Siberian Times states that thousands of bulging methane gas bubbles have been located in Siberia. These are thought to explode to form the giant craters found in the area. Scientist say it's thawing permafrost releasing methane caused by elevated temperatures. Article contains amazing pictures.
Similar observations have been made around the Arctic regions. This is a cause for concern as methane is a potent greenhouse gas creating a positive feedback loop; there is potential for a chain reaction.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
7,000 Underground Gas Bubbles Poised to 'Explode' in Arctic
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 26 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
(Score: 4, Funny) by hendrikboom on Saturday March 25 2017, @03:16PM (3 children)
Set fire to them! Then we'll have the much less dangerous carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Saturday March 25 2017, @06:19PM (2 children)
Methane has a shorter atmospheric lifetime.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @07:41PM (1 child)
Methane has a shorter atmospheric lifetime.
Yeah, and what do you think it turns into?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @10:37AM
Jaaaabs fer the Merkins.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Saturday March 25 2017, @03:20PM (1 child)
First pic looks like a sandworm trying to break through!
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @03:23PM
I find this appropriate as (parts of) the Earth will soon resemble Dune.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @03:50PM (9 children)
To go around and open them up to let the gas out, just to watch the world burn and to see the reaction of those who deny our impact on the planet's atmosphere.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @04:09PM (1 child)
Why not open them up with a small drilling rig...combined with a small liquefaction plant so the methane can be used productively.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @06:22PM
I believe this is one place where the free market in theory differs from the free market in practice.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday March 25 2017, @07:25PM (6 children)
I think we should do better than that: we should get a few million climate deniers to sign statements that they don't believe humans can change the climate, and that if they're wrong we get to torture them and all their descendants to death slowly on public TV, then we should set up a program to build lots of nuclear plants powering systems to produce as much methane as possible, and pump it into the atmosphere. Then let's see what these assholes have to say after a decade or two.
Obviously we're not going to stop the inevitable, so we might as well go out with a bang, and also punish some of those responsible.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Sunday March 26 2017, @07:51AM (2 children)
uhm, if you are using nuclear reactors to but as much methane as possible in the atmosphere, why not just use it to scrub CO2 instead?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 27 2017, @03:36AM (1 child)
Because the climate deniers don't believe that's necessary.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 27 2017, @06:45PM
Because the climate deniers don't believe that's necessary.
Would you happen to be one of these alleged "climate deniers"? Because you don't seem to be taking this seriously.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:39AM (2 children)
I think we should do better than that: we should get a few million climate deniers to sign statements that they don't believe humans can change the climate, and that if they're wrong we get to torture them and all their descendants to death slowly on public TV, then we should set up a program to build lots of nuclear plants powering systems to produce as much methane as possible, and pump it into the atmosphere. Then let's see what these assholes have to say after a decade or two.
Couldn't you try rational argument and evidence? Funny who engages in these murder fantasies when they face disagreement. If the rate of production of these methane bubbles is unusually high and unusually threatening to our climate, you should eventually be able to come up with evidence to back that assertion.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Monday March 27 2017, @03:52AM (1 child)
>Couldn't you try rational argument and evidence?
Have you met a climate denier before?
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 27 2017, @09:43AM
Sure, the catastrophic climate change people could be right. But I wouldn't bet money on anyone who can't string together a rational argument and then blames their failure to communicate on imaginary intellectual flaws of people who would go along with an argument that isn't pure shit!
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Saturday March 25 2017, @04:52PM (2 children)
Build a nuclear plant with the sole purpose of making OH and C radicals to pump into bubbles to break down the methane, or feed methane destroying micro-orgs into them to make lesser greenhouse gasses. Burning them would also work to decrease the immediate effect of methane release into the atmosphere.
I recently looked up atmospheric methane on wiki and they have a fun chart showing ice age happenings alongside atmospheric CO2 and Methane concentrations. If the pattern repeats for I think the fifth time, we are right at the edge of a glaciation event.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 4, Informative) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Saturday March 25 2017, @06:31PM (1 child)
I dug up that chart [wikipedia.org].
Your conclusion of an impending glaciation are unsupported. The horizontal red line is "current" (for when the chart was made) temperatures. Present CO2 and Methane concentrations are unprecedented. That fact is easy to miss since it happened in such a short period on the geological time scale.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @08:41PM
FWIW the image in question was in breach of Wikimedia Commons policy as it doesn't allow commercial use and consequently was removed. It is page 19 of https://regmorrison.edublogs.org/files/2012/03/Climate-Debate4-1if6jnl.pdf [edublogs.org]
(Score: 2) by patella.whack on Saturday March 25 2017, @05:35PM
The most recent VICE NEWS episode had some cool footage of people poking holes in the ice while torching the escaping gas.
Takes me back to when I was ten--- aerosol hairspray cans and a lighter. Fun stuff!
(Score: 3, Touché) by fishybell on Saturday March 25 2017, @05:57PM
The real story of global warming isn't how screwed we are, or how much blame we have shoulder, or how much our grandchildren will curse us.
The real story is that global warming has made Siberia very interesting for once.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Saturday March 25 2017, @06:50PM (1 child)
Why is atmospheric methane surging? (Hint: It's not fracking) [sciencemag.org]
By Paul Voosen Dec. 21, 2016 , 9:00 AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @08:54PM
Another possibility is that permafrost thaw is greatly underappreciated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @08:34PM (2 children)
Look at long-term climate history here [wikipedia.org] and here [wikimedia.org].
As someone who has tuned up many feedback loops, I would argue that if the system were prone to heating from positive feedback at this temperature, past maxima would have been higher. In fact, current temperature is near a peak of oscillation, and there is real risk of strong cooling over the next 10,000 years. It's not like climate "science" can explain these temperature cycles.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 26 2017, @11:05AM
You do realize those history charts are also produced by climate science? Science isn't perfect but it's the only thing we have.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Wednesday March 29 2017, @08:40AM
It looks like it's been a bit more than 100,000 years since similar or higher temperatures occurred. If methane has been accumulating for much of that time, it could be a goodly amount that's about to be released.