Inconvenient study: Methane seepage from the Arctic seabed has been occurring for millions of years

Despite the ever present wailing from green activists that we are sitting on a “methane catastrophe”, it’s simply business as usual for Earth in the Arctic. Even Dr. Gavin Schmidt of NASA GISS thinks the issue is “implausible”. This study further confirms that the issue is just another emotional overblown green issue of no merit.

Methane seepage from the Arctic seabed occurring for millions of years

From the Center for Arctic Gas Hydrate, Climate and Environment

Methane gas flares, up to 800 meters high, rise from the Arctic Ocean floor. That is the size of the tallest building in the world, Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Golden Gate Bridge becomes a miniature, in this visual comparison. Video illustration: Aleksei Portnov, phd.
Methane gas flares, up to 800 meters high, rise from the Arctic Ocean floor. That is the size of the tallest building in the world, Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Golden Gate Bridge becomes a miniature, in this visual comparison. Video illustration: Aleksei Portnov, phd.

We worry about greenhouse gas methane. Its lifetime in the atmosphere is much shorter than CO2´s, but the impact of methane on climate change is over 20 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period. 60 percent of the methane in the atmosphere comes from emissions from human activities.

But methane is a natural gas, gigatonnes of it trapped under the ocean floor in the Arctic.

And it is leaking. And it has been leaking for longer time than the humans have roamed the Earth.

“Our planet is leaking methane gas all the time. If you go snorkeling in the Caribbean you can see bubbles raising from the ocean floor at 25 meters depth. We studied this type of release, only in a much deeper, colder and darker environment. And found out that it has been going on, periodically, for as far back as 2,7 million years.” says Andreia Plaza Faverola, researcher at Centre for Arctic Gas Hydrate, Environment and Climate, and the primary author behind a new paper in Geophysical Research Letters.

She is talking about Vestnesa Ridge in Fram Strait, a thousand meters under the Arctic Ocean surface offshore West-Svalbard. Here, enormous – 800 meters high – gas flares rise from the seabed today. That’s the size of the tallest manmade structure in the world – Burj Khalifa in Dubai.

“Half of Vestnesa Ridge is showing very active seepage of methane. The other half is not. But there are obvious pockmarks on the inactive half, cavities and dents in the ocean floor, that we recognized as old seepage features. So we were wondering what activates, or deactivates, the seepage in this area.,” says Plaza Faverola.

Why 2,7 million years?

She, and a team of marine geophysicists from CAGE, used the P-Cable technology , to figure it out. It is a seismic instrument that is towed behind a research vessel. It recorded the sediments beneath these pockmarks. P-Cable renders images that look like layers of a cake. It also enables scientists to visualize deep sediments in 3D.

” We know from other studies in the region that the sediments we are looking at in our seismic data are at least 2.7 million years old. This is the period of increase of glaciations in the Northern Hemisphere, which influences the sediment.. The P-Cable enabled us to see features in this sediment, associated with gas release in the past . ”

“These features can be buried pinnacles or cavities that form what we call gas chimneys in the seismic data. Gas chimneys appear like vertical disturbances in the layers of our sedimentary cake. This enables us to reconstruct the evolution of gas expulsion from this area for at least 2,7 million years.” says Andreia Plaza Faverola.

The seismic signal penetrated into 400 to 500 meters of sediment to map this timescale.

How is the methane released?

By using this method, scientists were able to identify two major events of gas emission throughout this time period: One 1,8 million years ago, the other 200 000 years ago.

This means that there is something that activated and deactivated the emissions several times. Plaza Faverola´s paper gives a plausible explanation: It is the movement of the tectonic plates that influences the gas release. Vestnesa is not like California though, riddled with earthquakes because of the moving plates. The ridge is on a so-called passive margin. But as it turns out, it doesn´t take a huge tectonic shift to release the methane stored under the ocean floor.

“Even though Vestnesa Ridge is on a passive margin, it is between two oceanic ridges that are slowly spreading. These spreading ridges resulted in separation of Svalbard from Greenland and opening of the Fram Strait. The spreading influences the passive margin of West-Svalbard, and even small mechanical collapse in the sediment can trigger seepage.” says Faverola.

Where does the methane come from?

The methane is stored as gas hydrates, chunks of frozen gas and water, up to hundreds of meters under the ocean floor. Vestnesa hosts a large gas hydrate system. There is some concern that global warming of the oceans may melt this icy gas and release it into the atmosphere. That is not very likely in this area, according to Andreia Plaza Faverola.

” This is a deep water gas hydrate system, which means that it is in permanently cold waters and under a lot of pressure. This pressure keeps the hydrates stable and the whole system is not vulnerable to global temperature changes. But under the stable hydrates there is gas that is not frozen. The amount of this gas may increase if hydrates melt at the base of this stability zone, or if gas from deeper in the sediments arrives into the system. This could increase the pressure in this part of the system, and the free gas may escape the seafloor through chimneys. Hydrates would still remain stable in this scenario .”

Historical methane peaks coincide with increase in temperature

Throughout Earth´s history there have been several short periods of significant increase in temperature. And these periods often coincide with peaks of methane in the atmosphere , as recorded by ice cores. Scientists such as Plaza Faverola are still debating about the cause of this methane release in the past.

” One hypotheses is that massive gas release from geological sources, such as volcanos or ocean sediments may have influenced global climate.. What we know is that there is a lot of methane released at present time from the ocean floor. What we need to find out is if it reaches the atmosphere, or if it ever did.”

Historical events of methane release, such as the ones in the Vestnesa Ridge, provide crucial information that can be used in future climate modeling. Knowing if these events repeat, and identifying what makes them happen, may help us to better predict the potential influence of methane from the oceans on future climate.

