Study: Burning Coal Contributed to the Permo-Triassic Extinction

Burning coal. Not the climate change caused by the volcanoes themselves.

I see. So obvious in retrospect. Rather. Quite right. Hear, hear. /sarc

From the article: “Summary: A team of researchers has provided the first ever direct evidence that extensive coal burning in Siberia is a cause of the Permo-Triassic Extinction, the Earth’s most severe extinction event.”

Yeah, that, and two million years worth of the biggest volcanic eruptions in history.

I don’t think we will have to worry about such a scenario in the near future. Maybe in another couple of hundred million years.

I guess this is a good time to remind folks that if we could somehow burn every fossil fuel available to us in one day, including all the coal, it would not raise the CO2 level over about 800ppm.

The current level of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere is about 410ppm. So humans could barely manage to double the CO2 content if we burned all the fossil fuels tomorrow.

If you go by the new Russian climate computer model, doubling CO2 from current levels would raise the temperature by 1.8C, which is not even close to being catastrophic. And then of course, the Russian model may run too hot, itself (it’s the coolest of all the others). Some calculations put the temperature of a doubling of CO2 down near zero.

In other words, there is nothing to worry about concerning the Earth’s climate and fossil fuels. Not that the alarmists would ever admit that.

The atmosphere currently contains approx. 415ppm CO2. The sudden combustion of 10,000 Gt coal would increase the CO2 content of the atmosphere by approx. 4700ppm. Currently, natural processes remove CO2 from the atmosphere every year. This removal corresponds to approximately 2ppm / year (16 Gt / year) . The volcanic eruptions back then were said to have lasted around 60,000 years. So there was enough time that the atmospheric co2 content could constantly adapt to a lower content.
The eruption of the Tambora volcano in 1815 led to global cooling and the following year 1816 is known as the year without a summer. If CO2 really is such a potent greenhouse gas, the dinosaurs would probably have been very pleased with a slightly higher atmospheric content.

“The study estimates 6,000-10,000 Gt of carbon was burned. Global production of coal is around 8Gt, so we have a little way to go to catch up with the estimated Permian-Triassic burn”

Also, now we know that the 100-year timeline of the IPCC is a litte to short by orders of magnitude. And now we see more evidence of a climate science obsession with atmos CO2 as the cause of everything bad because that’s how their climate model works.

https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/05/03/the-co2-theory-of-everything/

https://tambonthongchai.com/2020/04/03/antarctica-rainforest/

https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/10/28/petm/

Amazing truly unbelievable science.

We have space rocks passing through solar system from outside solar system. And billions of space rock within our solar system. And Earth has been hit by space rocks and very likely Earth was hit by the billions of space rock which are in solar system.
But what is chance of Earth being hit by large space rock from outside of solar system?
The chance of getting hit by any large space rock is very low. One say less chance then winning the lottery but like lottery one get low value winning. So in terms of being hit small rock, that going to happen often and larger the space rock the less chance of Earth impacting by it.
So roughly Earth get hit by small space rocks monthly, and a bigger small rock yearly, something like the somewhat recent Russia impactor, in terms decades. And something like Tunguska event in terms centuries,
and bigger one in terms thousands of years, and etc.
So if looking timescale of ten millions of years, you going to have tens of millions of small space rocks hitting Earth and far less of the bigger space rocks hitting Earth, and unlikely to get space rock hitting Earth as large as the rock that killed the dinosaurs.
So in terms getting hit by a larger space rock from beyond our solar system, one need idea of how many are passing through solar system- and a large amount of them will be smaller space rocks, ones we detect are going closer to Earth and larger than most of smaller space rocks {because can’t detect smaller rocks unless get close to Earth- and not uncommon fairly rocks to flyby earth fairly close and only detect them after they missed hitting Earth. So been detected rocks larger than 1 km which stay fairly close enough to detect them and probably have detected and plotted say +90% of them, and roughly goal is focus of finding space larger than 140 km in diameter and larger, I guess less 50% of those have been plotted. And we have not hit by 140 meter space rock or larger within probably centuries, and perhaps not within a thousand years. But more than thousand years it increasingly becomes more likely, and seems likely guess it would be have the family of rocks which spend a lot time within relatively near region of Earth {or near the Sun}- rather than comets or rather rocks coming from outside solar system.
But if talking 100 millions of years the chances things as unlikely space rock coming from outside solar system and hitting Earth become more likely.
But in general terms expecting dinosaur killing like rock not hitting Earth every 100 million year, is not realistic, or we would be lucky if didn’t happen. You want find the crater, just like you want to find the bullet that killed someone. Pretty easy to find bullet hole in dead person, and usually easy to find bullet also.
It seems to me we spent more time and effort looking for the space rock that hit Earth, though not enough, and less effort finding the needle in haystacks of Space rocks which hit rock. No doubt certainly better to look the rock could kill people. But can say neither are getting the trillions dollars per year wasted on this CO2 emission religion.
Or we in living in Ice Age. CO2 emission is non issue. 250 million year has volcanic evidence, but impactor can cause volcanic activity not mention global earthquakes, and incinerate of continents. If big enough the boiling of oceans- Dino-killer was not really a huge space rock. And smaller space rock than dino-killer coming from beyond solar system, can be far more powerful. Or dino killer could be smaller rock coming outside of solar system {though more likely it wasn’t}.
Anyways 100 years ago, no thought space rocks could hit earth {and they were occurring on monthly basis].
And global warming is old theory {+100 year} which is utter nonsense.

