From the University of Alaska, Fairbanks
Study: Arctic seafloor methane releases double previous estimates
The seafloor off the coast of Northern Siberia is releasing more than twice the amount of methane as previously estimated, according to new research results published in the Nov. 24 edition of the journal Nature Geoscience.
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf is venting at least 17 teragrams of the methane into the atmosphere each year. A teragram is equal to 1 million tons.
“It is now on par with the methane being released from the arctic tundra, which is considered to be one of the major sources of methane in the Northern Hemisphere,” said Natalia Shakhova, one of the paper’s lead authors and a scientist at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. “Increased methane releases in this area are a possible new climate-change-driven factor that will strengthen over time.”
Methane is a greenhouse gas more than 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide. On land, methane is released when previously frozen organic material decomposes. In the seabed, methane can be stored as a pre-formed gas or asmethane hydrates. As long as the subsea permafrost remains frozen, it forms a cap, effectively trapping the methane beneath. However, as the permafrost thaws, it develops holes, which allow the methane to escape. These releases can be larger and more abrupt than those that result from decomposition.
The findings are the latest in an ongoing international research project led by Shakhova and Igor Semiletov, both researchers at the UAF International Arctic Research Center. Their twice-yearly arctic expeditions have revealed that the subsea permafrost in the area has thawed much more extensively than previously thought, in part due to warming water near the bottom of the ocean. The warming has created conditions that allow the subsea methane to escape in much greater amounts than their earlier models estimated. Frequent storms in the area hasten its release into the atmosphere, much in the same way stirring a soda releases the carbonation more quickly.
“Results of this study represent a big step forward toward improving our understanding of methane emissions from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf,” said Shakhova. She noted that while the ESAS is unusual in its expansive and shallow nature, the team’s findings there speak to the need for further exploration of the subsea Arctic. “I believe that all other arctic shelf areas are significantly underestimated and should be paid very careful attention to.”
Photo courtesy of Natalia Shakhova
Methane bubbles collect under the ice.
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf is a methane-rich area that encompasses more than 2 million square kilometers of seafloor in the Arctic Ocean. It is more than three times as large as the nearby Siberian wetlands, which have been considered the primary Northern Hemisphere source of atmospheric methane. Previous estimates performed for the ESAS suggested that the area was releasing 8 teragrams of methane into the atmosphere yearly.
During field expeditions, the research team used a variety of techniques—including sonar and visual images of methane bubbles in the water, air and water sampling, seafloor drilling and temperature readings—to determine the conditions of the water and permafrost, as well as the amount of methane being released.
Methane is an important factor in global climate change, because it so effectively traps heat. As conditions warm, global research has indicated that more methane is released, which then stands to further warm the planet. Scientists call this phenomenon a positive feedback loop.
“We believe that the release of methane from the Arctic, and in particular this part of the Arctic, could impact the entire globe,” Shakhova said. “We are trying to understand the actual contribution of the ESAS to the global methane budget and how that will change over time.”
Shakhova and Semiletov are also affiliated with the Pacific Oceanological Institute at the Russian Academy of Sciences, Far Eastern Branch, as are research team members Anatoly Salyuk, Denis Kosmach and Denis Chernykh. Other members of the research team include Dmitry Nicolsky of the UAF Geophysical Institute; co-lead author Ira Leifer of the Marine Sciences Institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara and Bubbleology Research International; Valentin Sergienko of the Institute of Chemistry at the Russian Academy of Sciences, Far Eastern Branch; Chris Stubbs of the Marine Sciences Institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara; Vladimir Tumskoy of Moscow State University; and Örjan Gustafsson of the Department of Applied Environmental Science and Bolin Centre for Climate Research, Stockholm University.
###
=============================================================
So the real question here – is this doubling to 17 Tg a big problem? Let’s look at the numbers they cite:
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf is venting at least 17 teragrams of the methane into the atmosphere each year. A teragram is equal to 1 million tons.
Houweling et al. (1999) give the following values for methane emissions (Tg/a=teragrams per year):
Table from Wikipedia
The estimated total emissions totals 600 Tg/a, sinks total 580 Tg/a. The previous estimates of CH4 emissions are already accounted for somewhere in the table above, perhaps with oceans, then it adds 8.5 TG/a to the balance sheet.
8.5/600 is a 1.4% increase, hardly anything dramatic. It may be even be below or near the error band for these estimates.
But all that is being reported in MSM stories, like this one in Scientific American is about a doubling of methane release, and of course, that makes people worry.