###

Reference: Role of tectonic stress in seepage evolution along the gas hydrate-charged Vestnesa Ridge, Fram Strait. A.Plaza Faverola, S.Bünz, J.E.Johnson, S. Chand, J. Knies, J. Mienert and P. Franek. Geophysical Research Letters. 2015.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL062474/abstract

Abstract

Methane expulsion from the world ocean floor is a broadly observed phenomenon known to be episodic. Yet the processes that modulate seepage remain elusive. In the Arctic offshore west Svalbard, for instance, seepage at 200–400 m water depth may be explained by ocean temperature-controlled gas hydrate instabilities at the shelf break, but additional processes are required to explain seepage in permanently cold waters at depths >1000 m. We discuss the influence of tectonic stress on seepage evolution along the ~100 km long hydrate-bearing Vestnesa Ridge in Fram Strait. High-resolution P-Cable 3-D seismic data revealed fine-scale (>10 m width) near-vertical faults and fractures controlling seepage distribution. Gas chimneys record multiple seepage events coinciding with glacial intensification and active faulting. The faults document the influence of nearby tectonic stress fields in seepage evolution along this deepwater gas hydrate system for at least the last ~2.7 Ma.

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

133 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gregory
February 6, 2015 10:37 am

We need to get our there and capture that methane for the good of the planet 😉

EW3
Reply to  Gregory
February 6, 2015 11:08 am

Bingo!

johnmarshall
Reply to  Gregory
February 7, 2015 2:55 am

Then burn it for electricity and warmth.

Jimbo
Reply to  johnmarshall
February 7, 2015 7:28 am

Sorry to put this comment here but it is a timely warning to the media about running scare stories over premature methane ejection. Nafeez Ahmed ran an earlier story, then Warmists came in on the attack over catastrophic methane release.

Guardian – 5 September 2013
So Tobis is wrong in assuming that the carbon release scenarios the paper is discussing are only CO2 – that isn’t specified, so I’d assumed the paper was open on whether the 50-100 Gt emissions were methane or carbon.
This was a mistake, however. The paper makes clear that although the scenarios are not clear on the precise quantification of carbon dioxide compared to methane releases from permafrost thawing, methane releases would be only be a small percentage of the overall carbon release scenarios explored. So Tobis is ultimately correct – the paper does not back up the specific scenario endorsed as likely by the Nature paper. I stand corrected on that.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/sep/05/jury-out-arctic-methane-catastrophe-risk-real

Note to media: Sceptics exist for reasons like the above. We don’t swallow, we spit. 😉

February 6, 2015 10:37 am

So the bottom line is, we don’t have to stop eating cows? Right?

Mac the Knife
Reply to  Nuke Pro
February 6, 2015 12:13 pm

Right. We don’t have to stop cows from eating either.

Reply to  Mac the Knife
February 6, 2015 12:25 pm

But remember what killed the dinosaurs after baked beans night.

simple-touriste
Reply to  Nuke Pro
February 6, 2015 12:33 pm
tadchem
February 6, 2015 10:46 am

“But under the stable hydrates there is gas that is not frozen. ”
Methane forms hydrates when it contacts water under 55° F (12.8° C). Elevated pressure accelerates this. Methane hydrate is a continuing problem in natural gas pipelines, where substances such as methanol are added to prevent the water from forming the clathrate ‘cages’ around the methane molecules.
If there is ‘gas that is not frozen’ below the hydrates, it must be dry down there because it is certainly cold and pressurized, and there isn’t any methanol.

Reply to  tadchem
February 6, 2015 3:10 pm

Since temperature below the seafloor increases with depth, the hydrate formation zone is limited to around 100 meters of sediment. see: Cold Seeps and Methane Hydrates.

GeeJam
February 6, 2015 10:48 am

As many WUWT regulars have already pointed out, ‘Methane’ will almost certainly be the new ‘CO2’ over the next couple of years. The CAGW ‘Sophists’ have a truck load of egg on their faces – they will be in total denial as, as yet, they have no real hard examples where recent ‘global warming caused by CO2’ has actually jumped out and gone Boo! Even temperate Spain has deep snow right now. The nice thing for us Climate ‘Realists’ is that there is considerably less atmospheric Methane (0.002%) to CO2 (0.04%). This is an excellent trumping point for additional incessant debate.

asybot
Reply to  ren
February 8, 2015 2:08 am

wow, snow falling in the winter along the mountains in northern Italy, parts of France, Switzerland and Austria I am sure the ski hills are pretty happy. Is this phenom any different than other years? Was there a methane release in the Mediterranean Sea we don’t know about? Sorry I am just getting frustrated with all the 0.01 degree with +/- 0.05 degree margin of error discussions to me the nit picking is getting out of control the warmists are getting desperate and as someone else mentioned I hope methane does become the next boondoggle we have to go through.

CaligulaJones
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 10:53 am

“‘Methane’ will almost certainly be the new ‘CO2′ over the next couple of years”
Wait till the read the not-so-fine print about water vapour…

LeeHarvey
Reply to  CaligulaJones
February 6, 2015 12:24 pm

Oh… please.
I can’t wait for the first congressional hearing where some idiot calls for an immediate reduction of anthropogenic water vapor emissions.
I think the debate will actually be over at that point.

Bryan A
Reply to  CaligulaJones
February 6, 2015 12:38 pm

“‘Methane’ will almost certainly be the new ‘CO2′ over the next couple of years”
Wait till the read the not-so-fine print about water vapour…
It certainly will just add oxygen O2 O2 O2 and lightning and
CH4 becomes (1)CO2 and (4)H2O

RockyRoad
Reply to  CaligulaJones
February 7, 2015 9:38 am

I can see California banning ALL swimming pools even though they sit just east of the largest body of water on the planet.
Connecting the dots isn’t one of their strong points.

Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 10:57 am

Geejam, not just Northern Spain, we have friends on the Costa del Sol who have told us the temperature tonight is 0 Celsius.

Jimbo
Reply to  andrewmharding
February 6, 2015 2:00 pm

NORTHERN SPAIN reported yesterday on the BBC. Spanish children won’t know what snow is.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/80802000/jpg/_80802553_db7f9057-0de7-4dce-b5b2-d5b307eb557d.jpg

GeeJam
Reply to  andrewmharding
February 6, 2015 3:55 pm

Jimbo, after almost 15 years, excerpts from the ‘Independent’ prediction on 20th March 2000 probably now need editing. I suggest . . . .
Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, said ‘within a few years winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event” now reads “Dr David Viner posseses an articulate sphincter”.
“. . . . snow is starting to disappear from our lives” and “. . . . “fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks” now reads “dried and crumbled in large amounts, the infusion of the Liberty Cap (Psilocybe semilanceata) into boiling water creates a hallucinogenic ‘tea’ which causes stupor, psychedelic nomenclature, makes you feel happy and you giggle lots.”

RoHa
Reply to  andrewmharding
February 6, 2015 6:17 pm

So the global warmers were right! Now Britain has got a climate like Southern Spain, just as they promised.

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 11:16 am

lol, apparently, so, but, never fear, that methane flash in the pan chicanery will soon dissipate into oblivion, heh, heh, HEH!
***********
Why methane (besides the obvious that it’s easily linked to petroleum production)?
Why because….. it sounds a WHOLE lot more like “Man Bear Pig.” Mm, hm.
MethaneMANBEARPIGmethaneMANBEARPIGISREAL!

“I’m super — cereal.
The End.”
Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
#(:))

Jimbo
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 1:03 pm

When I heared about the methane time-bomb from the Arctic I thought to myself “maybe methane has always been leaking…..” Then I said this has to be a scare story. And yest it is.
There WAS no methane bomb (or sustained spike) when the Arctic was largely ice free during periods of the early-Holocene summers. Even Gavin Schmidt concurred.

Abstract – 2007
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 – December 2010
The combined sea ice data suggest that the seasonal 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 – 1993
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.gsapubs.org/content/21/3/227.short
======================
Abstract – July 2010
….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,…
DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.02.010

Janice Moore
Reply to  Jimbo
February 6, 2015 2:06 pm

Thank you, Jimbo, for more of your non-stop, powerful, refutation.

Brandon Gates
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 3:09 am

Jimbo,

When I heared about the methane time-bomb from the Arctic I thought to myself “maybe methane has always been leaking…..” Then I said this has to be a scare story. And yest it is.

It would be nice if your list of excellent citations of good scientists doing brilliant honest work, you’d provide some references to the first “scare story” you heard so that everyone can decide for themselves whether the messaging was scary, false … whatever … as you say. And further, so that we know where to direct our specific complaints if we feel such is warranted.

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 5:23 am

Brandon Gates
February 7, 2015 at 3:09 am

Jimbo,
When I heared about the methane time-bomb from the Arctic I thought to myself “maybe methane has always been leaking…..” Then I said this has to be a scare story. And yest it is.

It would be nice if your list of excellent citations of good scientists doing brilliant honest work, you’d provide some references to the first “scare story” you heard so that everyone can decide for themselves whether the messaging was scary, false … whatever … as you say. And further, so that we know where to direct our specific complaints if we feel such is warranted.

No problem. To be precise it would be the first “scare story” I read. The first I cannot recall as there have been many.

Dec 15, 2004
Methane Burps: Ticking Time Bomb
by John Atcheson, originally published by Baltimore Sun (Common Dreams)
=====
Bangor Daily News – Sep 29, 2008
Arctic Methane Releases Worse Than Financial Crisis
=====
New Scientist – 25 March 2009
Fred Pearce
Meltdown: the Arctic armageddon
Forget polar bears, the rapid warming in the Arctic could be a catastrophe for us all. Fred Pearce reports

I’ll get you some more right away.

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 5:32 am

Brandon Gates, here are some more methane scare stories.

Guardian – 24 July 2013
Ice-free Arctic in two years heralds methane catastrophe – scientist
Professor Peter Wadhams, co-author of new Nature paper on costs of Arctic warming, explains the danger of inaction
========
Arctic News – October 18, 2013
Unfolding Methane Catastrophe
========
Arctic News – 9th February, 2012
Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm
Abstract
Although the sudden high rate Arctic methane increase at Svalbard in late 2010 data set applies to only a short time interval, similar sudden methane concentration peaks…..

The funny thing is Brandon, that even the Guardian and other outlets began running stories questioning the earlier alarm. I will give you these too right after this comment.

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 5:34 am

Brandon, here are some articles questioning the earlier alarm. Please don’t ask me to find you more as I think I satisfied your first request. Have a nice day.
Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/sep/05/jury-out-arctic-methane-catastrophe-risk-real
MotherJones
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/08/arctic-methane-hydrate-catastrophe
New York Times
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/20/arctic-methane-is-catastrophe-imminent/?_r=0

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 5:56 am

New Scientist
Meltdown: the Arctic armageddon
Forget polar bears, the rapid warming in the Arctic could be a catastrophe for us all. Fred Pearce reports
Can be found below

New Scientist – 25 March 2009
Arctic meltdown is a threat to humanity
by Fred Pearce
Magazine issue 2701. Subscribe
I AM shocked, truly shocked,” says Katey Walter, an ecologist at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. “I was in Siberia a few weeks ago, and I am now just back in from the field in Alaska. The permafrost is melting fast all over the Arctic, lakes are forming everywhere and methane is bubbling up out of them.”
Back in 2006, in a paper in Nature, Walter warned that as the permafrost in Siberia melted, growing methane emissions could accelerate climate change. But even she was not expecting such a rapid change. “Lakes in Siberia are five times bigger than when I measured them in 2006. It’s unprecedented. This is a global event now, and the inertia for more permafrost melt is increasing.” …..
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127011.500-arctic-meltdown-is-a-threat-to-humanity.html

