ultimately creating a thin strata layer for geologists to puzzle over in the far future.
Same goes for CO2. Increase it, and organisms and plants have a feeding / multiplying frenzy, lower the levels, and die off. Oh, and EXACTLY the same for crude oil. Surprise, surprise! Virtually every substance out there breaks down eventually and the components are food for something. Even toxic chemicals. Even… gasp… radioactivity integrates into nature!

Things burying AGW seem to be emerging on an almost daily basis now – taking studies such as this and media into account. It gives the sense of a long suppressed protest of dissent starting to emerge.

Most of the Alarmists don’t care how wrong or absurd they are; they just shout loudly in the hope of attracting attention, funds, and creating some action (whatever it is).
We’ll be able to test AMEG in about 7 months or so. They state:
“Climate extremes are all too apparent resulting in food prices rising ominously towards a level which could put over a billion people into starvation next year and provoke food riots all over the world.’
and
“What is happening will seriously impact food, agriculture and the insurance industry in 2013,”

Like the approach of this guy: Georg Delisle – permafrost expert – pulls no punches
“…it is utter imbecility to suppose that the entire permafrost could thaw out by the end of the century. It would take thousands of years.”
His study ‘Near-surface permafrost degradation: How severe during the 21st century?’ was the basis for his presentation.
From http://notrickszone.com/2012/12/01/permafrost-far-more-stable-than-claimed-german-expert-calls-danger-of-it-thawing-out-utter-imbicility/
Geoscientist and permafrost expert Georg Delisle from Hanover presented his research.
He studied time periods from the last 10,000 years when the global temperature was warmer than today for several thousand years by as much as 6°C. Ice cores that had been extracted from Antarctica and Greenland provide exact information about the composition of the atmosphere during these warm periods.
His conclusion: ‘The ice cores from both Greenland and Antarctica provide no indication of any elevated release of greenhouse gases at any time even though back then a deep thawing of the permafrost when compared to today would have been the case.’
http://donnerunddoria.welt.de/files/2012/11/2007GL029323.pdf

The mind boggles at the number of deluded people who think that catastrophe is right around the corner. How in he#$ do these people think that the Earth has reached its benign environment after 4.6 billion years if there were such lethal traps everywhere?

REPLY: I’m not talking about marine sources such as clathrates, I’m talking about earthen sources. Decomp = methane. They point out decomp sped up initially, then leveled off as plant systems started to manage better.
Unless of course you want to refute this headline story too: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/27/501221/arctic-methane-release-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it/?mobile=nc
———–
So rather than admit that your post grossly misrepresents Sistla et al, you divert me to a realclimate-written post that confirms that Arctic methane releases will play a significant role in climate evolution, even if sudden enormous releases of methane are unlikely.

REPLY: My view comes from the way methane has been portrayed in the Arctic. There are numerous essays which suggest methane will be released from tundra. One of the problems in the use of the word “carbon” is it is often shorthand for carbon dioxide or for methane, they don’t make that clear. I read it as a combination of CO2 and methane from soil decomp. For example here’s a story about an NSF press release where Carbon and Methane are used interchangeably in the Arctic. From Think Progress

Scientists learned last year that the permafrost permamelt contains a staggering “1.5 trillion tons of frozen carbon, about twice as much carbon as contained in the atmosphere,” much of which would be released as methane. Methane is is 25 times as potent a heat-trapping gas as CO2 over a 100 year time horizon, but 72 times as potent over 20 years!
The carbon is locked in a freezer in the part of the planet warming up the fastest (see “Tundra 4: Permafrost loss linked to Arctic sea ice loss“). Half the land-based permafrost would vanish by mid-century on our current emissions path (see “Tundra, Part 2: The point of no return” and below).

Here’s what the NSF says (much like what Nic Stokes says):

Methane is a greenhouse gas more than 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide. It is released from previously frozen soils in two ways. When the organic material (which contains carbon) stored in permafrost thaws, it begins to decompose and, under anaerobic conditions, gradually releases methane.

I’ve long been exposed to this idea, and that is what I thought was going on here since they artificially elevated temperatures. I just recent ran a critique of a story in the Guardian where we talking about how if surface vegetation is disturbed/removed, we end up with the permafrost below it melting which leads to decomp and methane release. In this study, they point out how a 2 degree warming was “expected” to cause issues like this, but instead the vegetation responded favorably, against their expectations.
Now I don’t defer the possibility that I could be wrong, but at the same time I’ll point out that when press releases and news stories are written, when “carbon” is used, it should be made perfectly which form of “carbon” they are talking about. From my perspective, the word “carbon” as shorthand for CO2/Methane in the Arctic needs to be clarified in many places.
Of course it would also help if Science would stop paywalling everything (including those studies done in California where I pay taxes to make it possible, where they should be public domain) so only those with perceived unlimited funds (feeding at the government trough – You and Nick for example) can read the papers. I went to UCSB looking for it, and was denied access. Of course if I had access to the paper, it may have clarified the issue to the point where it was clear that “Carbon” was not shorthand for Methane/CO2 in this case.
Next time there’s a story here at WUWT or elsewhere where “carbon” is used as shorthand, I’ll expect you to complain to the authors. Something tells me you won’t though, because your demonstrated holier than thou critical commentary is always one way.
-Anthony

They thought it worth publishing.
After spending two decades on their experiment, they could hardly have thought otherwise, although in this case they seem to be right.
However, rtj1211 still has a point. Results that confirm what some people (the groups he mentioned) would already have thought, but disprove what other people appear to have thought are worthwhile.

GENUG (@GENUG) says:
May 15, 2013 at 3:25 pm
“and the acidification of the world’s oceans is pretty much in an advanced state, meaning….. SHTF!!! uptake ability for CO2 going down, cycle is running….. not good.”
Average pH dropped by 0.1 over the past decades. If the uptake ability were going down, which I would call conjecture, how would that be a problem? Even the ongoing rise of CO2 concentrations between 1998 and 2013 did nothing to warm the planet, so where is the problem when the concentration rises further; it obviously does not correlate in a meaningful way with temperatures – neither with real local temperatures nor with the theoretical, meaningless construct they call global average temperature. Of course ESPECIALLY not with real temperatures; the diurnal temperature fluctuation in my place seems entirely unimpressed by CO2 levels.
Try to think rationally. I know it’s hard after decades of green brainwashing but try. Start with a book about simple boolean logic.

Dick/DB/Steve: You guys know damn well that carbon=methane when they are talking about permafrost thaw. That’s all they’ve warned us about for years. You are word parse trolling. Just stop…

Rick Bradford says:
May 15, 2013 at 7:40 pm
Most of the Alarmists don’t care how wrong or absurd they are; they just shout loudly in the hope of attracting attention, funds, and creating some action….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It is part of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people…..
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions….
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)….

Think Looney Lew and – Royal Society calls Lewandowsky “outstanding” for an example of all three rules.
Skeptics are always behind the 8-ball. CAGW types think up something new write a ‘Peer-Reviewed Science Paper’ then hand the lap-dog ‘journalists’ a press release so it makes headlines. By the time skeptics have come up with a rebuttal a new catastrophic ‘Peer-Reviewed Science Paper’ is making headlines and the old paper is wrapping fish. It does not matter if the paper is complete bumkin, all that matters is that it grabs headlines.
Actual science started heading out the door when the Age of Enlightenment or Age of Reason gave way to Romanticism.

An Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals in 18th century Europe, that sought to mobilize the power of reason, in order to reform society and advance knowledge. It promoted science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition,[1] intolerance and abuses in church and state. Originating about 1650 to 1700, it was sparked by philosophers Baruch Spinoza (1632?1677), John Locke (1632?1704), Pierre Bayle (1647?1706), physicist Isaac Newton (1643?1727), and historian Voltaire (1694?1778)….
The Enlightenment flourished until about 1790–1800, after which the emphasis on reason gave way to Romanticism’s emphasis on emotion and a Counter-Enlightenment gained force….
http://www.ask.com/answers/116661941/what-s-the-difference-between-the-enlightenment-and-the-renaissance

Politicians of course do not want the vioting public to be able to reason. As H. L. Mencken said,
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” So a dumb electorate swayed by emotion is just what politicians want.
Pascal Lamy let the true goal of the politicians out of the bag:

…All had lived through the chaos of the 1930s — when turning inwards led to economic depression, nationalism and war. All, including the defeated powers, agreed that the road to peace lay with building a new international order — and an approach to international relations that questioned the Westphalian, sacrosanct principle of sovereignty…

This then is ‘THE CAUSE’ that Michael Mann is talking about when he said
“I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’s doing, but its not helping the cause.” in a climate gate e-mail. Don’t forget one of the other climategate e-mails was asking for the Climate Team™ to review Ged Davis’s Global Governance & Sustainable Development (B1). Davis was at the time a Shell Oil VP. “During the late 1990s, he served as Director of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development’s Global Scenarios and as Facilitator and Lead Author of the IPCC’s Emission Scenarios” – from InterAcademy Council, Annex A. Study Panel Biographies (Link now dead)
Pascal Lamy also states the problem facing those who want global governance:

….It is true that popular criticism of globalization can be irrational — or worse.

