Early spring rain boosts methane from thawing permafrost by 30 percent

Early spring rain boosts methane from thawing permafrost by 30 percent
Grassy plants called sedges grow across the surface of the bog that Neumann and her team studied. Credit: Rebecca Neumann/University of Washington

Arctic permafrost is thawing as the Earth warms due to climate change. In some cases, scientists predict that this thawing soil will release increasing amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, that is known to trap more heat in our planet's atmosphere.

Now a University of Washington-led team has found a new reason behind increased methane emissions from a thawing permafrost bog in Alaska: Early spring rainfall warms up the bog and promotes the growth of plants and methane-producing . The team showed that early precipitation in 2016 warmed the bog about three weeks earlier than usual, and increased the bog's methane emissions by 30 percent compared to previous years. These results were recently published in Geophysical Research Letters.

"In general, the chance of generating methane goes up with increased rainfall because soils get waterlogged. But what we see here is different," said corresponding author Rebecca Neumann, an associate professor in the UW Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering. "Early rainfall sent a slog of warm water moving into our bog. We believe microbes in the bog got excited because they were warmed up, so they released nutrients from the soil that allowed more plant growth. Methane production and are tightly linked with soil temperature and plant growth.

"Our results emphasize that these permafrost regions are sensitive to the thermal effects of rain, and because we're anticipating that these environments are going to get wetter in the future, we could be seeing increases in methane emissions that we weren't expecting."

In northern latitudes, bogs form when ice-rich permafrost thaws. The thawed area sinks relative to the surrounding landscape as the ice melts, and soil becomes waterlogged, creating a wetland with grassy plants called sedges growing across the surface.

Neumann and her team studied a thawing permafrost bog located about 20 miles from Fairbanks, Alaska, from 2014 through 2016. Over the years, the researchers tracked methane emissions in and around the bog, sedge plant growth and soil temperature at 16 different depths.

In 2016 the team saw temperatures at the edge of the bog increase 20 days earlier, and cumulative methane emissions across the bog increase by 30 percent as compared to the previous years.

"We saw the plants going crazy and methane emissions going bonkers," Neumann said. "2016 had above average rainfall, but so did 2014. So what was different about this year?"

The key turned out to be the timing of the precipitation: The spring rainfall started earlier in 2016 compared to 2014. In the spring the ground is colder than the air. So the rain, which is the same temperature as the air, warms up the ground as it enters the soil. The earlier the spring rains come, the sooner the soil in the surrounding forest gets saturated. Any surplus rain then flows down into the bog, rapidly warming the bog soils.

The warm soil aids microbes living in the bog and speeds up their metabolisms. Normally microbes use oxygen to break down organic matter, and they release carbon dioxide into the air. But in waterlogged soils, like a bog created by permafrost thaw, there's no oxygen around. So the microbes have to use whatever is available, and they end up converting organic matter into methane.

Early spring rain boosts methane from thawing permafrost by 30 percent
A UW-led team has found that early spring rainfall warms up a thawing permafrost bog in Alaska and promotes the growth of plants and methane-producing microbes. Credit: Rebecca Neumann/University of Washington

"It's the bottom of the barrel in terms of energy production for them," Neumann said. "The microbes in this bog on some level are like 'Oh man, we're stuck making methane because that's all this bog is allowing us to do.'"

At the same time, the sedge plants are also fueled by the warmer soil. In 2016 the team found more of these plants at the warmer edges of the bog. Sedges, like most plants, take carbon dioxide from the air to make their food, which they send to their roots to help them grow. Sometimes the food leaks out of the roots into the soil where it can become food for the microbes. So more sedges directly fuel the microbes to make more methane.

In addition, sedges contain hollow, air-filled tubes that allow oxygen to flow from the air to their roots. These tubes also allow the microbes' methane to escape the bog and enter the atmosphere.