As you can see from all the earlier references it is NOT unprecedented. These people are living in cloud cookoo land, spreading scare stories, when they, as the experts, should know better than even me. Economical with the truth are the only word that comes to mind.

richardscourtney
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 5:57 am

Jimbo
Thankyou! That was brilliant! Tears of laughter are flowing down my face.
A better trouncing of the egregious Brandon Gates is hard to imagine.
Again, thankyou.
Richard

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 6:47 am

richardscourtney
February 7, 2015 at 5:57 am
Jimbo
Thankyou! That was brilliant! Tears of laughter are flowing down my face.
A better trouncing of the egregious Brandon Gates is hard to imagine.
Again, thankyou.
Richard

Richard, had Brandon been paying attention over the years he would not have bothered asking me for references. The Arctic methane fairy tale has been told to death. I could have given him many more references but what’s the point?
Here is something worth reading from last Spring.

Methane: The Irrelevant Greenhouse Gas
Dr. Tom Sheahen
April 11, 2014
…..Looking at the second graph in the figure, methane (CH4) has narrow absorption bands at 3.3 microns and 7.5 microns (the red lines). CH4 is 20 times more effective an absorber than CO2 – in those bands. However, CH4 is only 0.00017% (1.7 parts per million) of the atmosphere. Moreover, both of its bands occur at wavelengths where H2O is already absorbing substantially. Hence, any radiation that CH4 might absorb has already been absorbed by H2O. The ratio of the percentages of water to methane is such that the effects of CH4 are completely masked by H2O. The amount of CH4 must increase 100-fold to make it comparable to H2O……
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/11/methane-the-irrelevant-greenhouse-gas/

Brandon Gates
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 1:09 pm

Jimbo,
Thank you for your prompt and complete answer to my call for references. It will take some time to read through them, though a cursory skimming reveals pretty much my memory of them at the time. Which for me was, holy shit, scary.

Brandon Gates
Reply to  Jimbo
February 7, 2015 1:21 pm

richardscourtney,

A better trouncing of the egregious Brandon Gates is hard to imagine.

Really? Jimbo gave me exactly what I requested, and promptly so, which is far more than I can say for you, for whom I have to drag it out amidst much ado about me being “daft” for even asking. As for scare stories, you sell a different brand of it: fear of those whom you don’t like. Well, I don’t like you much either, but I’m still trying to save your unpleasant hide from your own foolishness without scaring the bejezus out of everyone in the process by making rational appeals to good science. Perhaps you see yourself trying to accomplish the same mission, but from where I’m sitting I don’t see it. Mutual suspicion does abound in this debate I suppose, and I am as human as any.

mpainter
Reply to  Jimbo
February 8, 2015 2:26 am

Brandon Gates 2-7 -15; 1:09 pm.
admits that he was familiar with the alarmist junk science on methane scares which he, in a previous comment, pretended ignorance of and so demanded that Jimbo provide references in regard to.

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 8, 2015 9:34 am

Brandon Gates, consider another line of evidence. There is now tundra where there used to be trees.

Abstract
….Here we present palaeoecological evidence for changes in terrestrial vegetation and lake characteristics during an episode of climate warming that occurred between 5,000 and 4,000 years ago at the boreal treeline in central Canada. The initial transformation — from tundra to forest-tundra on land, which coincided with increases in lake productivity, pH and ratio of inflow to evaporation — took only 150 years, which is roughly equivalent to the time period often used in modelling the response of boreal forests to climate warming5,6. The timing of the treeline advance did not coincide with the maximum in high-latitude summer insolation predicted by Milankovitch theory7,….
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v361/n6409/abs/361243a0.html
Abstract
……Tree birches (Betula pubescens Ehrh., B. pendula Roth.) reached the present-day shoreline of Barents Sea in Bolshezemelskaya tundra and 72°N in Taimyr between 8000 and 9000 BP……
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1552004?uid=2&uid=4&sid=00000000000000
Abstract
The palynological record of Late-Quaternary arctic tree-line in northwest Canada
Open woodlands with black spruce grew as far north as Sleet Lake from 8400 to 3500 yr BP. These woodlands gradually retreated to just south of Reindeer Lake during the late Holocene….
doi: dx.doi.org/10.1016/0034-6667(93)90040-2
Abstract
Holocene pollen stratigraphy indicating climatic and tree-line changes derived from a peat section at Ortino, in the Pechora lowland, northern Russia
….Trees and a climate warmer than at present persisted until c. 3000 14C yr BP, when forests disappeared and modern dwarf-shrub tundra vegetation developed.
http://hol.sagepub.com/content/10/5/611.short

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
February 8, 2015 9:47 am

Brandon Gates
February 7, 2015 at 1:09 pm
Jimbo,
Thank you for your prompt and complete answer to my call for references. It will take some time to read through them, though a cursory skimming reveals pretty much my memory of them at the time. Which for me was, holy shit, scary.

If you look closely you will see that one of the people spewing out the methane alarm is the Arctic sea ice specialist Professor Peter Wadhams. Gavin Schmidt rightly says that there is no record of a major methane excursion during the largely ice free period of the Holocene Climate Optimum summers which lasted for a millennium or more.
Why was I not at all worried about Professor Peter Wadhams‘ irresponsible scare stories. Because he does not like to own it when shown to be a fool. He predicted an ‘ice-free’ Arctic ocean THIS YEAR or next year AT THE LATEST. Read here. He then changed it to 2020 and gave no reason for his change of heart. This is the kind of nonsense I am fighting against. It is irresponsible to put out scare stories to the media and getting people unduly worried.
Yet I am called the ‘D’ word by some people. How sad for us all.

logos_wrench
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 8:31 pm

What are you talking about? The science is settled the debate is over or haven’t you received the crazy assed memo?

February 6, 2015 10:53 am

The coincidence of global warming events with methane release could be due to increased plate tectonic activity initiated by gravitational forcing from cyclical orbital variations (Milankovitch rhythms). Associated increased terrestrial volcanism would release hydrogen chloride, which would deplete ozone, allowing increased solar UV-B irradiance and consequent warming. See ozonedepletiontheory.info for further discussion on this.

Jimbo
Reply to  David Bennett Laing
February 6, 2015 1:53 pm

David Bennett Laing, I think the volcanism and orbital variations was covered to some degree yesterday.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/05/inconvenient-study-seafloor-volcano-pulses-may-alter-climate-models-may-be-wrong/

Janice Moore
February 6, 2015 11:04 am

… another emotional overblown green issue of no merit.

A. Watts
“And a nation is left to wonder
how they possibly could have been so gullible.”
“War of the Worlds” — Orson Welles Oct. 31, 1938 (youtube)

GeeJam
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 6, 2015 11:18 am

Hey Janice, I’m so glad you’ve popped by. I’ve missed your comments for a while. I need some help (see below).
Question: Leaving ‘You Tube’ URL’s aside (as they upload automatically), how do you insert an image/photo in to your WUWT comments in word press. I’ve tried and tried – but WordPress just ‘strips-out’ the URL. I’ve seen many great comments from you – enhanced with an embedded image to emphasise your point. Please help me (and other regulars too).
By the way, I’m the one who posted that comprehensive list of all the ways we manufacture CO2 that you was so interested in seeing a couple of years back. Remember.
GeeJam

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 11:41 am

Hi, GeeJam!
Oh, WOW — a question for ME! COOL. I can answer it, too!
I just learned how about a month ago.
1. Double left click on a photo (from any web page) — to make its http deal appear in the navigation bar at top of page.
2. Single left click on the “http:// blah, blah, blah” web address at top of page (to highlight it).
3. Type CTRL-c (that is, the Ctrl key simultaneously with the letter c).
4. In WUWT comment box, type, CTRL-v.
Wordpress will convert the http deal into the photo (I usually test it — still unsure… but, the test page would not materialize (or I’m too impatient) for me just now, so…. here goes!
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=golden+retriever+photos&qpvt=Golden+Retriever+photos&qpvt=Golden+Retriever+photos&FORM=IQFRML#view=detail&id=04AFE709E0D570E50D5247466715E8F9D1E3F1DA&selectedIndex=56
Great to hear from you, GJ (and SO nice to know I’ve been missed by someone, here — just busy trying to find a job :(.) I’ve wondered if you’ve made any headway on the CO2 Truth Primer project. You would do a FINE job at that with your writing skill. We NEED such a thing. And how is your Golden (or whatever breed dog you and your wife regularly walk if I’m misremembering)?
Take care, over there! #(:))
Janice

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 11:43 am

Well! I messed up! I’ll go test my method (grr) and get back to you.

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 11:48 am

How to Post a Photo on WUWT:
1. RIGHT click on photo.
2. In drop-down menu, LEFT click on “Copy”
3. In WUWT comment box, Type: “CTRL-v”
I did what I do to place photos into e mails (blush).

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 12:03 pm

Okay. Gee Jam? I was wrong (apparently).
I’ve been testing both of my methods on the WUWT “Test” page and now NEITHER one is working. I don’t know why.
Suggestion: Ask Ric Werme (click on his “Guide to WUWT” in right hand margin of this page — his e mail is in there. Ask him. The “instructions” I saw printed somewhere on WUWT were not specific enough to be helpful, imo.).

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 12:14 pm

Well, dear Gee Jam, since this is a slow thread, here is the result of my FIRST method (at 11:41am today) which has now worked TWICE on Test and faild one time here … so far…
Golden Retriever same photo second attempt with same method as at 11:41am:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-biznduk2iuQ/UCyoyi6RbnI/AAAAAAAAOow/04A8e_H6WW8/s1600/Golden+Retriever4.jpg

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 12:15 pm

Use the 11:41am method (kinda shaky, but, it works on and off — SO WEIRD!). Test first!

GeeJam
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 12:46 pm

Right Janice. Here goes. hope it comes out.
http://i.imgur.com/eBjAUHV.jpg
CO2 in relation to all other gas.

GeeJam
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 1:10 pm

Bingo Janice. A huge huge thank you . . . . and well done for remembering our Golden Retriever. I am humbled when you say “You do a FINE job with your writing skills”. Like everyone else here, we all care so passionately about the AGW deception (see one of my recent comments below).
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/02/shock-study-results-calling-climate-skeptics-deniers-just-pisses-them-off/#comment-1851055
Trust it’s not too cold over there. It’s chilly here and just gone 9.10pm tonight – so time to replenish the Sauv Blanc. You’re probably just having your lunch.

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 1:22 pm

CONGRATULATIONS!!! #(:))
(and excellent graphic)

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 1:50 pm

… and (your 1:10pm comment appeared AFTER my later one… WordPress is so weird…) Well said, and hear, hear! to your Feb. 3 linked comment. You might try submitting that to an online publication, even a monthly newsletter for an organization with which you or a friend are affiliated would be good. ALL truth spoken does some good! It all adds up.
Keep on writing!
(and give your dog a love from me — dogs are the best)
Yup. I’m LATE (and kind of cranky about it, too) to get to my lunch.
Bye!

