Giant methane bubbles pushing through Arctic permafrost

[Brian G Turner]

Swathes of Arctic are BULGING as 7,000 methane gas bubbles threaten to explode

Huge swathes of the Arctic are bulging as 7,000 methane gas bubbles threaten to explode, according to reports.

Large bumps are appearing in the ground in Russia's Yamal and Gydan peninsulas as underground permafrost melts, sending gas into the air.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

as expected :/

 

[Serendipity]

This will add to global warming (methane's a greenhouse gas).
If I were dystopian science fiction writer, I would link a lot of these bubbles underground. Then if one ignites (via the spontaneous combustion method), it could start a chain reaction of fires across the region, which will also add to global warming via the carbon dioxide output. The temperatures will rise, the waters will rise, etc. We're doomed, I say, we're doomed.

 

[Dave]

We're doomed, I say, we're doomed.

The way we treat this planet, anyone would think we had another one to go to.

 

[Serendipity]

The way we treat this planet, anyone would think we had another one to go to.

We do... it's called going into space and colonising moons, planets and asteroids. But you're implicitly right. I doubt we'll be able to do this or control climate change on Earth.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I've added one of the photos from the article to the opening post. I simply find it stunning that these bubbles are so huge.

 

[BionicGriff]

I wonder how deep they go, I scanned through the article quickly but didn't see anything.

Perhaps the conspiracies are true and Reptilians do have underground bases, they could be in the process of preparing access tunnels to the surface for a full scale attack.

 

[J Riff]

There's got to be material for standup comedians here. I mean, fart/methane jokes are very popular in movies lately aren't they?

 

[Montero]

This will add to global warming (methane's a greenhouse gas).
If I were dystopian science fiction writer, I would link a lot of these bubbles underground. Then if one ignites (via the spontaneous combustion method), it could start a chain reaction of fires across the region, which will also add to global warming via the carbon dioxide output. The temperatures will rise, the waters will rise, etc. We're doomed, I say, we're doomed.

What I recall from a programme on bonfire vs compost methane is 40 times worse as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

 

[BionicGriff]

What I recall from a programme on bonfire vs compost methane is 40 times worse as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

I think I've heard that same number, don't recall where though.

 

[J-Sun]

Puts me in mind of a story by Pat Murphy and Paul Doherty that I recommended when I read Bridging Infinity and which is coming out in Dozois' next "year's best." In that story, the scientist has to manufacture her own methane event to try to wake people up and it helps some but other things intervene to put further obstacles in the way (temporarily or permanently? won't say - read the story). I wonder if this will wake some people up... and how many other obstacles will be in the way.

We desperately need to be fixing this problem and taking steps to spread offworld and we aren't doing either.

 

[BionicGriff]

Puts me in mind of a story by Pat Murphy and Paul Doherty that I recommended when I read Bridging Infinity and which is coming out in Dozois' next "year's best." In that story, the scientist has to manufacture her own methane event to try to wake people up and it helps some but other things intervene to put further obstacles in the way (temporarily or permanently? won't say - read the story). I wonder if this will wake some people up... and how many other obstacles will be in the way.

We desperately need to be fixing this problem and taking steps to spread offworld and we aren't doing either.

I read something a while back that some researchers stumbled upon a method to harvest carbon out of the atmosphere, but I never heard anything since. At the time I think the remaining issue was efficiency, or scalability or something of the sort. More of a band aid then a solution, but once they find a way to make something profitable who knows how far it will go.

 

[BionicGriff]

Startups have figured out how to remove carbon from the air. Will anyone pay them to do it?

Here's something I found regarding this. It sounds promising, but it seems like that miracle technology is always just another year, or 5, or 10 down the road.

 

[Serendipity]

There is a rival method to this technology being done in Iceland - see CO2 turned into stone in Iceland in climate change breakthrough

There are a couple of problems in dealing with climate change. The first is that despite the vast amount of understanding of the processes involved we do yet have a complete picture of what is going on. In that missing bit there may be a mechanism that is of some importance.