Arizona study says “During this event, up to 96% of all marine species and 70% of terrestrial vertebrate species became extinct.”

Not the only publicized study this year. There has been another. A Berkeley team says there was a 300,000 to 400,000 years lag between the hemispheres. That’s an event? First paper made it seem like it all happened at once.

“In Earth’s largest extinction, land die-offs began long before ocean turnover … Though most scientists believe that a series of volcanic eruptions, occurring in large pulses over a period of a million years in what is now Siberia, were the primary cause of the end-Permian extinction, the lag between the land extinction in the Southern Hemisphere and the marine extinction in the Northern Hemisphere suggests different immediate causes. … that the start of the terrestrial turnover happened so long before the marine extinction was a surprise.”

Robert A. Gastaldo et al. The base of the Lystrosaurus Assemblage Zone, Karoo Basin, predates the end-Permian marine extinction, Nature Communications (2020). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-15243-7
http://www.geologypage.com/2020/03/in-earths-largest-extinction-land-die-offs-began-long-before-ocean-turnover.html

No need to consider that. The extinction was from the Permian (Karoo) glaciation caused by Pangaea covering the south pole, causing snow and ice accumulation, for sea levels to drop below the continental shelves and for Pangaea to dry out. It was part of the roughly 300 million year supercontinent cycle that is caused by the changing orbital inclinations of Jupiter (318 E-mass) and Saturn (95 E-mass) varying Earth’s orbits and the speed of its rotation. Slowing down has a warming effect and makes Earth more rounded; speeding up has a cooling effect and makes the Earth more oblate. The warming of the Triassic was caused by the consequential start of the breakup of Pangaea with volcanic activity melting the polar ice caps, increasing sea levels and causing further warming by flooding of the continental shelves increasing coastal habitats and evaporation to create an explosion of life in the ocean and on land. It was from the same causes as the Cambrian explosion of life – the breakup of Pannotia.
I have just written about the current scenario on https://www.quora.com/Because-of-global-warming-should-we-go-back-to-using-animals-like-horses-and-camels-for-transport-and-towing/answer/John-Bruyn

“It took millions of years for ecosystems to be re-established and for species to recover.”

What about all that life that adjusted to 2 million years of volcanoes? They NEVER recovered. But apparently the species that evolved to live with erupting volcanoes for 2MY don’t count right?

Recovered from WHAT EXACTLY? I would counter that entire ecosystems went extinct, never to return after the volcanoes stopped erupting.

Still pontificating on when the Garden actually existed and trying to get all of us back there are we?

I want to know why those volcanos were erupting for 2 million years.

What happened to all the unemployed coal miners when the Permo-Triassic period finished?

I wonder if we could get a cost analysis of this purposeless study and suggest where the money could have been spent on something of actual value to humankind.