One more thing that is "better than we thought" – NOAA: "the atmosphere’s self-cleaning capacity is rather stable"

Yesterday we learned that the great Pacific Garbage Patch really isn’t as big as hyped by media, today we learn that the “atmosphere’s ability to rid itself of many pollutants is generally well buffered or stable”. Huh. Imagine that, the planet isn’t broken as easily as some imagine.

From a NOAA press release:

NOAA-led Research Team Takes Measure of the Variability of the Atmosphere’s Self-Cleaning Capacity

Aidan Colton.
Aidan Colton at NOAA's Mauna Loa Observatory (MLO) demonstrates how early flask samples were filled at the site. Air collected year-round at MLO and eight other remote sites around the world has been analyzed for the industrial solvent methyl chloroform. Variability in the decay of this chemical has helped scientists understand the oxidizing or cleansing power of the global atmosphere and its sensitivity to natural and human-induced perturbations.

An international, NOAA-led research team took a significant step forward in understanding the atmosphere’s ability to cleanse itself of air pollutants and some other gases, except carbon dioxide. The issue has been controversial for many years, with some studies suggesting the self-cleaning power of the atmosphere is fragile and sensitive to environmental changes, while others suggest greater stability. And what researchers are finding is that the atmosphere’s self-cleaning capacity is rather stable.

New analysis published online today in the journal Science shows that global levels of the hydroxyl radical, a critical player in atmospheric chemistry, do not vary much from year to year. Levels of hydroxyl, which help clear the atmosphere of many hazardous air pollutants and some important greenhouse gases — but not carbon dioxide — dip and rise by only a few percent every year; not by up to 25 percent, as was once estimated.

“The new hydroxyl measurements give researchers a broad view of the ‘oxidizing’ or self-cleaning capacity of the atmosphere,” said Stephen Montzka, the study’s lead author and a research chemist at the Global Monitoring Division of NOAA’s Boulder, Colo., laboratory.

“Now we know that the atmosphere’s ability to rid itself of many pollutants is generally well buffered or stable,” said Montzka. “This fundamental property of the atmosphere was one we hadn’t been able to confirm before.”

The new finding adds confidence to projections of future air pollutant loads. The hydroxyl radical, comprised of one oxygen atom and one hydrogen atom, is formed and broken down so quickly in the atmosphere that it has been extremely difficult to measure on global scales.

“In the daytime, hydroxyl’s lifetime is about one second and is present at exceedingly low concentrations,” said Montzka. “Once created, it doesn’t take long to find something to react with.”

NOAA's Patricia Lang.
NOAA's Patricia Lang prepares to measure methane levels inside a flask that is part of NOAA's global air sampling network. Network measurements, made from remote sites around the world, were critical in helping an international team of scientists understand the oxidizing or cleansing power of the global atmosphere and its sensitivity to natural and human-induced perturbations. Methane levels were a key point of comparison in the new study, published in Science.

The radical is central to the chemistry of the atmosphere. It is involved in the formation and breakdown of surface-level ozone, a lung- and crop-damaging pollutant. It also reacts with and destroys the powerful greenhouse gas methane and air pollutants including hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide. However, hydroxyl radicals do not remove carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide or chlorofluorocarbons.

To estimate variability in global hydroxyl levels — and thus the cleansing capacity of the atmosphere — researchers turned to studying longer-lived chemicals that react with hydroxyl.

The industrial chemical methyl chloroform, for example, is destroyed in the atmosphere primarily by hydroxyl radicals. By comparing levels of methyl chloroform emitted into the atmosphere with levels measured in the atmosphere, researchers can estimate the concentration of hydroxyl and how it varies from year to year.

This technique produced estimates of hydroxyl that swung wildly in the 1980s and 1990s. Researchers struggled to understand whether the ups and downs were due to errors in emissions estimates for methyl chloroform, for example, or to real swings in hydroxyl levels. The swings would be of concern: Large fluctuations in hydroxyl radicals would mean the atmosphere’s self-cleaning ability was very sensitive to human-caused or natural changes in the atmosphere.

To complicate matters, when scientists tried to measure the concentration of hydroxyl radical levels compared to other gases, such as methane, they were seeing only small variations from year to year. The same small fluctuation was occurring when scientists ran the standard global chemistry models.

An international agreement helped resolve the issue. In response to the Montreal Protocol – the international agreement to phase out chemicals that are destroying the Earth’s protective stratospheric ozone layer – production of methyl chloroform all but stopped in the mid 1990s. As a result, emissions of this potent ozone-depleting gas dropped precipitously.

Without the confounding effect of any appreciable methyl chloroform emissions, a more precise picture of hydroxyl variability emerged based on the observed decay of remaining methyl chloroform. The scientists studied hydroxyl radicals both by making measurements of methyl chloroform from NOAA’s international cooperative air sampling program and also by modeling results with state-of-the-art models.

The group’s findings improve confidence in projecting the future of Earth’s atmosphere.

