2 greenhouse gases on the rise worry scientists

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - 2 greenhouse gases on the rise worry scientists stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

SETH BORENSTEIN | October 25, 2008 12:39 AM EST | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
This undated handout photo provided by the Scripps Institute shows Scripps geoscientists Ray Weiss, left, and Jens Muehle in San Diego, Calif., amid collection cylinders used to collect air samples from a variety of locations around the world. Weiss and Muehle led a study that found that the greenhouse gas nitrogen trifluoride, used in the manufacture of flat-panel monitors, escapes to the atmosphere at levels much higher than previously assumed. Two major and potent greenhouse gases are building in the atmosphere, raising an unexpected new threat for accelerating global warming, new studies show. The gases are methane and nitrogen trifluoride, and their levels are building faster than expected. (AP Photo/Scripps Institute, Robert Monroe)

WASHINGTON — Carbon dioxide isn't the only greenhouse gas that worries climate scientists. Airborne levels of two other potent gases _ one from ancient plants, the other from flat-panel screen technology _ are on the rise, too. And that's got scientists concerned about accelerated global warming.

The gases are methane and nitrogen trifluoride. Both pale in comparison to the global warming effects of carbon dioxide, produced by the burning of coal, oil and other fossil fuels. In the past couple of years, however, these other two gases have been on the rise, according to two new studies. The increase is not accounted for in predictions for future global warming and comes as a nasty surprise to climate watchers.

Methane is by far the bigger worry. It is considered the No. 2 greenhouse gas based on the amount of warming it causes and the amount in the atmosphere. The total effect of methane on global warming is about one-third that of man-made carbon dioxide.

Methane comes from landfills, natural gas, coal mining, animal waste, and decaying plants. But it's the decaying plants that worry scientists most. That's because thousands of years ago billions of tons of methane were created by decaying Arctic plants. It lies frozen in permafrost wetlands and trapped in the ocean floor. As the Arctic warms, the concern is this methane will be freed and worsen warming. Scientists have been trying to figure out how they would know if this process is starting.

It's still early and the data are far from conclusive, but scientists say they are concerned that what they are seeing could be the start of the release of the Arctic methane.

After almost eight years of stability, atmospheric methane levels _ measured every 40 minutes by monitors near remote coastal cliffs _ suddenly started rising in 2006. The amount of methane in the air has jumped by nearly 28 million tons from June 2006 to October 2007. There is now more than 5.6 billion tons of methane in the air.

"If it's sustained, it's bad news," said MIT atmospheric scientist Ron Prinn, lead author of the methane study, which will be published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters Oct. 31. "This is a heads up. We're seeing smoke. It remains to be seen whether this is the fire we're really worried about.

"Whenever methane increases, you are accelerating climate change," he said.

Story continues below
advertisement

By contrast, nitrogen trifluoride has been considered such a small problem that it's generally been ignored. The gas is used as a cleaning agent during the manufacture of liquid crystal display television and computer monitors and for thin-film solar panels.

Earlier efforts to determine how much nitrogen trifluoride is in the air dramatically underestimated the amounts, said Ray Weiss, a geochemistry professor with Scripps Institution of Oceanography and lead author on a nitrogen trifluoride paper. It is set to be published in Geophysical Letters in November.

Nitrogen trifluoride levels in the air _ measured in parts per trillion _ have quadrupled in the last decade and increased 30-fold since 1978, according to Weiss, who is also a co-author of the methane paper.

It contributes only 0.04 percent of the total global warming effect that man-made carbon dioxide does from the burning of fossil fuels.

But nitrogen trifluoride is one of the more potent gases, thousands of times stronger at trapping heat than carbon dioxide. Methane is more than 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide on a per molecule basis. Carbon dioxide remains the most important gas because of its huge levels and rapid growth.

Still, methane and the potential of future increases is a worry, Weiss and others say.

Its recent increase coincides with anecdotal evidence of more methane being released in the shallow parts of the Arctic Ocean. A scientific survey in late summer found methane levels in the east Siberian Sea up to 10,000 times higher than normal, said Orjan Gustafsson, an environmental scientist at Stockholm University who has just returned from the six-week survey.

Prinn's data are consistent with the early results of "whole fields of methane bubbles" that Gustafsson said he found last month.

The highest methane level increases were seen in monitoring stations in Alert, Canada, which with recent anecdotal evidence points to plants in permafrost thawing and decaying.

Stanford University environmental scientist Stephen Schneider cautioned that the recent increase is new and that "it is pretty hard to be very confident of any trend or big story yet on methane."

Methane levels have kept scientists guessing for the past decade. They were on the rise until about 1997, then soared in 1998 and then leveled off until jumping again in 2006.

WASHINGTON — Carbon dioxide isn't the only greenhouse gas that worries climate scientists. Airborne levels of two other potent gases _ one from ancient plants, the other from flat-panel screen t...
WASHINGTON — Carbon dioxide isn't the only greenhouse gas that worries climate scientists. Airborne levels of two other potent gases _ one from ancient plants, the other from flat-panel screen t...
Filed by Nick Sabloff  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
63
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 (2 pages total)
- Exusian I'm a Fan of Exusian 25 fans permalink

This is what an ice-free Arctic means:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html

It is one of the oft-mentioned tipping points. One of the biggest ones, in fact.