"The plants are really doing two things," Neumann said. "They're providing yummy carbon that lets the microbes make more methane than they would have otherwise. The also provide a conduit that allows methane to escape into the atmosphere. They're a double whammy for methane production and emission."

As the Earth warms, these northern latitude regions are expected to experience more rainfall. If this rain falls in spring or early summer, these areas could release more methane into the atmosphere than is currently predicted. Neumann and her team plan to examine methane emissions from other bogs to see if this pattern holds true across northern latitudes.

"In general, the ability of rain to transport thermal energy into soils has been underappreciated," Neumann said. "Our study shows that by affecting temperature and emissions, rain can increase the ability of thawing permafrost landscapes to warm the climate."


Explore further

Thawing permafrost produces more methane than expected

More information: Rebecca B. Neumann et al, Warming Effects of Spring Rainfall Increase Methane Emissions From Thawing Permafrost, Geophysical Research Letters (2019). DOI: 10.1029/2018GL081274
Journal information: Geophysical Research Letters

Citation: Early spring rain boosts methane from thawing permafrost by 30 percent (2019, February 4) retrieved 21 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-02-early-boosts-methane-permafrost-percent.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
568 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Feb 04, 2019
We are told:
"....methane, a potent greenhouse gas, that is known to trap more heat in our planet's atmosphere."

But we are NOT told how much methane will actually run-up global temperature. Usually articles like this one use the Global Warming Potential (GWP) numbers from the IPCC reports to say that pound for pound methane is as much as 86 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat, but are silent when it comes to saying how that translates into increasing temperature. Anyone who does an internet search to find out how much methane will affect global temperature will not find the answer. It seems to be a well kept secret.

Using the GWP numbers it can be figured out though. If methane increases by a few parts per billion every year, it will run temperatures up 86 times what an increase of that same few parts per billion of CO2 would produce. Which is essentially nothing. And it follows that 86 times nothing is still nothing.


Feb 04, 2019
@Steve Case.
If methane increases by a few parts per billion every year, it will run temperatures up 86 times what an increase of that same few parts per billion of CO2 would produce. Which is essentially nothing. And it follows that 86 times nothing is still nothing.
The flaws in your 'reasoning' are clear as they are BIG, mate.

FIRST: you assume CO2 increases only "by a few parts per billion every year"...which is far lower than reality situation already, let alone once warming is sufficient to trigger even more releases/emissions.

SECOND: you fail to foresee truly massive releases of Methane AND CO2; from MANY previously stable reservoirs of BOTH Methane AND CO2 in clathrates/hydrates/Peat (ie, OCEAN 'floors'; LAND 'permafrost' AND PEAT reservoirs of Carbon...which LATTER 'peat' will decompose/burn much more fast/widely, thereby producing EVEN MORE of BOTH Methane AND CO2).

Please learn more about the COMPLEX science/issues before 'framing' more 'arguments'. :)

Feb 05, 2019
RealityCheck
Fromthe EPA's site:

[GWP]is a measure of how much energy the emissions of 1 ton of a gas will absorb over a given period of time, relative to the emissions of 1 ton of carbon dioxide (CO2)."

It's a comparison that asks, "If CO2 and CH4 increase by similar amounts, what's the comparative temperature rise?" The answer is CH4 will run up the temperature up to 86 times as much as the same quantity of CO2. The reality is that the CH4 increase is tiny, a few parts per billion. So you need to compare to an increase of the same few parts per billion of CO2.

As for your second point that CH4 will increase dramatically, NOAA runs a nice web site
https://www.esrl....nds_ch4/
with data back to 1984 on methane showing a lot of variability over that time line. The MAX in 1991 was 14.02 ppb and the MIN was -4.92 ppb in 2004. The average is 6.5 ppb. And plotted out the linear trend is negative.

