Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia • Hacker News Board

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#51

Post by torpfactory » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:12 AM UTC

blhack wrote: post #4

mdorazio wrote: post #2

So have we fired a clathrate gun then [1]? It's getting increasingly difficult to pretend worst-case global warming scenarios won't turn into reality in the next 25 years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis

What should we do?

Geoengineering is really the only realistic option if this is the case.

Sulfate aerosol injection is by far the most promising. And cheap - maybe 5-8b per year [1]. I'm not claiming this is a good idea in any way. As they say: desperate times call for desperate measures. We could buy ourselves several decades to sort our (as humans) shit out. We don't understand the unintended consequences very well, but at least this technique mimics natural processes (volcanic eruptions).

[1]https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034...

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#52

Post by unsignedchar » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:12 AM UTC

blhack wrote: post #4

mdorazio wrote: post #2

So have we fired a clathrate gun then [1]? It's getting increasingly difficult to pretend worst-case global warming scenarios won't turn into reality in the next 25 years. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis

What should we do?

Document our failures as a species for the next one that attempts to ‘civilize’?

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#53

Post by blurbleblurble » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:13 AM UTC

waste_monk wrote: post #46

Could this be mitigated by floating a whole bunch of logs / other flammable carbon based material and burning them, burning off the methane in the process? It would certainly lead to increased local temperatures in the short term, but it would remove the methane problem, and if we got enough carbon into the air we would eventually see a "nuclear winter" type cooling effect. This is obviously Bad and we'd need to burn…

This seems like a potentially good idea. Get it straight to CO2 as soon as possible. Otherwise I believe the half-life in the atmosphere is on the order of 10 years.

The problem I could see though is that it would likely speed up the melting of the Arctic. I'm sure there are really complex tradeoffs and someone would have to study them very carefully.

Intuitively I expect the gas to dilute very quickly, making it hard to burn efficiently over large surface areas... how much energy do you put into the fires vs. the amount of gas that is actually converted to CO2. It doesn't help that the methane will rise. All that energy will just go into quickening the melting of the Arctic. Which will also hasten climate change.

Like yeah if you could visualise methane pockets and target them with lasers to the point of combustion as they erupted, sure that could maybe work and much more efficient at converting the gas. Still seems far fetched though.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#54

Post by RobertRoberts » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:13 AM UTC

waste_monk wrote: post #46

Could this be mitigated by floating a whole bunch of logs / other flammable carbon based material and burning them, burning off the methane in the process? It would certainly lead to increased local temperatures in the short term, but it would remove the methane problem, and if we got enough carbon into the air we would eventually see a "nuclear winter" type cooling effect. This is obviously Bad and we'd need to burn…

It's comments like this that make me question if people really understand climate science.

If all we have to do to cool the earth is as simple as explained above, then global warming is solved.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#55

Post by Mediterraneo10 » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:13 AM UTC

eloff wrote: post #14

kjar wrote: post #5

Apparently it’s no longer mitigation, now adaptation. The desire to avoid nihilism at point is tough. I’m pushing 40 and I hope I get 25 more years, family kids are in for it.:(

I see comments like this all the time, but it doesn't happen that fast. You won't notice a big difference in your lifetime, and neither will your children, unless maybe they live in a very low area by the coast. This plays out over hundreds of years. It's still a serious problem and we need to address it, but I keep seeing emotional reactions that ignore the science and the current predictions.

Europeans have already noticed a "big difference" in the influx of Syrian and Afghani refugees. That invigorated anti-immigration parties, but those parties also advocated for various policies that went beyond immigration. A few million people had a huge impact on politics overall.

Now imagine the turmoil and political ramifications that could spring, even in the short term, from the flooding of Bangladesh and the migratiom of its people towards the global north.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#56

Post by Mikeb85 » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:14 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #44

Mikeb85 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's -10 degrees C with half a foot of snow where I live at this exact moment, does that cancel out your anecdote?

I think perhaps you ought to realize how childish the "it's cold outside so global warming is a myth" argument sounds. It makes you sound willfully ignorant, which I'm sure isn't what you intended.

I literally responded to a thread where someone said the world would end in 25 years, someone had a more measured response, then someone used the warm weather where they live as proof of impending disaster. Think about what I responded to.

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#57

Post by arbuge » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:15 AM UTC

milofeynman wrote: post #22

eloff wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see comments like this all the time, but it doesn't happen that fast. You won't notice a big difference in your lifetime, and neither will your children, unless maybe they live in a very low area by the coast. This plays out over hundreds of years. It's still a serious problem and we need to address it, but I keep seeing emotional reactions that ignore the science and the current predictions.

There's been a difference in the last 15 years... Look at the ocean currents. Look at the hurricanes stalling. That didn't use to happen. Look at tornado alley moving west. Look at the mass migration out of Siberia.[0] If you haven't noticed anything you aren't paying attention, or you're a gas company shill spreading misinformation. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/climat...

> Look at tornado alley moving west

I think you mean east:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2018/10/17/tornado-al...

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#58

Post by eloff » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:16 AM UTC

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #55

eloff wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see comments like this all the time, but it doesn't happen that fast. You won't notice a big difference in your lifetime, and neither will your children, unless maybe they live in a very low area by the coast. This plays out over hundreds of years. It's still a serious problem and we need to address it, but I keep seeing emotional reactions that ignore the science and the current predictions.

Europeans have already noticed a "big difference" in the influx of Syrian and Afghani refugees. That invigorated anti-immigration parties, but those parties also advocated for various policies that went beyond immigration. A few million people had a huge impact on politics overall. Now imagine the turmoil and political ramifications that could spring, even in the short term, from the flooding of Bangladesh and the mi…

None of which is predicted to happen this century...

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#59

Post by blurbleblurble » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:17 AM UTC

RobertRoberts wrote: post #54

waste_monk wrote: post #46

Could this be mitigated by floating a whole bunch of logs / other flammable carbon based material and burning them, burning off the methane in the process? It would certainly lead to increased local temperatures in the short term, but it would remove the methane problem, and if we got enough carbon into the air we would eventually see a "nuclear winter" type cooling effect. This is obviously Bad and we'd need to burn…

It's comments like this that make me question if people really understand climate science. If all we have to do to cool the earth is as simple as explained above, then global warming is solved.

I took this idea to be: since methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, and since it takes decades for CO2 to decay in the atmosphere on its own, maybe we could speed up the decay process (via combustion) in order try and avoid triggering extreme positive feedback (the clathrate gun).

Also yeah a lot of people don't understand climate science!

Re: Sea 'Boiling' with Methane Discovered in Siberia

#60

Post by eloff » Wed, Oct 09, 2019, 3:18 AM UTC

realusername wrote: post #18

eloff wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see comments like this all the time, but it doesn't happen that fast. You won't notice a big difference in your lifetime, and neither will your children, unless maybe they live in a very low area by the coast. This plays out over hundreds of years. It's still a serious problem and we need to address it, but I keep seeing emotional reactions that ignore the science and the current predictions.

> I see comments like this all the time, but it doesn't happen that fast. You won't notice a big difference in your lifetime, and neither will your children I do already, the weather is much worse than when I was a kid, much drier and the heat waves are harsher.

That's a small difference.