If the methane clathrates go, then the deniers/delayers will be right: there will be nothing we can do to stop global warming.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:07 PM on 10/25/2008
- Exusian I'm a Fan of Exusian 25 fans permalink

This is what an ice-free Arctic means:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html

The Independent - The methane time bomb
Arctic scientists discover new global warming threat as melting permafrost releases millions of tons of a gas 20 times more damaging than carbon dioxide

[quote]Underground stores of methane are important because scientists believe their sudden release has in the past been responsible for rapid increases in global temperatures, dramatic changes to the climate, and even the mass extinction of species. [Look up Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM] Scientists aboard a research ship that has sailed the entire length of Russia's northern coast have discovered intense concentrations of methane " sometimes at up to 100 times background levels " over several areas covering thousands of square miles of the Siberian continental shelf.

In the past few days, the researchers have seen areas of sea foaming with gas bubbling up through "methane chimneys" rising from the sea floor. They believe that the sub-sea layer of permafrost, which has acted like a "lid" to prevent the gas from escaping, has melted away to allow methane to rise from underground deposits formed before the last ice age. ...[/quote­]

This is one of the oft-mentioned tipping points. One of the biggest ones, in fact.

If the methane clathrates go, then the deniers/delayers will be right: there will be nothing we can do to stop global warming.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:42 PM on 10/25/2008
- wendynyc I'm a Fan of wendynyc 11 fans permalink

Al Gore is probably right - the Arctic Polar cap will have no summer ice within the next five years.

Shouldn't the Bush Administration officials and the Oil Co Executives be sued for their irresponsible policies that have resulted in the destruction of life on our planet??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 AM on 10/25/2008

Even if the United States reduced their GHG outputs to those of sub-Saharan Africa, with the decrease in standard of living involved in such an undertaking, then the climate would continue to change. And even if you sue the pants off of every energy company on the planet, the climate will still change. People's efforts would be far better spent trying to adapt to our environment rather than change it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:38 PM on 10/25/2008
- shockmagog I'm a Fan of shockmagog 139 fans permalink
photo

We will do both. There is nothing wrong with trying to slow down and lessen the effects of Global Warming. "Decreasing our standard of living" sounds like a talking point designed to promote fear.

One of the only correct things McCain has ever said was that even if we are not successful in the fight against Global Warming, weaning ourselves from fossil fuels while promoting renewables puts us ahead of the game.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:47 PM on 10/25/2008
- Exusian I'm a Fan of Exusian 25 fans permalink

Ah, the same old "climate change is natural" ruse, a favorite of those who have no comprehension of the science or the facts, combined with the "no fossil fuels means a massive drop in standard of living" ruse, a favorite of those who ignore that hydroelectric, solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear technologies already exist.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 10/25/2008
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 138 fans permalink

The most immediate thing we can do is to elect representatives who are not beholden to the oil companies, the way Bush and Cheney are.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:02 PM on 10/25/2008
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 138 fans permalink

It is looking like the pace of global warming is going to increase, and increase radically. As a retiree, I had thought that it would be my children and grandchildren who would see most of the effects of GW, but now it looks like there may be huge changes even in my lifetime.

It may be too late to prevent massive methane discharges from the tundra and the oceans, but we can still do something about the root cause of the arctic warming. We have to cut way back on the amount of CO2 that we release into our atmosphere. The "good" thing about methane in the atmosphere is that it tends to wash out after about 15 years. The really, really "bad" thing about the methane is that it is an extremely warming agent to have in the atmosphere, and we are probably already past the point of being able to stop massive amounts of additional methane from being released from the arctic.

From reading the article, it sounds like we also had better do something very soon to eliminate the release of nitrogen triflouride. Since most of the manufacturing that uses that chemical is done in Asia, we need to find a way to convince the manufacturers to stop using and/or releasing it. The nations of the world successfully cooperated to eliminate the release of r-12 into our air, and we need to keep cooperating in that spirit in the future.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 AM on 10/25/2008

"The nations of the world successfully cooperated to eliminate the release of r-12 into our air"

Bullshit. Ever worked on a car manufactured previous to 1994? they still leak R-12. Refrigerators still use the same thing, it is just called R-22.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:40 PM on 10/25/2008
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 138 fans permalink

R-134a has successfully been used in the cars and trucks made in the last 15 or so years, and it has been used because it does not destroy the ozone layer the way R-12 did.

R-22 is used in refrigerators and household airconditioners, not automobiles, and it is far less damaging to the ozone layer than R-12 was.

The world-wide effort to stop using R-12 has succeeded, except for the very small percentage of vehicles still being used that were made prior to the mandated switch over to R-134a. Observations by scientists over the last several years verify that the ozone holes are shrinking. This example of cooperation among all the peoples of the world should be duplicated in our efforts to reduce green-house gas emissions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 PM on 10/25/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect