Study Finds East Siberian Arctic Shelf Showing Instability and Widespread Venting of the GHG Methane; Releases May Be Much Larger and Faster Than Anticipated
05 March 2010
| Top left. Bubble plumes (probably dominated by CH4) rising from the seafloor registered by geophysical instrumentation. Top right. seismic image showing gas charged sediments and gas release from the bottom. Bottom left. Positions of oceanographic stations with bathymetry lines. Bottom right. Fluxes of CH4 venting to the atmosphere over the ESAS. Source: Shakhova et al. Click to enlarge. |
A section of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS) seafloor that holds vast stores of frozen methane (CH4) is showing signs of instability and widespread venting of the gas, according to the findings of an international research team led by University of Alaska Fairbanks scientists Natalia Shakhova and Igor Semiletov. Methane is a greenhouse gas more than 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
The permafrost under the ESAS—a 2.1 million square kilometer area which encompasses the Laptev, East Siberian and Russian part of the Chuckchi seas—was long thought to be an impermeable barrier sealing in methane. However, the study, published in the 5 March edition of the journal Science, found that the ESAS is perforated and is starting to leak a large amount of methane—currently about 7.98 teragrams, an amount comparable to the amount currently estimated as coming out of the entire World Ocean.
Although the oceanic CH4 flux should be revised, the current estimate is not alarmingly altering the contemporary global CH4 budget. These findings do change our view of the vulnerability of the large sub-sea permafrost carbon reservoir on the ESAS; the permafrost “lid” is clearly perforated, and sedimentary CH4 is escaping to the atmosphere.
To discern whether this extensive CH4 venting over the ESAS is a steadily ongoing phenomenon or signals the start of a more massive CH4 release period, there is an urgent need for expanded multifaceted investigations into these inaccessible but climate-sensitive shelf seas north of Siberia.
—Shakhova et al.
| “Subsea permafrost is losing its ability to be an impermeable cap.” |
| —Natalia Shakhova |
Methane is released from previously frozen soils in two ways. When the organic material (which contains carbon) stored in permafrost thaws, it begins to decompose and, under anaerobic conditions, gradually releases methane. Methane can also be stored in the seabed as methane gas or methane hydrates and then released as subsea permafrost thaws. These releases can be larger and more abrupt than those that result from decomposition.
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf is a methane-rich area that is a shallow seaward extension of the Siberian tundra that was flooded during the Holocene transgression 7 to 15 thousand years ago.
The ESAS sub-sea permafrost, which is frozen sediments interlayered with the flooded peatland, not only contains comparable amounts of carbon as still land-fast permafrost in the Siberian tundra but also hosts permafrost-related seabed deposits of CH4. Moreover, ESAS sub-sea permafrost is potentially more vulnerable to thawing than terrestrial permafrost.
In contrast to on-land permafrost, sub-sea permafrost has experienced a drastic change in its thermal regime because of the seawater inundation. The annual average temperature of ESAS bottom seawater (–1.8° to 1°C) is 12° to 17°C warmer than the annual average surface temperature over onland permafrost. A physical implication of combined bottom-up geothermal and topdown seawater heat fluxes is the partial thawing and failure of sub-sea permafrost and thus an increased permeability for gases. We consequently hypothesized that CH4 is released from seabed deposits to vent extensively to the Arctic atmosphere.
—Shakhova et al.
Earlier studies in Siberia focused on methane escaping from thawing terrestrial permafrost. Semiletov’s work during the 1990s showed, among other things, that the amount of methane being emitted from terrestrial sources decreased at higher latitudes. But those studies stopped at the coast. Starting in the fall of 2003, Shakhova, Semiletov and the rest of their team took the studies offshore.
| The warming ocean on top of the ESAS and the heat from the mantle below it warm the shelf and make it perforated. This allows methane gas stored under it under pressure to burst into the atmosphere. Credit: Zina Deretsky, National Science Foundation. Click to enlarge. |
From 2003 through 2008, they took annual research cruises throughout the shelf and sampled seawater at various depths and the air 10 meters above the ocean. In September 2006, they flew a helicopter over the same area, taking air samples at up to 2,000 meters (6,562 feet) in the atmosphere. In April 2007, they conducted a winter expedition on the sea ice.
They found that more than 80% of the deep water and more than 50% of surface water had methane levels more than eight times that of normal seawater. In some areas, the saturation levels reached more than 250 times that of background levels in the summer and 1,400 times higher in the winter. They found corresponding results in the air directly above the ocean surface. Methane levels were elevated overall and the seascape was dotted with more than 100 hotspots. This, combined with winter expedition results that found methane gas trapped under and in the sea ice, showed the team that the methane was not only being dissolved in the water, it was bubbling out into the atmosphere.
These findings were further confirmed when Shakhova and her colleagues sampled methane levels at higher elevations. Methane levels throughout the Arctic are usually 8 to 10 percent higher than the global baseline. When they flew over the shelf, they found methane at levels another 5 to 10 percent higher than the already elevated Arctic levels.
Shakhova notes that the Earth’s geological record indicates that atmospheric methane concentrations have varied between about .3 to .4 parts per million during cold periods to .6 to .7 parts per million during warm periods. Current average methane concentrations in the Arctic average about 1.85 parts per million, the highest in 400,000 years, she said. Concentrations above the East Siberian Arctic Shelf are even higher.
It was thought that seawater kept the East Siberian Arctic Shelf permafrost frozen. Nobody considered this huge area.
—Natalia Shakhova
The East Siberian Arctic Shelf, in addition to holding large stores of frozen methane, is more of a concern because it is so shallow. In deep water, methane gas oxidizes into carbon dioxide before it reaches the surface. In the shallows of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, methane simply doesn’t have enough time to oxidize, which means more of it escapes into the atmosphere. That, combined with the sheer amount of methane in the region, could add a previously uncalculated variable to climate models.
The release to the atmosphere of only one percent of the methane assumed to be stored in shallow hydrate deposits might alter the current atmospheric burden of methane up to 3 to 4 times. The climatic consequences of this are hard to predict.
—Natalia Shakhova
Shakhova, Semiletov and collaborators from 12 institutions in five countries plan to continue their studies in the region, tracking the source of the methane emissions and drilling into the seafloor in an effort to estimate how much methane is stored there.
Shakhova and Semiletov hold joint appointments with the Pacific Oceanological Institute, part of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Their collaborators on this paper include Anatoly Salyuk, Vladimir Joussupov and Denis Kosmach, all of the Pacific Oceanological Institute, and Orjan Gustafsson of Stockholm University.
Resources
Natalia Shakhova, Igor Semiletov, Anatoly Salyuk, Vladimir Yusupov, Denis Kosmach, and Örjan Gustafsson (2010) Extensive Methane Venting to the Atmosphere from Sediments of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Science 327: 1246-1250 doi: 10.1126/science.1182221
Study Finds East Siberian Arctic Shelf Showing Instability and Widespread Venting of the GHG Methane; Releases May Be Much Larger and Faster Than Anticipated
http://www.examiner.com/x-4648-Atlanta-Weather-Examiner~y2009m9d6-Arctic-passage-open-without-ice-breakers-first-time-in-history
Sen. Rockefeller Introduces Legislation to Suspend EPA Regulation of Stationary Source GHG for 2 Year
Uniquely, American politicians discover the absence of global warming and presence of weapons-of-mass-destruction.
Posted by: kelly | 05 March 2010 at 05:06 AM
.
Releases May Be Much Larger and Faster Than... Blah.. Blah... Blah...
How much do these government paid people earn to draw pictures of impending disasters, models of "much larger (worse, more hideous)" disasters that will absolutely hit us? Of course the "may" word is ALWAYS stuck in their predictions of doom. LOL!
Climate "scientists" predicted that the U.S. hurricane seasons would be much worse over the past few years. They have been much better. The opposite of their models and predictions come true more often than not yet Globalwarmists still fall in line, chanting the Globalwarmist mantra: "Repent of your energy usage or burn in Globalwarmist hell."
Massive tax increases, drastic losses of freedom, and an ever expanding, incompetent, government are NOT the answer to Earth's naturally changing climate cycles.
As The Institute of Physics recently stated: "... worrying implications arise for the integrity of scientific research in this field and for the credibility of the scientific method as practised in this context."
And referring to the climate scientist discussions now made public by a whistleblower they stated about the "scientists": "... prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law."
.
Posted by: The Goracle | 05 March 2010 at 08:23 AM
Massive positive feedbacks such as the thawing of methane hydrates means that we may be beyond a tipping point to where we have caused too much damage that may prove far more difficult to mitigate/repair.
Delaying tactics by the proxies of fossil fuel companies and those who have unwittingly taken up their propaganda has put off much needed reductions in GHG emissions. Now, greater (and steeper) reductions will likely prove necessary.
Posted by: Will S | 05 March 2010 at 09:29 AM
@goracle:
I find your relentless attempts to discredit any evidence of AGW while smearing any scientist who disagrees with your viewpoint to be a curious obsession. One wonders just what's up with you.
Posted by: Nick Lyons | 05 March 2010 at 10:21 AM
The sad fact is the AGW cult has so deeply committed itself to fantasy - they cannot get out. These are people for whom damaged pride is worse than death. Even when caught red-handed lying, manipulating, hiding data - they will not confess. When their fabled IPCC report is found full of errors - they duck and hide. When their alarmist predictions fail to materialize they make excuses.
AGW is an illusion upon which alarmists have counted to finance their global ambitions. Now that it has been outed, and its architects are under indictment - they STILL refuse to accept their fate. Unbridled ego and pride makes for denial. More and more hysterical press releases arrive attempting to blunt the embarrassing truth. It is now just sad.
Posted by: sulleny | 05 March 2010 at 12:34 PM
.
@ Nick Lyons: How is it that you believe that The Institute of Physics smeared "climate scientists?" No doubt you are wondering "what's up with" them, correct? I ask you to please reread their statements and point out the smears.
And you agree that the "scientists" were wrong when they predicted an increase in the severity and number of hurricanes hitting the US over the past five years - due to Global Warming®, correct?
.
Posted by: The Goracle | 05 March 2010 at 01:25 PM
http://www.examiner.com/x-4648-Atlanta-Weather-Examiner~y2009m9d6-Arctic-passage-open-without-ice-breakers-first-time-in-history
..OPEN ..FIRST TIME IN HISTORY isn't because climate got colder, wizards..
Posted by: kelly | 05 March 2010 at 03:16 PM
Goracle, Sulleny:
Are you compensated in any way for your posts?
Do you post under multiple names?
Posted by: Kelly | 05 March 2010 at 03:26 PM
When Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, CAGW, due to CO2, collapsed, the Disaster Cassandras looked around for something else, to keep up the 'Future Disaster "Scare" ', and more important, keep the contributions flowing.
First it was the proposed acidification of the oceans, due to a variation in in the percentage of the atmosphere's constituents that are acidic, from .000034 to .000039, or a change of .000004, was suggested.
The entire number of the atmosphere's molecules are insignificant, compared to the number of molecules in the Ocean. And some tiny portion of that tiny atmosphere's molecules are going to to change the Oceans? This is farcical. It died with a few minutes calculations on the back of an envelope.
But they still propose this asininity, for the ignoramuses to swallow. After all, if the Rubes bought the idea that the change in temperature they saw every day in their lives, from sunrise to noon, was several times the change that would somehow 'Kill All Life on Earth', someday, they would buy anything.
Next was the proposed threat of CH4 releases from the Ocean's hydrates or permafrost. But Now we have the ARGOS buoy bathscapic, thermo-graphic profiles of the Ocean, to rely on. We now actually do know, and we discovered this only about 6 years ago, the Oceans are growing COLDER, despite the supposed Global Warming. This helps to MAINTAIN and NOT release frozen Hydrated CH4.
Reports of local seeps is just what the Earth has always done, or didn't you know it? Oil and gas vents from the Earth, naturally. Mr. Drake's very first Oil well in the world, in the 1860s, was drilled on a spot from which Oil vented. Or go look at the La Brea "Tar Pits" in Los Angeles. That park is a local, very viscous, petroleum vent.
CH4 as measured in the atmosphere, is even more rare and measured in parts per Billion, instead of parts per Million of CO2. And it has stopped rising, and is stable, as a barely measurable portion of the atmosphere, over the last couple of decades. So another grasp at straws for saving Disaster Stories dies, as incredible.
My solution to the localized Chukchi sea gas venting?
Hooray! We found Gas! Drill, Baby Drill! Drill where the seeps are releasing gas; obtain the gas, and reduce the local seepage pressures.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 05 March 2010 at 04:24 PM
The frozen Arctic has thawed to the point the ice has melted and is openly navigable for the first time in history.
Thawing comes from warming, or is this denied also?
Posted by: kelly | 05 March 2010 at 04:41 PM
Maybe an article from Alaskans, with pictures, can clarify global warming:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Barrow-Alaska-Ground-Zero-for-Climate-Change.html
Summer sea ice in the region shrank by nearly 40 percent between 1978 and 2007. Winter temperatures have been several degrees Fahrenheit warmer than they were a few decades ago. Trees have spread into the tundra. In 2008, a wildfire broke out in an area north of the Brooks Range, where the local dialect had no word for forest fire.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Barrow-Alaska-Ground-Zero-for-Climate-Change.html#ixzz0hM54qc4s
Barrow, Alaska: Ground Zero for Climate Change
"Whatever is going to happen to the rest of the world," says Dan Endres of NOAA, "happens first and to the greatest extent in the Arctic."
Posted by: kelly | 05 March 2010 at 05:23 PM
Nowhere in here do I see the word CAR.
Green CAR Congress. FOCUS!
Posted by: Aaron Turpen | 05 March 2010 at 05:43 PM
The sad fact is the ANTI-AGW cult has so deeply committed itself to fantasy - they cannot get out. These are people for whom damaged pride is worse than death. Even when caught red-handed lying, manipulating, hiding data - they will not confess. When the IPCC report is found to have a FEW errors - they BLOW IT OUT OF PROPORTION WITH REALITY, AND CRY CONSPIRICY. When their ANTI-AGW predictions fail to materialize they WILL make excuses.
ANTI-AGW is CONVIENENTLY STICKING YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND.
Posted by: GdB | 05 March 2010 at 08:07 PM
Green car = non polluting cars = non ICE cars.
Very green car = dream car running on pollution.
Climate is definately getting much warmer North of the Border. How much of this is man made and how much is a natural phenomena? Scientists and politicians (and Green Car congress) can argue on the exact percentage for decades but the alarming trend is still there and growing.
Can humanity do much to reverse the current warming trend when it has gone beyond a certain point? We could probably slow the progress of the forward cycle and the tipping point by a century or so. In the long run aren't we going head on into one more hot followed by a real cold cycle? A real extended cold cycle would certainly put an end to humanity and man made pollution. Life would start over again some 100+ million years later with a new world and new species. Too bad we will not be around to see it.
One thing is certain, hamanity did not create the previous hot-cold cylces. Who did?
Posted by: HarveyD | 05 March 2010 at 08:17 PM
Back on subject. Obviously, it would be better to capture this methane and maybe do GTL or burn it directly in cars.
Big heavy concrete upside down funnels could be dropped on top of the biggest emmiters and piped to a GTL plant. Maybe the whole thing is even cost competative!
Unfortunately it was not mentioned if the 8 teragrams was per year or per day. Anyhow, I did some back of the envelope calc's:
World 2005 oil consumption equivalent to 4.9E11 MJ/day.
Siberian Arctic Shelf Methane = 4MJ/(day or year?)
Posted by: GdB | 05 March 2010 at 08:22 PM
Periodically about every-40 year or so, the Polar Arctic Oscillation reverses direction. The winds shift directions. The lower levels of Arctic ice coverage reached in 2007 and now rebuilt back to the 1979-2009 median level, was a result Not of thawing but of wind and currents blowing the ice easterly North of Greenland and into the North Atlantic where it drifted South and then melted. Just like the iceberg that sunk the Titanic.
See Cryosphere Today and see the day by day changes speeded up and you can see it happen. Sorry It was not Global Warming 'melting'. Meanwhile the ICE continues to build in Antarctica.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 06 March 2010 at 02:40 AM
Jane Ferrigno of the U.S. Geological Survey in a National Public Radio interview
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124178690 (Audio clip available)
Ms. FERRIGNO: The fact that the ice shelves are changing on the peninsula is a significant signal that global change, climate warming, is affecting the ice cover of Antarctica. It’s affecting first the area that’s towards the north, that’s slightly warmer, but the effect of the warming has traveled from the northern part of the peninsula to the southern part of the peninsula, where it’s colder.
“RAZ: Give us a sense of how much ice [on the Antarctic peninsula] has been lost over the past, say, 10 years.
Ms. FERRIGNO: I think I’ll go back 20 years, and in the last 20 years, I would say at least 20,000 square kilometers of ice has been lost, and that’s comparable to an area somewhere between the state of Texas and the state of Alaska.
Ms. FERRIGNO: It is. It is very dramatic, and it is larger than the size of Texas, but when you consider the entire Antarctic ice sheet, it’s still a fairly minimal amount. But the thing that we’re really interested in seeing is that this is a sort of a red flag because if the warming continues, if the retreat continues, if the amount of ice on the continent starts to flow into the water, then there will be substantial impact to the sea level.
RAZ: That’s Jane Ferrigno. She is a scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey.
Jane Ferrigno, thanks for coming in.
Ms. FERRIGNO: Thank you.
RAZ: So about the size of the state of Texas in terms of ice has been lost in the past 20 years. ”
OOOPS, a USGS scientist seems to have forgotten the actually size of Texas and of Alaska. This map will clarify: http://xrl.in/4plz
THIS gentlemen is just one of many reasons climate science has collapsed into a laughing matter these day. Government scientists don't know distance.
Posted by: sulleny | 06 March 2010 at 04:19 AM
"Summer sea ice in the region shrank by nearly 40 percent between 1978 and 2007. Winter temperatures have been several degrees Fahrenheit warmer than they were a few decades ago. Trees have spread into the tundra. In 2008, a wildfire broke out in an area north of the Brooks Range, where the local dialect had no word for forest fire."
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Barrow-Alaska-Ground-Zero-for-Climate-Change.html
Sorry, no "collapsed into a laughing matter.." here..
"Periodically about every-40 year or so, the Polar Arctic Oscillation reverses direction." implies the Northwest has been navigable 'every-40 year or so' PRIOR to 2009 as well.
Sorry - that's not what 'navigable for the first time in history' means.
Posted by: kelly | 06 March 2010 at 07:28 AM
.
As The Institute of Physics recently stated: "... worrying implications arise for the integrity of scientific research in this field and for the credibility of the scientific method as practised in this context."
And referring to the "climate scientist" discussions, now made public by a whistleblower, they stated about the "scientists": "... prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law."
Lets PLEASE get back to science! When the Globalwarmist religion uses papers from government paid "scientists" that refuse "to comply with honourable scientific traditions" what's the point of discussing the matter? If the government paid "scientists" would simply follow proper scientific method, rather than religious dogma, there could be scientific debate and discussion. For now, though, the Globalwarmists have decided to yell louder rather than partake in science.
Or, we can all yell about how "stoopid" The Institute of Physics is and let everyone know how much we now hate them. Science!
.
Posted by: The Goracle | 06 March 2010 at 09:27 AM
Unfortunately as the Goracle (Praise be to Algore!) points out we not only have bad science being done by compromised "scientists," we also have willful malfeasance in the actions of the "top climate researchers" - Hansen, Jones, Briffa, Mann et al.
They are under investigation and may well be indicted for their evil deeds. Any reasonable cult will cast out their wayward members to avoid further embarrassment. This is why the Institute of Physics has berated Jones and followers for corrupting the scientific method. There should be no room for these fanatics. They should be replaced by honest, fair-minded, open-hearted scientists who are unafraid of opposing points of view.
If you remain an AGW believer, ask youself why an major UK Institute representing 36,000 world class physicists have said this about the AGW leaders at UEA:
""... prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law."
Can the cult heal itself? Or will it be brought to its knees before getting clean??
Posted by: sulleny | 06 March 2010 at 12:13 PM
The scientists know the limitations of their models but were seduced by the power, notoriety and publicity.
They nodded assent to (praise be) Al Gore’s exaggerating and sealed their doom.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 07 March 2010 at 02:07 PM
Hi Folks, sorry to be off topic but I felt that the the barrage of sound-bite, out of context quotes given above needed to be put in context. The UK Institute of Physics is not 'stoopid' but their submission to the UK Parliamentary inquiry has been misappropriated and wilfully misconstrued. The full text, in context, of their response is here:
http://www.iop.org/News/news_40679.html
Please check it out the full text but to cut to the chase:
'We regret that our submission has been seized upon by some individuals to imply that IOP does not support the scientific evidence that the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is contributing to global warming.
IOP’s position on global warming is clear: the basic science is well established and there is no doubt that climate change is happening and that we should be taking action to address it now.'
IOP's submission called for openness and transparency. Selective quoting is not part of that process so maybe some of the posters above might reflect on their own commitment to openness and transparency when they welly into criticise others.
Posted by: Thomas Lankester | 08 March 2010 at 01:16 AM
Back on topic!
As a well documented and potent greenhouse gas (going back to Tindle in 1859), methane does need to be monitored and any changes in the natural emissions noted. The authors of this study have not stated that these emissions are definitely indicating a move past a 'tipping point' as the baseline level of emissions is not known. That said, it was previously assumed that these deposits were safely capped but their study shows this assumption to be false
So, one to keep an eye on in future.
Posted by: Thomas Lankester | 08 March 2010 at 01:24 AM
Thomas:
the condemnation of deposed leader Phil Jones at UEA's Climatic Research Unit and his international comrades, stands as quoted. CRU's leader actively sought to circumvent FOI law and honorable scientific tradition, aka scientific method. Such paranoid fanaticism has voided his stature as an "climate authority," and casts a darkening shadow on all CRU activities.
Posted by: sulleny | 08 March 2010 at 06:50 AM
I can't believe I'm getting sucked into this dialogue...
Everyone must admit that the earth's climate is little understood. We have only begun to try to model it, and with little success so far. There are probably important factors that are not even known today (perhaps the strength of the earth's magnetic field, e.g.).
AGW may be hogwash. Or, it might be correct. Nobody knows for certain.
So, how about a little less certainty in these postings?
Posted by: danm | 08 March 2010 at 07:44 AM