PhilCP
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 3:43 pm

Geejam,
Uhoh. That graph is pretty but appears to be wrong. 5 ounces in 3200 gallons is 0.0012%. CO2 is 400ppm which is 0.04%

Janice Moore
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 4:48 pm

Hi, Phil C. P.,
Until Gee J (it is about 1:42AM where he is, I’m pretty sure) replies, my thought is: the graphic depicts human CO2 emissions (and, if that is still not small enough, the graph may be just for U.S. CO2 emissions). Natural CO2 emissions outweigh human by a factor of 2.
— Native Sources of CO2 = 150 (96%) gigatons/yr
— Human CO2 = 5 (4%) gtons/yr
[At about 36:34 on the video of Dr. Murry Salby’s 2013 Hamburg lecture posted below on this thread, here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/06/inconvenient-study-methane-seepage-from-the-arctic-seabed-has-been-occurring-for-millions-of-years/#comment-1853842 ]
Janice

GeeJam
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 5:02 pm

PhilCP, thank you for raising the query, I see where you’re coming from, but sadly you’ve misread the information. The image attempts to emphasise the amount of man-made CO2 only, not the total amount of atmospheric CO2.
The image was created shortly before 10th May 2013 when global warming alarmists sensationalised the fact that during the last 40 years, CO2 levels had increased from 314 parts per million (0.0314%) to 400 parts per million (0.04%).
So, 0.0314% of 3,200 imperial gallons is one gallon. Thus, in total, there is only 1 gallon of CO2 to every 3,200 gallons of atmosphere.
We know that there are 8 x pints in 1 x imperial gallon and that there are 20 fl.oz. in 1 x pint.
Of that 8 pints of total CO2, naturally occurring Carbon Dioxide accounts for 96.775%*, whilst the remaining 3.225% is ‘our fault’.
So, 96.775% (Natural CO2) of 8 pints is 7.75 pints, which leaves a quarter of a pint (or 5 fl.oz) that is caused by man.
The diagram is correct. For every 3,200 gallons of atmosphere, only 5 fl.oz. of it is anthropogenic CO2. Remarkable but true.
I trust this clarifies your query.
* http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
Ref: Section 4 ‘Comparing natural vs man-made concentrations of greenhouse gases’.

GeeJam
Reply to  GeeJam
February 6, 2015 5:10 pm

Janice, for reference, it’s just gone 1.00 am in the wee small hours of Saturday morning.

ren
February 6, 2015 11:04 am

You can see that in the Arctic ice is more than last year.
http://www.climate4you.com/images/RecentSnowCoverEuropeAsia.gif

February 6, 2015 11:06 am

If the Global Warming people forgotten to learn in School – they DO have problem…
But it’s their problem. Not others.
Where have all the money gone?

Janice Moore
Reply to  norah4you
February 6, 2015 11:28 am

Well, Ms. Norah, that’s easy: they obviously DRANK it ALL.
“…. when will they ever learn? When will they… e–ver— learn?”
(I know what era of music is YOUR favorite (smile))
Well, like NEVER, apparently. Just gotta sideline them (with a glass of whatever) and keep movin’ the ball of truth down the field — GO, ANTHON-Y!
*************************
btw: This year, your wonderful genuine scientist dad would have been 100, if I’m not mistaken. Your science blog (https://norah4science.wordpress.com/) is a GREAT tribute to him! He would (perhaps, IS :)) been so proud.

Reply to  Janice Moore
February 6, 2015 12:49 pm

Yes my dad would have been 100 February 24th…..
my mother had her 99th Birthday late January. Unfortunately she has alzheimer and demens. But she always recognise me and she is at a wonderful place where she and the others can have breakfast anytime they want between 7 and 11. Wonderful people working there, and above all she loves it.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 6, 2015 1:39 pm

Dear Norah,
That is too bad about your mom, but… that she still knows you (and is not paranoid and suspicious of you as can happen) is wonderful. Glad she is well cared for. Wow, what genes! You’ll be keeping the quality of the comments on WUWT threads at high level until the “pause” becomes “The Great Chill”…. and … then, beyond to (after ENSO, etc… once again warms the earth overall) …. and an old familiar refrain is sounded … “The Earth is About to Explode
(due to too many people walking around, disturbing the soil …. so you must all go live in this pr–…… er… “village” …. where you can only walk within its 100 meter square area…)
— We Must Control the People and We Must Have More MONEY!”…
“There is nothing new under the sun.” Solomon.
Take care — and keep warm!
Janice

February 6, 2015 11:06 am

Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
Hmmm…. Yet another climate-alarmist “We’re doomed” moment called into serious question.

Janice Moore
February 6, 2015 11:07 am

Take heart, HOWEVER, dear Allies for Truth! #(:))
“… convinced, if only briefly.”
Truth wins.
Every time.

Eamon Butler
Reply to  Janice Moore
February 6, 2015 3:55 pm

Hi Janice,
I too would like to add a ”warm” welcome back to you.
Best regards, Eamon

Janice Moore
Reply to  Eamon Butler
February 6, 2015 5:01 pm

Eamon, me fine Irrreeesh Writer for Truth (last time, the truth about that excellent source of energy: Nuclear Power)!
VERY good to hear from you! #(:)) And, thanks. Keep up all that commenting in the face of all that stoney, glazed-over-eyed, staring back at you. SOMEONE (likely several “someones” ARE reading you with comprehension and thinking….. .). Each little photon of light brightens the darkness of ignorance — many photons add up to: ILLUMINATION! Truth SHALL prevail. You are not alone. Thanks to small but SIGNIFICANT efforts of many (like you!), the CO2 Cult is on the margins of the battlefield (slithering away from the light, into the dark corners…. where rats live). Stalwart wielders of the pen like you will keep them there.
Waving at you from the west coast of the U.S.,
Janice

February 6, 2015 11:08 am

Reblogged this on Norah4you's Weblog and commented:
So the green activists want more money without doing proper scientific studies or any other work?
Well, I for one think it’s time for the children (hm excuse green activists) to grow up.