The second is getting global agreement on what to do about climate change. Different solutions will result in different climates in individual countries. Whilst the default is likely to be status quo, there is no guarantee that we can get back to it using natural processes - likely to, but not certain to.

Yes, I could write a novel or thesis about this, but I spare you the deluge of words!

 

[Dave]

I read something a while back that some researchers stumbled upon a method to harvest carbon out of the atmosphere...

I don't mean to be a smart-alec (well, okay I do) but were they, by any chance, botanists, or gardeners? Also, geologically speaking, shellfish have done a pretty good job too.

More seriously, chemical carbon-capture schemes would work better where the concentration is higher, such as inside chimneys, rather than placed randomly around the countryside. I also don't understand what the companies in that report are doing - "injecting bubbles into fizzy drinks to recovering hard-to-get-oil from tapped-out wells," "combine the hydrogen with CO2 to make a diesel fuel" - is just recycling it, not removing it, and - "sequestered in the ocean or underground" - the oceans are already turning acidic and chemically turning it to carbonate rock requires a lot of mining and then burying it all again. No, the answer lay in not producing as much in the first place, but I think that bird has now flown.

As for the Methane bubbles:

as expected :/

Stephen is correct, this was predicted. This kind of positive feedback was the greatest concern. It will soon be a runaway train.

 

[mosaix]

I remember reading, many years ago, methane release from landslides beneath the sea as being a possible explanation for the unexplained loss of ships. A large volume of gas rising beneath the hull of a ship would cause the ship to 'fall' into it and be engulfed.

 

[BionicGriff]

I don't mean to be a smart-alec (well, okay I do) but were they, by any chance, botanists, or gardeners? Also, geologically speaking, shellfish have done a pretty good job too.

I guess I don't recall what they were or what their goal was, the original thing I read was maybe a year ago or more (it stood out to me at the time as I had heard of the idea in theory, but this was the first time I saw someone discussing an actual working process), but I remember the main premise of the article was how they inadvertently stumbled across this process while researching something else, it was perhaps a side effect or something. I'm pretty the researchers were in the field of chemistry, I don't think it was botany or gardening.

More seriously, chemical carbon-capture schemes would work better where the concentration is higher, such as inside chimneys, rather than placed randomly around the countryside. I also don't understand what the companies in that report are doing - "injecting bubbles into fizzy drinks to recovering hard-to-get-oil from tapped-out wells," "combine the hydrogen with CO2 to make a diesel fuel" - is just recycling it, not removing it, and - "sequestered in the ocean or underground" - the oceans are already turning acidic and chemically turning it to carbonate rock requires a lot of mining and then burying it all again. No, the answer lay in not producing as much in the first place, but I think that bird has now flown.

I agree with this completely, if you interpreted my post being that I thought this was the solution to our problems, then that was poor phrasing on my part. No doubt the solution comes down to adjusting human behavior, not developing new corrective actions.

My intended point was simply that when fighting a losing battle, any additional weapon you can bring to the fight is welcome.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I remember reading, many years ago, methane release from landslides beneath the sea as being a possible explanation for the unexplained loss of ships. A large volume of gas rising beneath the hull of a ship would cause the ship to 'fall' into it and be engulfed.

It's thought this might explain some of the "Bermuda Triangle" things. Not that there is a Bermuda Triangle thing - but you know what I mean.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

What I recall from a programme on bonfire vs compost methane is 40 times worse as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

It's about 25-30 times worse, but it lasts a much shorter time in the atmosphere; it gets oxidised. CO2 is much more stable in comparison.

 

[Serendipity]

It's thought this might explain some of the "Bermuda Triangle" things. Not that there is a Bermuda Triangle thing - but you know what I mean.

It's not only the Bermuda Triangle where this (could) happen. It's been shown that a trawler 'sank' in the North Sea for exactly this reason. In fact it was a report of this incident that inspired to write my short story 'Cold Pressure' which was published in the Jupiter magazine (which is why I remember it).