At times like this, it is useful to have another look at the IPCC AR5 draft report graph on how methane in the atmosphere stacks up against model projections:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.



If methane were a greenhouse gas then Titan with it’s thick (1.4 times Earth) methane rich atmosphere would be warmer than it’s airless chunk of rock neighbor Hyperion.
But let’s not let observable fact get in the way of a good yarn.
Methane that they didn’t know about has been perculating into the atmosphere all along you say?
I feel warmer already. Burrrrr
Full disclosure. Fellas. To be perfectly honest, it bums me out that global warming has turned out to be a crock.
I was looking forward to mild winters where I could wander the world in short sleaves, and donate my coat to charity.
Am I the only one who feels this way?
Increased methane releases in this area are a possible new climate-change-driven factor that will strengthen over time.
Anything is POSSIBLE with these fools. And some times it is twice as POSSIBLE.
Well if methane estimates are twice the previous estimates then CO2 is half as effective as previously thought. Or something. (Yeah the math makes no sense – but if that doesn’t deter THEM why should it deter me?)
@crosspatch: Heroic, man.
@James Baldwin from Arding: “A question I have thought many times – how can ruminants be seen as purely “anthropogenic”?”
McDonalds. No, really. There are plenty of sources for it, but the link has the lot of the interesting ones.
http://tinybytes.me/facts/crazy-fast-food-facts?page=10
@uppsalaumea: “Q: Why are FAR, TAR, SAR, AR4, all overestimating CH4 emissions,?”
It’s important to consider just what the Climate Models are doing. Willis E. has shown on occasion that climate models reduce to a simple function of CO2. So the output of every model is, essentially, a linear slope. Non-conforming models have different slopes, and so don’t pass peer review. eg. “We know the consequence of ‘this has never happened before’ because we haven’t seen it. And you don’t get to put food on the table unless you agree with what has never previously occurred.”
Put that all together and what you arrive at is a linear slope coming straight off the pre-pause temperature. Ignoring that temperature hasn’t been compliant to their dictates, every other consideration of the climate models is simply a fractional scale. eg. Same atmosphere as now, but bigger!, improved!, more in the box!. So if the CO2 derviation of Temp overshoots, then so to does everything else and in roughly the same proportion.
How to be a Climate Modeler: Take the official CO2 -> Temp increases as stated by the High Popes of heat. Find the point at which temp has increased 1%. Increase all parameters of the climate by 1%. Tweak various parameters to retain the pre-chosen conclusion to make your model look: a) different, thus justifying your slice of the funding pie. b) Avoid nailing your thesis to the door of Mann’s cathedral. And c) Make it seem like you’re doing anything but a linear projection the mid-90s slope of temperature as reported by global temperature products/models.
The Alarmists love recycling the methane scare. PNAS recently published a “study” showing that the US is “spewing” 50% more methane than the EPA says: http://www.boston.com/news/science/2013/11/25/study-spewing-more-methane-than-epa-says/Z2uq4QCTNvE16mGdB9tiIJ/story.html
For better effect, they really should put that in “hiros”, though.
‘Their twice-yearly arctic expeditions have revealed that the subsea permafrost in the area has thawed much more extensively than previously thought, in part due to warming water near the bottom of the ocean’……….
And the other part?
Is this guy one of the authors?
http://www.mrmethane.com/
Good news. Given the dramatic increase in methane (ho ho), plus the fact that temperature is steady means we are even more confidant that climate sensitivity is low!
Perhaps to some this is indeed “worse than we thought”
All that methane gets trapped under the ice, and then is released all at once when the ice melts in the spring. That explains why it gets warmer in the summer.
Can I have my grant money now?
/sarc
The flaw is that the first measurement is interpreted as a change in rate of emission, whereas it is merely a different measurement of a process that has been ongoing for some time. To make a significant difference in the stability of the subsea hydrates one would have to significantly change the temperature of the water column above.
Everyone should watch the video of global Methane levels from the Airs Aqua satellite. Animation of every day from 2002 to 2009.
Search “Airs Methane” on Google video.
You will have a completely different perspective on this issue.
Bill Illis: “You will have a completely different perspective on this issue.”
Ok, so… Before I watched it my perspective was that people can make videos. After it, my perspective is still that people can make videos. My thesis that videos are anthropogenic in origin has not been altered.
It is clear that this process has been driven by the heat you claim is ‘hidden’. The bottom of the sea floor is in the 700M range, were we can’t measure the massive increase in heat content that has occurred over the last 12 years. This is the fingerprint of that hidden heat, starting to literally boil our oceans with gassified methane, released from it’s permanent storage in the pristine arctic seabed. As the temperatures at that depth continue to rise in an unprecedented manner, we will see more and more discoveries of how this is catastrophically tipping the delicate climate balance, and pushing us into a runaway greenhouse.
/sarc
Bill Illis: A quick follow up on Airs Methane.
From what I see in their docs, the range represented in the video falls around 0.2 total while the std err appears to be 0.35 or so. Not terribly clear on that one, nor do I care to be given that the CH4 product has the following to say of itself:
“Given all of issues described in the caveats, we caution researchers to consider the V5 CH4 product to be a provisional release. It is an exploratory product and we had to modify the climatology and RTA shortly before delivery to take into account the recently re-released NOAA ESRL measurements in the 400-500 mb region (with a +20 ppbv correction). The lack of sufficient QA or regularization of the retrieval makes the methane values in the tropics, deserts, and Antarctica suspicious. The CH4_dof test does not improve this in the tropical region. “
This also satisfies my thesis that Climatology continues to produce a stream of Piltdown Men in their quest to find Hopeful Monsters. Hopefully you can advise further on what perception you want me to take on.
http://daac.gsfc.nasa.gov/AIRS/documentation/v5_docs/AIRS_V5_Release_User_Docs/V5_L2_Standard_Product_QuickStart.pdf
I agree with crosspatch, what is the temperature on the seafloor off the coast of Northern Siberia? Aside from temperature what else could release methane from the shelf?
So, by farting around the house my heater will come on less?
And how about this reality check:In the northwest USA, recently there has been an high pressure system and an inversion layer and the temperature is still cold with all those pollutants and stagnant air…WUWT!?
Thanks for the interesting articles and comments.
The article which Bruce Cobb points out shows that actual measurement of methane revealed a lot more is being released than the modeled estimates. Of course, the previous estimates must have been used in climate models — so the climate models’ historical accuracy again shows that they’re wrong.
The rate of methane increase has slowed a lot in the last 20 years. This was unexpected. They don’t really understand all the sources and sinks of methane. The climate models (see above) vastly over-predict the amount of methane released. Recent studies have said the permafrost and clathrate methane is very stable. All of this points to it not being a problem.
Now they have detected methane release in some new places. But, unless this just started shortly before they discovered it, this is already part of the global levels and rates of methane measured.
Also, if concentrations are higher than they realized in arctic, this could explain some of the arctic amplification and if a higher conc. is giving rise to the recent temperatures, this may mean that the sensitivity to methane is less than they thought and would also tend to lower the amount attributed to CO2 if there is now thought to be more of another GHG present in arctic.
The IPCC graph says one thing quite clearly: It’s not as bad as we thought or projected. In fact we at the IPCC have very little skill in our projections for methane as can be seen by the repeated lowering of the projections – 4 times!
Japan showed in a pilot project this year that methane in some locations can be harvested.
http://www.nature.com/news/japanese-test-coaxes-fire-from-ice-1.12858
Alaska project pumping co2 to push out methane in test scheme.
http://www.nature.com/news/gas-hydrate-tests-to-begin-in-alaska-1.9758
Oh noes, now the cattle have come to kill us with their belches and farts!
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/11/26/big-methane-burp-cows-refineries-spew-gas/
As we slip further into the “Svalgaard Minimum,” we will probably be very glad to have extra GHG in the atmosphere.
OP says:
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf is venting at least 17 teragrams of the methane into the atmosphere each year. A teragram is equal to 1 million tons.
Can’t grok that. Need to put it in terms of ‘Hiroshima bombs’.
***
papiertigre says:
November 26, 2013 at 3:41 am
I was looking forward to mild winters where I could wander the world in short sleaves, and donate my coat to charity.
Am I the only one who feels this way?
***
No, I’ve learned to hate the cold & realize how vulnerable humans are to it. Lately I’ve been dreaming of moving to Willis’ tropical Pacific island…
“Results of this study represent a big step forward toward improving our understanding of methane emissions from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf”
Well SLAP me. Did she actually say that? I mean come on. That is a big step forward???? Wow. It’ll be a topic of conversation for years now. People will be hanging on every clathrate-sodden word.
I still don’t understand how the sea bed can be frozen (sub-sea permafrost). Surely if the sea bed were frozen then the water in contact with it would also be frozen.
What am I missing?