So it looks like climate skeptics will have to be lumped into the group called ” irrational — or worse.” (enter Lewandowsky and Cook stage left)
Lamy states the progress that has been made:

….Half a century ago, those who designed the post-war system — the United Nations, the Bretton Woods system, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)…. [GATT led to WTO] — were deeply influenced by the shared lessons of history….All, including the defeated powers, agreed that the road to peace lay with building a new international order …

He states the problem now facing globalists:

This raises a final challenge: How to provide global leadership? Mobilizing collective purpose is more difficult when we no longer face one common enemy, but thousands of complex problems. The Cold War was about the clash, not just of geopolitical interests, but of big ideas — democracy against totalitarianism, freedom against state control. But the Cold War “glue” has disappeared….

And finally he states the ‘Solution’ to the problems facing globalists, Mencken’s endless series of hobgoblins

…With the recent economic crisis we discovered that the collapse of one part of an economy can trigger a chain-reaction across the globe. With the climate crisis, that our planet is an indivisible whole. With the food crisis, that we are dependent on each other’s production and policies to feed ourselves. And with the flu epidemic, that speedy international cooperation is vital…. Pascal Lamy: Global governance
is the globalization of local governance

(All other Lamy quotes from Pascal Lamy: Whither Globalization?)
All four of these events were carefully orchestrated of course.
For those not familiar with ‘The Flu Epidemic Crisis’ Live Avian Flu Virus Placed in Baxter Vaccine Materials Sent to 18 Countries “The company that released contaminated flu virus material from a plant in Austria confirmed Friday that the experimental product contained live H5N1 avian flu viruses.”
‘The Food Crisis’ : How Goldman Sachs Created the Food Crisis
The economic crisis I have traced to the five banking laws signed by Clinton, a pal of Lamy. The laws repealed the depression era laws put in place to prevent another depression. Matt Taibbi has done a really great job investigating the situation: Matt Taibbi: The Great American Bubble Machine, Goldman Sachs
It is worth looking at Taibbi’s other articles on banks and finance. link

Gail Combs says: May 16, 2013 at 5:36 am
“..For those not familiar with ‘The Flu Epidemic Crisis’ Live Avian Flu Virus Placed in Baxter Vaccine Materials Sent to 18 Countries “The company that released contaminated flu virus material from a plant in Austria confirmed Friday that the experimental product contained live H5N1 avian flu viruses.”… http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2009/03/07/live-avian-flu-virus-placed-in-baxter-vaccine-materials-sent-to-18-countries/
This is an interesting topic Gail, and to many here will seem very far fetched or fantastic. However, there is little doubt this occurred, and whether or not it could have been accidental in this case I won’t comment on.
But, there is little doubt that in the past viral and bacterial commercial and trial vaccines (for both animal and human patients) were quite possibly contaminated by other viruses, often these were unknown at the time. (ie, it is more difficult to QC test for contamination with the unknown).
I have found no-one likes to discuss the topic, but in some specific cases (animal) I pursued researchers have told me this was very likely the reason for the rapid worldwide spread of ‘new’ pathogens. (I believe often ‘new’ may mean suddenly of importance in a developed country with high tech farming practices … it could have been lurking forever in some corner of the less developed world, barely visible with long term natural immunity largely protecting backyard operations).

Hockey Schtick says:
May 15, 2013 at 3:52 pm
quote
A new review paper from SPPI and CO2 Science finds the growth rate of atmospheric methane has significantly decreased over the past 30 years, the opposite of IPCC predictions.
unquote
What methane release there has been may (possible/could be/perhaps) due to the reduction of SO2 release. There was a prediction that when the acid rain stopped the tundra would release methane.
So perhaps the warming is doing less than nothing.
JF

GENUG (@GENUG) says:
May 15, 2013 at 3:25 pm
and the acidification of the world’s oceans is pretty much in an advanced state, meaning….. SHTF!!! uptake ability for CO2 going down, cycle is running….. not good
Foraminiferal boron isotope ratios as a proxy for surface ocean pH over the past 21 Myr shows evidence that ocean alkalinity is near record highs.
See http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v363/n6425/pdf/363149a0.pdf
It is a common mistake to overstate the acidity of carbonic acid by 1,000 times: “Although the concentration of CO2(aq) far exceeds that of dissolved H2CO3 (in the order of 10³) we denote the concentration of all dissolved CO2 by [H2CO3]” – from section 9.2 of CHEMISTRY OF CARBONIC ACID IN WATER at http://www-naweb.iaea.org/napc/ih/documents/global_cycle/vol%20I/cht_i_09.pdf

Well geoengineering is still happening. What about that and how do we stop it? Who is in charge of this spraying of the skies? Why is it happening then?