Best regards
Steve Case - Milwaukee, WI

Feb 05, 2019
The statement in my earlier post that the data from
https://www.esrl....nds_ch4/
when plotted out shows a negative trend isn't very meaningful.
Here's a plot of annual methane concentration rather than just the yearly increments:
https://i.postimg.cc/yxWg5QQZ/image.png
The Excel 2nd order polynomial/quadratic indicates negative acceleration.

Best regards
Steve Case - Milwaukee, WI

Feb 05, 2019

Using the GWP numbers it can be figured out though. If methane increases by a few parts per billion every year, it will run temperatures up 86 times what an increase of that same few parts per billion of CO2 would produce. Which is essentially nothing. And it follows that 86 times nothing is still nothing.


Here's a good link for you if you wonder why methane is so bad: http://www.onegre...howdown/

"We've seen that methane, which accounts for only 14 percent of emissions worldwide, traps up to 100 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 5-year period. This means that even though carbon dioxide molecules outnumber methane 5 to 1, this comparatively smaller amount of methane is still 19 times greater a problem for climate change over a 5 year period"

Feb 05, 2019
Positive feedback.

Feb 05, 2019
Cortezz, Thanks for your link. Yes, that link says methane traps up to 100 times more heat than carbon dioxide. What your link doesn't say is how much methane will actually run up global temperature.

Fill in the blank:

By 2100 methane will increase from 1800 ppb to 2300 ppb, this will increase global temperature by _____ degrees C.

Feb 05, 2019
@Steve Case.
By 2100 methane will increase from 1800 ppb to 2300 ppb, this will increase global temperature by..
Another flaw in your reasoning is that you fail to allow for the fact that Methane is converted by atmospheric physics to CO2 and water vapour. It is the increased TRIGGERING of even more FEEDBACK between the initial effects of the Methane releases and the subsequent increase in further releases of both Methane and CO2 from the fossil Carbon reservoirs...which is THEN ALSO followed by PERSISTENT CO2 increases from Methane CONVERSION to MORE CO2...and so on.

As @Da Schneib just reminded you/all above, it's the initiation of...
Positive feedback
...RUNAWAY GREENHOUSE effects that will be the most dangerous during this transition period (between previous 'tolerable normal' temps/weather/climate 'variability/patterns' and evolving 'dangerous instabilities/extremes') towards the 'new normal' that will not be so 'tolerable' for humanity.

Rethinkit. :)

Feb 05, 2019
..RUNAWAY GREENHOUSE !!!!!!!!!! lol

methane-the-irrelevant-greenhouse-gas

https://wattsupwi...use-gas/


Feb 06, 2019
Cortezz, Thanks for your link. Yes, that link says methane traps up to 100 times more heat than carbon dioxide. What your link doesn't say is how much methane will actually run up global temperature.

I don't know if anyone can actually say that. I wish they had a chart that would state how much every single greenhouse gas heats the atmosphere but I think no scientist wants to put their name under that. I think it would be really wild guessing.

But I found this: "As of 2011, methane contributed radiative forcing of 0.48 ± 0.05 Wm-2 , or about 17% of the total radiative forcing from all of the long-lived and globally mixed greenhouse gases."

From that you can estimate how much an increase of 500 ppb will cause radiactive forcing.

Feb 06, 2019
..RUNAWAY GREENHOUSE !!!!!!!!!! lol

methane-the-irrelevant-greenhouse-gas

https://wattsupwi...use-gas/


This picture debunks your link. It clearly shows how much of an effect methane has compared to only water vapor

https://upload.wi...ings.svg

Feb 06, 2019
your link

https://upload.wi...ings.svg

forgot water vapour , the biggest of all

Feb 06, 2019
Don't forget the ropes when the people whose septic tanks overflowed into their front yards when you said the sea level wasn't rising come for you. You better get lots of guns, because they're going to show up in thousands looking for liar deniers to hang up by the feet over their cess pools. And they'll have more guns than you can imagine. I'm going to encourage them and write my congresscritters not to make a law about it. You know, freedom and stuff.

