The problem with this, of course, is that we know next to
nothing about the methane cycle, and are mystified even by the modern behavior of the gas, as it has been declining for no (apparent) cause.
In contrast, if we eliminated carbon dioxide emissions but did
nothing about methane and black carbon emissions, threats posed by long - term climate change would be markedly reduced.
Not exact matches
The article mentions
nothing about the amount of energy that it takes to free the
methane from the rock where it is held.
David Archer's argument that there's
nothing to worry
about methane is based on the continued existence of the sea ice.
If we eliminated emissions of
methane and black carbon, but did
nothing about carbon dioxide we would have delayed but not significantly reduced long - term threats posed by climate change.
«Until we do something
about CO2,
nothing we do
about methane or these other things is going to matter much for climate»
For example, because the mass balance argument says
nothing about absolute numbers or attribution it may be that we are also — for example — destroying carbon - fixing plankton, reducing the breaking of waves and hence mechanical mixing with the upper ocean, releasing
methane in the tundra which was previously held by acid rain and which can now be converted to CO2, or it may be we are just seeing a deep current, a tiny bit warmer than usual because of the MWP, heating deep ocean clathrate so that methanophage bacteria can devour it and give off CO2.
Finally, while economics may be critical to your definition of «catastrophic» anthropogenic global warming, economics says
nothing about the science underlying the projections of sea level rise, the physics of Arctic amplification, changes to albedo that lead to greater warming that may lead to significant releases of
methane clathrate deposits, regional projections of reduce (or enhanced) precipitation, and so on.
What
about the cattle industry; I hear
methane GHG is also on the rise and cattle flatulence is an increasing contributor http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/832/do-cow-and-termite-flatulence-threaten-the-earths-atmosphere Last thought; what
about the do
nothing approach?
The Sierra Club's willful dismissal of this fact further illustrates that its «Beyond Dirty Fuels» campaign has
nothing to do with
methane reductions — it's all
about imposing as many regulatory hurdles as possible.