Latitude
February 6, 2015 11:19 am

So we were wondering what activates, or deactivates, the seepage in this area.,” says Plaza Faverola
====
just ask a marine biologist how marine sediments work….ammonification, nitrification, denitrification, sulfurization
The world wouldn’t work if it didn’t load and unload

Dawtgtomis
February 6, 2015 11:27 am

Well… I expect future news from NASA on the creation of The Orbiting Methane Observatory (OMO). Go for the money, guys.

michael hart
February 6, 2015 11:32 am

The science may be bollocks, but the animated graphics and pretty pictures are often what captures peoples minds, beliefs, and funding. I’m not joking. It happens in other disciplines too.

DD More
February 6, 2015 11:35 am

Here, enormous – 800 meters high – gas flares rise from the seabed today.
But since it is in water over 1,000 meters deep, it is still absorbed by the water. Still not getting into the air.

Janice Moore
Reply to  DD More
February 6, 2015 11:51 am

Slam — DUNK!
Case closed.

Walt Allensworth
Reply to  DD More
February 6, 2015 12:02 pm

Sounds too simple.
So you’re saying that methane is absorbed into the water then doesn’t, at some time later, get released into the air from the water?
I have no idea one way or the other, but would love to understand this process better.
If in fact the methane that is absorbed into the water stays absorbed and does not ever get into the air, well, that’s a powerful argument against the alarmists.
Are there any references on this supporting your assertion?

Janice Moore
Reply to  Walt Allensworth
February 6, 2015 12:21 pm

Dear Mr. Allensworth,
There is an even simpler answer to this latest hot air from the windmill promoters (they are the main beneficiaries of the fra-ud) which requires no knowledge of methane’s properties at all:
1. Processes that have been going on for thousands of years and haven’t “blown up the planet” are not likely to do so — ever.
2. Even IF, ad argumentum, they will…. there is not a THING we humans can do about it.

Reply to  Walt Allensworth
February 6, 2015 12:34 pm

Some bugs emit methane.
Some consume methane.
That’s not surprising when you think about it. Why would nothing manage to find away to exploit that niche?
Link to Wikipedia on Methanotrophs. The references section looks quite good but some are paywalled.

JJM Gommers
Reply to  Walt Allensworth
February 6, 2015 2:14 pm

Critical pressure is around 45 bar if I remember well, pressure release at bottom is 100 bar supercritical, if there is no chemical reaction it will be released to the atmosphere at the surface.

asybot
Reply to  Walt Allensworth
February 8, 2015 2:27 am

Let’s just make sure that before you light a match the cows are in another pasture.

Dawtgtomis
February 6, 2015 12:06 pm

This article by Alfred Wegener Institute touches on ocean surface methane emission as well as absorption:
http://www.awi.de/en/research/research_divisions/geosciences/marine_geochemistry/research_themes/methane_in_high_latitudes/methane_from_submarine_sources/
Here is a paper on Solubility of methane in distilled water and seawater:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/je60068a029
I’m no chemist, but I thought somebody might find this stuff useful.

Dawtgtomis
Reply to  Dawtgtomis
February 6, 2015 12:22 pm

Here’s one that’s not pay-walled that is related: Methane emission from high-intensity marine gas seeps in the Black Sea into the atmosphere
http://users.ugent.be/~jgreiner/papers/Schmale_etal_2005_GRL.pdf
And, (believe it or don’t)
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n5/abs/ngeo1452.html

Paul Linsay
February 6, 2015 12:30 pm

Methane’s effect as a radiative gas is completely swamped by the radiative effects of H2O. It’s complete nonsense to worry about it at any level below the concentration required for ignition in your stove. Here’s a pdf with all the atmospheric gases and their absorbance:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3758743/AtmosphericTransmission.pdf

Reply to  Paul Linsay
February 6, 2015 12:37 pm

Sounds reasonable. But is methane well mixed?
If not land emissions of methane would be more significant than marine emissions
I don’t know if that’s right or not but I always suspect simple answers with respect to any aspect of the climate.

philincalifornia
Reply to  Paul Linsay
February 6, 2015 1:02 pm

Nice link Paul. If you know, how does that look in the presence of 30 – 40,000 ppm of water vapor?

Mac the Knife
February 6, 2015 12:32 pm

Here, enormous – 800 meters high – gas flares rise from the seabed today. And they call this ‘seepage’?
The abstract did not indicate if any data or estimates of mass flow rates were determined for the 800 meter high plumes of methane ‘seepage’ or how many of these plumes they encountered. I note this because it begs the question: Are these plumes releasing more or less methane than global cow flatulence and/or global termite flatulence ?
Inquiring minds need to know….

Jerry Henson
February 6, 2015 12:36 pm

Methane remains in hydrate form as long as nothing disturbs its zone of stability.
Google” Methane hydrate zone of stability” for a chart.
Reduction of water pressure, increase in temperature, vibration, or increased pressure
from below can cause the gas to pass back into a gaseous state.
Hydrocarbons are created deep in the earth and rise where they meet the least resistance.
The least resistance seems to be along fault lines, but they perk up all around the world,
but are are deflected where the shield is near the surface.
Methane hydrates are the reason for the continuing of the rise of atmospheric CH4 and C02
levels when the warm periods end and the ice returns.
As the sea levels fall, large amounts of hydrates are released from their zone of stability .
This process continues until the sea level stops falling.In a short time, the methane degrade
into CO2.
This accounts for a lag, in one instance of an observed lag of ~8000 yrs.
When the steady state returns, methane is introduced into the atmosphere at its background
level.
The large amount of CO2 observed along the fault lines or mid ocean ridges, or at volcanoes are mostly his methane being oxidized by the heat, though some methane passes through,
The “Black Smokers” which exhibit astonishing amounts of life are powered by Methanotrophs
consuming the gas at the bottom of the food chain.

Curious George
February 6, 2015 12:45 pm

Golden Gate Bridge is 2,700 m long. A nice illustration.

William Astley
February 6, 2015 12:57 pm

We need a Coles Note summary of the logic and observations that support the late Nobel Prize winning Astrophysics Thomas Gold’s assertion that the source of the hydrocarbons on the surface of the earth including ‘natural’ gas, crude oil, and black coal is from the deep earth (there are more than 50 different observations to support that Gold deep earth theory).
The source of the ocean floor CH4 and the CH4 from land sources is the core of the earth. As the earth’s core solidifies the CH4 is expelled. The super high pressure expelled liquid CH4 breaks a path through the mantel. The super high pressure liquid CH4 picks up heavy metals in solution as it moves through the mantel which explains why there are heavy metals in oil and black coal and why there are super concentrated deposits (up to a million times concentrated more than the typical mantel) of Gold, Uranium, Thorium and so forth in the mantel.
The radioactive uranium and thorium which the liquid CH4 dissolved, radioactively decays releasing Helium which explains why there is helium associated with oil deposits (the source of all commercial helium is from oil deposits). As Gold notes there is no logical reason if oil’s origin was plant life for there to be helium connected with the oil deposit and heavy metals. The helium travels through the cracks and paths in the mantel created by the liquid CH4 enabling it to rise to up to the oil deposits. If there has no mechanism to create the cracks and paths in the mantel the helium would stay with the uranium and thorium deposits.
One of the implications of the deep earth CH4 hypothesis is there is a steady large new input of new carbon (‘natural’ gas is low C13) into the biosphere which means the sinks of CO2 are larger than estimated. The implications of a large new steady input of CO2 into the biosphere and large sinks is that the anthropogenic CO2 emission is not the primary cause of the observed increase in atmospheric CO2.
An observation to support the assertion that there is a steady new stream of new CO2 into the atmosphere(CH4 disassociates in the upper atmosphere and then forms CO2 and H2O) is the fact that ratio of C13/C12 in sediments stays the same in the geological record, rather than gradually increases as plants preferentially use C12 and the fact that there are methyl hydrate deposits on the ocean floor in the Arctic. (What is the biological mechanism alternative?)
The above comments provides a mechanism/explanation to support Salby’s hypothesis that more than 50% of the recent CO2 increase in the atmosphere is due to natural CO2 release.
William: The CO2 is released from the ocean when it warms and from land due to a mechanism that causes there to be an increase in CH4 movement from the deep sources when there is a solar magnetic cycle change (slow down or increase in the solar magnetic cycle). The increase in CH4 movement explains why there is an increase in earthquakes when there is significant increase or decrease in solar magnetic cycle activity.

Gamecock
February 6, 2015 1:22 pm

But what is the methane doing to the acidity of the warming deep ocean water as sea level rises?
(Trying to fit 4 scaries into one sentence.)

Rhoda R
February 6, 2015 1:30 pm

“The increase in CH4 movement explains why there is an increase in earthquakes when there is significant increase or decrease in solar magnetic cycle activity.”
Mr Astley, am I correct in interpreting your statement to mean that solar perturbations cause earthquakes? I’m not snarking, just seeking enlightenment.

Jimbo
February 6, 2015 1:49 pm

What we know is that there is a lot of methane released at present time from the ocean floor. What we need to find out is if it reaches the atmosphere, or if it ever did.”

Does all the methane released reach the surface?

Defusing the Methane Greenhouse Time Bomb
Could methane-digesting bacteria and an Arctic cap of fresh water prevent a climate catastrophe?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/defusing-the-methane-time-bomb/
=======
Vent and Seep Communities on the Arctic Seafloor
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/essay_vogt.html

What about the methane tundra time-bomb?

Abstract
Methylobacter tundripaludum sp. nov., a methane-oxidizing bacterium from Arctic wetland soil on the Svalbard islands, Norway (78° N)
http://ijs.sgmjournals.org/content/56/1/109.short

As you can see the Earth has some specialised organisms ready to exploit these events that have been with us for eons. We even have bacteria that ‘eat’ crude oil!

Reply to  Jimbo
February 8, 2015 10:14 am

What about Dana Wigington, solar scientist, saying we are reaching a Venus Syndrome scenario if the MASSIVE GEOENGINEERING worldwide does not stop. He claims the spraying and weather modification is at a point where the industry is having to spray chemicals, use HAARP, scalar weapons etc. to keep the methane release from getting worse? geoengineeringwatch .com

Jimbo
Reply to  John wiggin
February 9, 2015 5:56 am

Tell Dana Wigington that he is denying IPCC science.

IPCC
“Some thresholds that all would consider dangerous have no support in the literature as having a non-negligible chance of occurring. For instance, a “runaway greenhouse effect” —analogous to Venus–appears to have virtually no chance of being induced by anthropogenic activities…..”
http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf
————————–
Sir John Houghton
Atmospheric physicist
Lead editor of first three IPCC reports
There is no possibility of such runaway greenhouse conditions occurring on the Earth.”
http://tinyurl.com/oqy42ej
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/68/6/R02

highflight56433
February 6, 2015 1:58 pm

Check your briefs for dreaded CH4 movement, butt don’t check to close.

highflight56433
Reply to  highflight56433
February 6, 2015 2:06 pm

…possible CH4 leakage fix…no solution however.