Is Permafrost Methane A Climate Time Bomb? “Only in Scenarios – Not In Reality” Says German Permafrost Scientist

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

It amazes me how the media take a non-story and inflate it into a “climate time-bomb”.

The Sueddeutsche Zeitung has an interview today with Dr. Hans-Wolfgang Hubberten, a director at the Alfred-Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), who has been studying the permafrost in Siberia for 20 years now. Not surprisingly he sees signs of some permafrost melt – and why not? After all the globe has warmed about 0.6°C over the last 100 years.

In the interview Hubberten speaks about the scenario of massive permafrost melt and the implications such a scenario would have, but then reminds us that in reality the permafrost is thawing only very slowly, and so it’s no big deal. So what does the media focus on? On the horror scenarios of course, and not the reality.

One of the favorite horror scenarios floated out by AGW alarmists is sub-marine permafrost melt and the associated release of huge quantities of potent greenhouse gas methane, which then could lead to the much dreaded, yet elusive, tipping point.

Hubberten points out that there are 36 million square km of permafrost, which is equal to 25% the size of the earth’s land surface. Much of it lies below the Arctic ocean. The thickness ranges from a couple of meters to 1600 meters in some spots in Siberia. Of course warming and cooling of the climate leads to corresponding changes in the permafrost over time.

Here are some of Hubberten comments on melting permafrost:

1. Impact on sea levels:

It could by the end of the century lead to an additional global sea level rise of a few centimeters. Therefore the permafrost must be studied with the same seriousness as melting glaciers and sea ice.

This is a not so subtle call for lots more funding.

2. Is the permafrost thawing? According to Hubberten (paraphrasing):

In some areas in Russia within 50 years it has gotten about 20 cm thicker. Right now in treeless regions the upper 50 or 60 cm layer  is thawing. In the forested southern permafrost region up to 5 to 6 meters. The permafrost is warming also at greater depths where temperatures over the entire year range from -5°C to -20°C. We have exact measurements in Alaska for example. At a depth of 20 meters it has warmed 1.5″C over the last 35 years.”

Some places it’s thicker, some places thinner, and some places it is less cold. That shouldn’t be a surprise though because the planet has warmed a bit over the last century. So not really that much has happened.

3. What does Hubberten think about the possibility of a massive methane gas eruption from rapidly thawing permafrost (paraphrasing – emphasis added)?

Much is speculated on this ‘methane climate time-bomb’. In a sceanrio where there is a rapid and complete disintegration of the sub-marine permafrost, there could indeed be a huge methane release into the atmosphere, and from that a considerable global temperature increase from a greenhouse effect. In reality we assume, however, that there is a relatively slow reduction of the submarine permafrost – with a possible slight addition of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.”

Hubberten then throws his pitch for more funding, again, adding:

But, the sub-marine permafrost and the methane  gas hydrates are still mostly not researched and with today’s level of knowledge it is a big factor of uncertainty in the climate system.”

In the end we can safely say that all the permafrost warnings will likely turn out to be like the UN 50-million-refugee-predictions we have all been hearing about the last few days.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

10 responses to “Is Permafrost Methane A Climate Time Bomb? “Only in Scenarios – Not In Reality” Says German Permafrost Scientist”

  1. DirkH

    We could make a truce with the warmists. They allow us to mine the clathrates and we promise to burn the Methane to less harmful CO2. 😉

  2. mindert eiting

    Be it methane or CO2, but it goes worse and worse with the greenhouse effect. Without scientific backup, AGW will become a free floating superstition, and in the mean time we should do something to give shelter to many AGW refugees, to be expected for the next decade. See:

    http://johnosullivan.livejournal.com/35681.html

    1. DirkH

      From the article:
      “In the future, says Joe, people will declare: “The atmosphere keeps the planet from getting too hot in the daytime, and too cold at night time”.”

      That is exactly the effect. Well put.

  3. R. de Haan

    It’s all BS.

    First of all Methane is not a problem at all. The amounts are insignificant
    Second, Methane is a heavy gas, won’t mix in the higher atmosphere
    Third, we have methane consuming bacteria all over the place

    Green doctrine has nothing to do with science.

    1. Jimbo

      The rate of methane rise is currently flattening too.

      NOAA
      “Methane was steadily increasing in the 1980’s, it’s growth rate slowed in the 1990’s, and it has had a near-zero growth rate for the last few years.”
      http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/mlo/programs/esrl/methane/methane.html

      So much for all the melting tundra. ;O)

  4. DirkH

    “Nuclear exit: Germany must learn to relinquish.”
    http://www.focus.de/finanzen/news/tid-22025/atomausstieg-deutschland-muss-verzichten-lernen_aid_619624.html

    Bürger! Spart Strom, Rettet das Klima! Coming next to a corner near you, the Blockwart.

  5. R. de Haan

    “After all the globe has warmed about 0.6°C over the last 100 years”.
    And cooled down again.

    The comment addresses another alarmist article about tornado’s being cased by Global Warming but the temp data severs both claims:
    http://www.weatherbell.com/jb/?p=1198

  6. R. de Haan

    Funding? Not a single penny. Period

  7. Daniel J. lavigne

    Humanity, due its infection by the madness of greed, shall never be able to accept that the use of some 800 / 1100 Billion barrels of oil in a very short period of time (We first discovered oil in 1856 when the world’s population was 800 / 1200 MILLION. By 1965 (109 years later) our numbers had increased to 2.85 BILLION) HAD to be of some consequence to atmospheric processes.

    Due our wilfull ignorance and determination to stay in that state of ignorance, NOTHING can be done to avert a crisis that shall curse humanity’s brief presence on the planet.

    Of course, if some of the wilfully ignorant BILLIONS should wake and understand the meaning of “Stop Your Engines!”, there is a chance, albeit a small one, that the majority of all such lumpen might understand that they have no choice but to heed the message as found at:

    http://www.StopYourEngines.com

    Thank you.

    Daniel J. Lavigne
    “The Tax Refusal”
    http://www.TaxRefusal.com

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close