RealClimate is wonderful, and an excellent source of reliable information.As I've said before, methane is an extremely dangerous component
to global warming.Comment # 20 is correct.There is a sharp melting point
to frozen methane.A huge increase in the release of methane could happen within the next 50 years.At what point in the Earth's temperature rise and the rise of co2 would a huge methane melt occur?No one has answered that definitive issue.If I ask you all at what point would huge amounts of extra methane start melting, i.e at what temperature rise of the ocean near the Artic methane ice deposits would the methane melt, or at what point in the rise of co2 concentrations in the atmosphere would the methane melt, I believe that no one could currently tell me the
actual answer as
to where the sharp melting point exists.Of course, once that tipping point has been reached, and billions of tons of methane outgass from what had been locked stores of methane, locked away for an eternity, it is exactly the same as the burning of stored fossil fuels which have been stored for an eternity as well.And even though methane does not have as long a life as co2, while it is around in the air it can cause
other tipping points, i.e. permafrost melting,
to arrive much sooner.I will reiterate what I've said before on this and
other sites.Methane is a hugely underreported, underestimated risk.How about RealClimate attempts
to model exactly what would happen
to other tipping points, such as the melting permafrost, if indeed a huge increase in the melting of the methal hydrate ice WERE
to occur within the next 50 years.My amateur guess is that the huge, albeit temporary, increase in methane over even three or four decades might push
other relevent tipping points
to arrive much, much, sooner than they normally would, thereby vastly incresing negative feedback mechanisms.We KNOW that quick, huge, changes occured in the Earth's climate in the past.See
other relevent posts in the past from Realclimate.Climate often does not change slowly, but undergoes huge, quick, changes periodically, due
to negative feedbacks accumulating, and tipping the climate
to a quick change.Why should the
danger from huge potential methane releases be vievwed with any less trepidation?
«Economist Gary Becker says, «Hurricane Katrina and now the
danger of an avian flu pandemic — one an
actual, the
other a potential, catastrophe for which the nation failed or is failing
to prepare adequately — underscore the need for institutional reforms that will overcome policy myopia based on inability
to plan seriously for responding
to catastrophes of slight or unknown probability but huge potential harm,» Judge Richard Posner responds.»
Alienating strategies include bad - mouthing or denigrating the
other parent in front of the child (or within earshot), 2,3 limiting the child's contact with the
other parent, 4 trying
to erase the
other parent from the child's mind (e.g., withholding pictures of the child with the
other parent), 2 creating and perpetuating a belief the
other parent is dangerous (when there is no evidence of
actual danger), 2 forcing the child
to reject the
other parent, and making the child feel guilty if he or she talks about enjoying time with the
other parent.2 The impact of these behaviors on children is devastating, but it also often has the opposite intended effect; parents who denigrate the
other parent are actually less close with their children than those who do not.3