Feb 06, 2019
Keep in mind more people live on the coasts than in the interior. Whatcha gonna do when they come for the liar deniers? Guns ain't gonna do no good. You ain't got enough guns. Better run and hide. Good luck with that.

Feb 06, 2019
I am so f'in tired of listening to the RWNJ trolls saying they got more guns. I figure it's time to fight fire with fire.

Some percentage on the coasts will claim it's a gummint plot. They'll be the first ones to hang. Then the cesspool gangs will invade the interior. Like I said good luck.

Feb 06, 2019
@snoosebaum.
RUNAWAY GREENHOUSE
lol methane-the-irrelevant-greenhouse-gas

https://wattsupwi...use-gas/
You and that simplistic author of the simplistic linked article you linked above are missing some crucial points:

1. Methane is CONVERTED to CO2 in the atmosphere, hence contributed to increasing CO2 load in atmospheric column.

2. CO2 is PERSISTENT and spreads across all atmospheric columns, hence there are NO 'holes' in the CO2 'blanket' (as there are in the water vapour 'blanket' due to water precipitating out of the atmospheric columns at various regions at various times).

3. Once CO2 increases to critical levels in STRATOSPHERE (where little water vapour occurs) the 'unbroken blanket' of CO2 becomes even MORE PERSISTENT and UBIQUITOUS than before.

Better 'call in sick' at that troll factory you work for, @snoose, so they don't get a chance to check your 'trolling effectiveness levels' and fire you! :)

Feb 06, 2019
@snoosebaum:

...cont:

4. The Methane in danger of being released en masse from VAST ocean/land hydrate/clathrate/permafrost/peat reservoirs is NOT...
The tiny increases in methane associated with cows...

Again, @snoose, better you 'call in sick' at your troll factory before they check your 'trolling effectiveness levels' and fire you! You're woeful at trolling, mate. Try being a decent intelligent human being with sense enough to NOT be like the 'rabbit caught in the headlights', @snoose. :)


Feb 06, 2019
Don't forget the ropes when the people whose lives were destroyed by the coming mini ice age when you said the sea level was rising come for you. You better get lots of guns, because they're going to show up in thousands looking for liar warmunists to hang up by the feet over their cess pools. And they'll have more guns than you can imagine. I'm going to encourage them and write my congresscritters not to make a law about it. You know, freedom and stuff.


Feb 06, 2019
methane, who says it best ?

https://www.youtu...soiyVTII

''hence there are NO 'holes' in the CO2 'blanket' ''

https://earth.nul...2.03,397

Feb 06, 2019
@snoosebaum.
methane?
https://www.youtu...soiyVTII
That linked video/author misses:

1. unusual 'fossil' methane/CO2 from clathrates/hydrates initially increases localised warming which releases more methane/CO2, and so on until the whole global system 'interconnects' all those localised increased warming feedbacks.

2. The Earth has 'buffer' components for heat/CO2 in Ocean and Cold regions/ice-reservoirs; so the TREND is what matters, NOT any simplistic localised/transient cooling/buffering...because when 'buffering capacities' are 'exhausted' all that heat/Co2 will RE-EMERGE.

3. the video/author is 'selective' in 'interpreting' the data...specifically 'excluding' data/trends which counter his simplistic 'analysis'.

4. Here in Oz and in many continents on the planet are NOW experiencing EXTREME COLD and EXTREME HEAT related INSTABILITY 'events' which make a mockery of that video's/author's simplistic 'analysis'.

He is (tragically) incompetent.

Feb 06, 2019
@snoosebaum....cont:
hence there are NO 'holes' in the CO2 'blanket'
https://earth.nul...2.03,397
.
Did you even rotate that sphere and check all the regions on the globe for the CO2 ppm load figures, @snoose? That link shows VARIATIONS (upwards from 400 ppm) of the atmospheric CO2 load in various regions; it does NOT show any 'holes' in the CO2 'blanket' ANYWHERE....NOT EVEN in the MIDDLE of the Atlantic and Pacific OCEANS! Face it, @snoose, you are even more (tragically) INCOMPETENT than those videos/authors whose (simplistic and misleading) 'analysis' and 'interpretations' you linked above and earlier in the thread. You and they are a danger to yourselves, your families and future generations; whom your self-entered and/or political/business/criminal 'interests' driven trolling and misinformation is effectively betraying. it's obvious that AGW-caused climate change is upon us all NOW. Shame.

Feb 06, 2019
@ 1 , who cares ? methane is not an issue, ppb , turns to co2 [ its going to get colder ]

@ 3 yes he distrusts the products of 'climate science' , thats the point

@ 4 , yes extreme cold , normal heat , great predictve skills have been shown [ not !]

Feb 06, 2019
@snoosebaum.
@1, methane is not an issue, ppb , turns to co2
That' 'conversion' is what I informed YOU about, mate; now you quote that back at me as if you are informing us of something we didn't know? And the 'problem' with methane is when VAST quantities from vast clathrates/hydrates/peat/permafrost etc initially causes warming of local region...THEN causing more releases etc etc...and finally joins up globally for overall warming FEEDBACK dynamics which overwhelms any temporary 'buffering' of CO2/heat in oceans/ice etc...which then means RE-EMERGENCE of 'buffered' heat/CO2...and hence RUNAWAY greenhouse effect.
@ 3 yes he distrusts the products of 'climate science'
And you/all should distrust HIS distrust of climate science...because, as I just showed above, he is (tragically; and perhaps even criminally) INCOMPETENT.
@ 4,...normal heat,
WRONG. See:
https://www.abc.n...10788072

Learn. :)

Feb 06, 2019
RUNAWAY greenhouse effect. !!

uh huh , thats been predicted for some time , nuth'n yet
from 2012

http://www.realcl...methane/

''Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, but it also has an awesome power to really get people worked up, ''

abc your fake news network, 2019 Hottest EVER !

Feb 06, 2019
@snooze is cesspool gang bait.

Feb 07, 2019
@snoosebaum.
RUNAWAY greenhouse effect
uh huh, thats been predicted for some time, nuth'n yet
It's not a 'methane' induced runaway greenhouse, it's a CO2 induced runaway greenhouse, @snoose. The methane merely brings forward the TIMING of that runaway 'tipping point': from when it may have been if only CO2 emissions increased/triggered it....to the point when EXTRA CO2 from vast warming-related methane releases CONVERTED to CO2....thus EXACERBATING the ALREADY ongoing CO2 problem that is bringing us ever closer to the tipping point PREDICTED AS THE FINAL PHASE of TRANSITION from pre-industrial 'tolerable norms, to future DEADLY 'new norms'.
from 2012
http://www.realcl...methane/
''Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, but it also has an awesome power to really get people worked up,''
See? it is BOTH powerful *and* SHOULD get people 'worked up'. :)
abc your fake news network
...says the incompetent troll.

Feb 07, 2019
Alaska shows no signs of rising Arctic methane, NASA study shows.
https://www.scien...4856.htm

And so, the PATHOLOGICAL LIES of the AGW Cult and their PATHOLOGICAL "SCIENCE" continues.

Feb 07, 2019
Meanwhile, on Earth: https://www.newsw...-1119624

If you're gonna lie, @tehalgore, at least try to make it plausible. If there are obvious articles out there that show you're wrong, what you get is a bunch of people laughing at you.

Now go hide from the cesspool gangs in your basement.

Feb 07, 2019
from;
http://www.realcl...methane/

''What could happen to methane in the Arctic?

The methane bubbles coming from the Siberian shelf are part of a system that takes centuries to respond to changes in temperature. The methane from the Arctic lakes is also potentially part of a new, enhanced, chronic methane release to the atmosphere. Neither of them could release a catastrophic amount of methane (hundreds of Gtons) within a short time frame (a few years or less). There isn't some huge bubble of methane waiting to erupt as soon as its roof melts.''

co2 derangement syndrome; HELP FIND A CURE !

Feb 07, 2019
@snoosebaum.
Alaska shows no signs of rising Arctic methane, NASA study shows.
https://www.scien...4856.htm
.
Your 'reading' indicates trolling carelessness/incomprehension of Climate system's subtlety/complexity, @snoose. Consider what you miss:

1. that is ONE STUDY with nothing to compare it to, to check whether that was an increase or normal compared to previous years.

2. the warming air temps may impact the actual GROUND differently depending on wind-chill factors, nature of soil, compaction/porosity etc differences between Alaskan and Siberian regions.

3. the TIME it takes (during the short 'summer' season) for warming to penetrate deep enough to seriously/deeply thaw the permafrost may at present be TOO SHORT in just ONE season.

4. BUT IF WARMING persists/exacerbates, eventually the SUMMER/THAW season becomes LONGER (like in OZ the summer/FIRE season has), so Methane releases will worsen.

Learn to read/think properly. :)

Feb 07, 2019
The latest Heresy will make your eyes burn !

https://judithcur...ump1hEYs

Feb 09, 2019
@snoosebaum.
The latest Heresy...

https://judithcur...ump1hEYs
How naive/stupid is this Judith Curry? Has she forgotten the 'scientists' corrupted by BIG TOBACCO to help confuse/delay action on the targeting/addiction of new generations of youngsters while BIG TOBACCO made huge profits as people DIED?

How long will you, @snoosebaum, be complicit in this latest attempt by BIG BUSINESS to confuse/delay action on AGW as people DIE all over the globe from the evolving 'new norm' of BACK-TO-BACK climate change related disasters?

If you (and this Judith Curry who wrote that article in your link) came to OZ NOW you/she would see how the dangers and deaths/costs are mounting as we speak.

Unprincipled/Stupid people such as you/Judith Curry are tragically (perhaps even criminally) INCOMPETENT time wasters/apologists for SCOUNDRELS. Murderers. Shame.


Feb 09, 2019
@snooze thinks it can avoid the cesspool gangs whose property it has destroyed by covering them with sewage.

Good luck with that. Hide in your basement. They'll be coming for you in their thousands. Your fate will be to be hung up by your ankles over the rising sewage you said could never happen.

Feb 10, 2019
apparently Scheibo has had some septic problems recently

Feb 10, 2019
@snoosebaum.
hot-not & wot-not ??

https://earth.nul...2,42.993
Thanks for linking that dynamic map showing the Earth's heat-transporting wind patterns currently experiencing increasing instability/disruption due to the added heat retention due to AGW effects. Did you have a point to make by posting that, @snoose? :)

PS: I long ago pointed out (to the trolls who spammed their troll-factory's 'meme of the day': "The polar bears will be fine") how the warming arctic was bad for polar bears *and* the land bears *and" the humans on land, who would be 'invaded' by polar bears no longer able to hunt enough of their usual prey on large sea-ice floes. Now here is confirmation that I tried to tell you was yet another 'downside' from AGW effects now, let alone all the rest as warming increases:

https://phys.org/...ive.html

Wake up. :)

Feb 10, 2019
jeez , not the ' bears' thing again ,

'' polar bears no longer able to hunt enough of their usual prey''

says who ? in this case its only 6-10 , more likely the pop is doing well and expanding

'' currently experiencing increasing instability/disruption ''

yes thats what i thought looking at that , but warm doesn't readily come to mind right now [brrr] , notice the southern jetstream is moving north ! during your summer , not good .


Feb 10, 2019
Not me; I'm on top of a hill. I saw this coming a couple decades ago. But you might meet some of my neighbors. They're pretty unhappy. They've already made their unhappiness known at meetings of the city council and there are some pretty scared councillors going door-to-door. They have instituted metal detectors at the entrances to the council chambers. And it's spreading.