“Say we wanted to know how much we’d need to reduce human-derived emissions of methane to cut its climate influence by half,” Montzka said. “That would require an understanding of hydroxyl and its variability. Since the new results suggest that large hydroxyl radical changes are unlikely, such projections become more reliable.”

Co-authors of the new paper, “Small Inter-Annual Variability of Global Atmospheric Hydroxyl,” include Maarten Krol (University of Utrecht and Wageningen University in the Netherlands); Ed Dlugokencky and Bradley Hall (NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory); Patrick Jöckel (Max-Planck-Institute for Chemistry in Mainz, Germany, and the Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany); and Jos Lelieveld (Max-Planck and the Cyprus Institute in Nicosia, Cyprus).

NOAA’s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

51 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
RichieP
January 7, 2011 2:40 am

OT but couldn’t put it in H&T as no box:
http://newmexicoindependent.com/68492/martinez-axes-all-environmental-improvement-board-members#
‘On her first day in office, Martinez had halted “all proposed and pending regulations,” which includes the cap-and-trade regulation’

LazyTeenager
January 7, 2011 3:07 am

Anthony harumphs
————
Huh. Imagine that, the planet isn’t broken as easily as some imagine
———–
identifying a potential problem and collecting evidence and finding that it’s not really a problem seems like good news to me.
Evidence beats gut feelings every time in my book. The real world I live in pays no attention to my gut feelings and mother nature has had many a surprise waiting for me.

George Lawson
January 7, 2011 3:07 am

Wonderful. It may not be the end, it may not even be the beginning of the end, but it surely is the end of the beginning!

Graham Dick
January 7, 2011 3:35 am

“the atmosphere’s ability to cleanse itself of air pollutants …. except carbon dioxide.” Well whoda thunk? Bonkers Branson to the rescue?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070216-virgin-earth.html

Grey Lensman
January 7, 2011 3:55 am

Whida thunk it indeed. Nature herself tells us clearly
whats what
quote
“the atmosphere’s ability to cleanse itself of air pollutants …. except carbon dioxide.”
Ergo co2 is not a pollutant or else it would get cleared.
QED as they say
They need to look at negative Ions and ozone as well. All part of natures armory against pollution.

Geoff Sherrington
January 7, 2011 4:03 am

People should not be surprised to find that Mother nature packs a big punch and that humans are puny. It’s nice to know that the atmosphere is resilient in this paper, but not unexpected.
Slightly off theme, but to demonstarte the power of nature, here is a clip from the Baralaba coal mine, that got too close to the flooded Dawson River in Queensland a few days ago. Baralaba open-cut mine: Mining operations commenced in July 2005. Planned production from the site is 0.5 Mtpa of metallurgical pulverised coal injection coal (PCI) and thermal coal. So the trucks you see in the video clip (thanks to Kim Wright) are not toys.
http://www.geoffstuff.com/Dawson%20River.wmv

Alexander K
January 7, 2011 4:22 am

Good cheerful stuff, Anthony.
Another bogeyman bites the dust! The carefully-knitted alarmism promoted by some so-called scientists is rapidly coming unravelled – the president of the UK’s Royal Society Dr Rees’s widely-promoted theories that the world is heading rapidly toward the end is similarly coming unravelled. Why cannot educated people be generally cheerful and constructive, instead of wishing for the apocalypse to begin now, or by next week at the latest?

Jimbo
January 7, 2011 4:30 am

An international, NOAA-led research team took a significant step forward in understanding the atmosphere’s ability to cleanse itself of air pollutants and some other gases, except carbon dioxide.

Are they saying that plants don’t take up carbon dioxide? Good to see they didn’t refer to it as a pollutant. Maybe they are getting the message.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/06/co2-is-plant-food-clean-coal-say-watt/

Jimbo
January 7, 2011 4:44 am

Here’s one more thing that is “better than we thought”

Guardian – 6 January 2011
Methane from BP oil spill eaten by microbes
Underwater bacteria had devoured nearly all the methane gas from BP’s blown-out well by August, says a study in Science”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jan/06/methane-bp-oil-spill-microbes

And another:

Reuters – Aug 24, 2010
A Manhattan-sized plume of oil spewed deep into the Gulf of Mexico by BP’s broken Macondo well has been consumed by a newly discovered fast-eating species of microbes, scientists reported on Tuesday.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67N5CC20100824

Bob Barker
January 7, 2011 4:45 am

Good news. Earth seems to have a controlling mechanism for just about everything except people’s wild imagination and fear. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is plant food and it is being cleared from the atmosphere by the Earth’s flora in copious amounts. Fortunately, it is also being replaced. We need higher levels of CO2 to grow more food-per-acre to support the Earth’s increasing fauna. That has been happening for several decades. A little warmer has not hurt either. Where is the problem? It is all a matter of perspective

tallbloke
January 7, 2011 4:48 am

“Say we wanted to know how much we’d need to reduce human-derived emissions of methane to cut its climate influence by half,” Montzka said. “That would require an understanding of hydroxyl and its variability. Since the new results suggest that large hydroxyl radical changes are unlikely, such projections become more reliable.”
And the projection would be that we don’t need to worry about human derived emissions of methane because the level of hydroxyl isn’t changing much.

January 7, 2011 5:13 am

The farmers are going to be happy about this….
No more “Beano” has to be put in the cow’s food.
Vy 73

latitude
January 7, 2011 5:31 am

“in understanding the atmosphere’s ability to cleanse itself of air pollutants and some other gases, except carbon dioxide.”
========================================================
Don’t put this in the first paragraph, and expect me to waste my time reading it…………..
Even the NOAA thinks we’re stupid

Sam Hall
January 7, 2011 5:45 am

Note that they repeated three times that this doesn’t’ include CO2? Protecting their funding I would guess.

Olen
January 7, 2011 5:48 am

The planet atmosphere is self regulating except for CO2. Remember how global warming advocates use to compare the earth to Venus where a runaway green house gas would irreversibly turn our planet into the hot acidic hell of Venus. Had they ever documented a time when Venus was like earth it might have made some sense. And of course there would have had to be people there causing the damage.
Stories of CO2 causing global warming should only be told for trick or treat on Halloween night.

Dave in Delaware
January 7, 2011 6:23 am

And what becomes of the Methane after it reacts with those hydroxyl ions?
“The atmosphere, and more precisely the troposphere, is the largest sink for methane. Methane in the troposphere reacts with hydroxyl (OH) radicals, forming mainly water and CARBON DIOXIDE.” -caps emphasis mine-
http://www.ghgonline.org/methanesinkatmos.htm
Did not see that mentioned in the posted article.
Is it a significant contribution to CO2 generation? Don’t have any numbers on that aspect of generation, but we are told that CO2 is a less potent GHG than Methane. Room for ‘spin’ either way on this.

chris b
January 7, 2011 6:35 am

They should’ve said:
“……in understanding the atmosphere’s ability to cleanse itself of air pollutants and some other gases, except carbon dioxide, oxygen, nitrogen, etc……”
What are the “some other gases” that are not pollutants that are being “cleansed” from the atmosphere?
Without this ability to “cleanse itself” we’d be choking to death on volcano exhaust.

Vince Causey
January 7, 2011 6:47 am

So we don’t need to worry about methane. That must come as a relief to all those alarmists being alarmed over runaway methane feedbacks.

Scott Covert
January 7, 2011 6:48 am

I remember my grade school textbooks showing a family walking their dog all wearing Cold War gas masks (Including the dog) as a harbinger of our future.
It was presented as fact that Smog would be that bad in my lifetime. They also told us that oil would be gone by 1983 as fact not to mention Global cooling later.
Our schools are a fertile plain of propoganda.

Alan McIntire
January 7, 2011 6:48 am

Before the current CAGW hysteria, it was thought that the earth also has a self regulating balance of CO2 in the atmosphere. As long as the earth;s crust is tectonically active, CO2 will be released in the atmosphere, warming up the atmosphere. With a warmer atmosphere we get more rain, washing excess CO2 out of the atmosphere, where it is incorporated into seashells, etc, and ultimately swallowed up and subducted in the earth’s crust. With less CO2 in the atmosphere, the earth cools off, there’s less rain, CO2 builds up from tectonic activity and the cycle starts all over again. I picked this up from a ” Scientific American” article written before the magazine went nuts and started confusing liberal propaganda with science.
http://www.geosc.psu.edu/~jfk4/PersonalPage/Pdf/Scientific_American_88.pdf

January 7, 2011 6:49 am

Years ago when CO2 wasn’t a pollutant and we where researching acid rain, we learned that “clean rain” is slightly acid because atmospheric water (clouds and vapor) reacts with CO2 to form carbonic acid. The resulting pH (around 5) was dependent on the atmospheric concentration of CO2 and it is reasonable to expect the atmospheric concentration to be dependent on the amount of water there is in the atmosphere. The absorbtion of CO2 in clouds and rain is the primary mechanism for it’s removal from the atmosphere. This water/CO2 interaction results in a very globally uniform CO2 concentration.

January 7, 2011 6:52 am

After 4.6 billion years of the Earth in existence, it has only grown more beautiful and more stable. The number of violent volcanic eruptions (and certain GHGs emission) and earthquakes that we experience now must be very minor compared to several hundred million years ago. CO2 deposited under fossil fuels should be too small compared to CO2 emission on those periods.

Jryan
January 7, 2011 6:55 am

Wouldn’t this kind of throw yet another monkey wrench in the AGW climate models given the lack of sensitivity this shows in the other GHG forcers?

PRD
January 7, 2011 7:10 am

Does this mean the proposal coming out next week will be to load the mosquito control DC-10’s with 50% NaOH and start fogging over and downwind of the petrochemical plants?

Steve Keohane
January 7, 2011 7:25 am

So OH cleans a lot of stuff from the atmosphere, but not CO2. We need a chemist to explain why CHO3, hydrogen carbonate, does not form.

1 2 3