Best have that basement all prepared. @snooze. And in the end it's not gonna help; they'll be looking for liar deniers to give them the Rialto Bridge treatment.

Feb 10, 2019
I mean seriously, you cannot possibly expect you can deny sea level rise when peoples' septic tanks are overflowing into their yards.

There's denial, and then there's comeuppance. You get what you pay for.

Feb 10, 2019
where the hell did they put their septic? on the beach ?

Feb 11, 2019
Where you told them it would be fine because sea level wasn't rising.

https://phys.org/...nks.html

Feb 11, 2019
3mm/ yr , yes very scary , i'm sure we will survive , don't build in a bog

Feb 11, 2019
3mm/ yr , yes very scary , i'm sure we will survive , don't build in a bog

Feb 11, 2019
3mm/ yr , yes very scary , i'm sure we will survive , don't build in a bog

Feb 12, 2019
@snoosebaum.
polar bears no longer able to hunt enough of their usual prey'
says who? in this case its only 6-10 , more likely the pop is doing well and expanding
It depends where they are seen. In some places it's many more polar bears invading (like 50+). They wouldn't come onto land in those numbers if something wasn't going wrong with their usual ice/snow hunting/breeding patterns/habitats etc.
currently experiencing increasing instability/disruption [of Earth's air/ocean current patterns]
yes thats what i thought looking at that , but warm doesn't readily come to mind right now [brrr] , notice the southern jetstream is moving north ! during your summer , not good .
The problem is increasing instability; and hence increasing extremes of cold/hot etc, as more heat/energy retained/cycled through Earth system.
3mm/ yr, yes very scary, i'm sure we will survive ,
In longer term that adds up; and instability/confluences cause increasing damage/cost.

Feb 12, 2019
''The problem is increasing instability; and hence increasing extremes of cold/hot etc, as more heat/energy retained/cycled through Earth system.''

increasing ? might want to check history , not much stability back there , all this warming is at most a degree or so over a century , so its -29 instead of -30 somewhere .
''
'In longer term that adds up; and instability/confluences cause increasing damage/cost.''

remember this was Miami we were talking about , the rich are all piled in there a few feet off sea level , the whole state is unstable full of swamps and sinkholes . Sea level rise has been linear and natural, end of ice age stuff .

and the P bears are getting their asses frozen as usual


Feb 14, 2019
@snoosebaum.
The problem is increasing instability; and hence increasing extremes of cold/hot etc, as more heat/energy retained/cycled through Earth system.
increasing? might want to check history, not much stability back there, all this warming is at most a degree or so over a century , so its -29 instead of -30 somewhere.
The operative term is INCREASING INSTABILITY, mate. Learn to read/understand properly in context, snoose. :)
In longer term that adds up; and instability/confluences cause increasing damage/cost.
remember this was Miami we were talking about , the rich are all piled in there a few feet off sea level , the whole state is unstable full of swamps and sinkholes ....
The global system involves more than just Miami, mate. The wider picture/trend is increasing sea levels and shrinking glaciers/ice-caps. Connect the dots. :)
and the P bears are getting their asses frozen as usual
And die more cruelly as less Arctic sea-ice to hunt on.

Feb 14, 2019
@snoosebaum.
https://www.thene...te-lies?
Poor old bugger, I feel sorry for him being exploited by that patently obvious AGW-denier who wrote that up. It's obvious that poor old bugger's claims have already been falsified by the current shrinking of glaciers, lessening sea-ice cover etc. Even the 'snow line' advancing up the mountains prove that AGW is underway despite his claims that we are in a cooling phase. Poor old bugger, the only ones taking his patently falsified claims seriously are the AGW-denier promulgators/believers like you and that 'writer', snoose. I'd be angry if it wasn't so pitiable.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more