Ice cores suggest methane spike may be caused by plants, not hydrates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential causes of a significant increase in atmospheric methane levels approximately 12,000 years ago, exploring whether this spike was primarily due to emissions from tropical wetlands or plant production, rather than from seafloor methane deposits. The conversation includes analysis of isotopic data from Greenland ice cores and implications for understanding methane sources and sinks in the context of climate change.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference a study suggesting that the increase in methane was likely due to higher emissions from tropical wetlands or plant production, contradicting the idea that seafloor methane deposits were responsible.
  • Others highlight the isotopic analysis of methane from Greenland ice cores, indicating that the isotopic signature does not support a significant contribution from seafloor hydrates.
  • A participant questions whether the researchers accounted for gravitational and molecular fractionation of methane gas in their analysis, suggesting that this could affect the interpretation of the isotopic data.
  • There are mentions of differing views on atmospheric oxidation processes and the nature of methane sources, with some arguing that geological methane has a different isotopic signature compared to biogenic methane.
  • Links to various studies are shared to support claims regarding methane sources and isotopic measurements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the sources of methane emissions and the validity of the isotopic analysis. There is no consensus on whether the increase in methane was primarily biogenic or geological, and questions remain regarding the methodological approaches of the studies referenced.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential limitations in the isotopic analysis, including the need for corrections related to fractionation processes. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainties in understanding methane emissions and their implications for climate science.

Mk
Messages
2,040
Reaction score
4
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-08/osu-sro082106.php
A dramatic increase about 12,000 years ago in levels of atmospheric methane, a potent greenhouse gas, was most likely caused by higher emissions from tropical wetlands or from plant production, rather than a release from seafloor methane deposits, a new study concludes.

This research, to be published Friday in the journal Science, contradicts some suggestions that the sudden release of massive amounts of methane frozen in seafloor deposits may have been responsible – or at least added to - some past periods of rapid global warming, including one at the end of the last ice age.

The findings were made with analysis of carbon isotopes from methane frozen in Greenland ice core samples, by researchers from Oregon State University, the University of Victoria, University of Colorado, and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California-San Diego.

For climate researchers, an understanding of methane behavior is of some significance because it is the second most important "greenhouse gas" after carbon dioxide. Its atmospheric concentration has increased about 250 percent in the last 250 years, and it continues to rise about 1 percent a year.

...researchers studied two stable isotopes of carbon found in methane, that can provide a better idea of where the methane came from during a period thousands of years ago when Earth was emerging from its most recent ice age, and entering the interglacial period that it is still in. At that time, methane concentration went up 50 percent in less than 200 years.

[...]

"There have been estimates that releasing even 1 percent of the methane hydrates in the seafloor could double the atmospheric concentration of methane," said Ed Brook, an associate professor of geosciences at OSU and co-author on the study. "So we looked to the past to see if that may have happened during previous periods of rapid global warming."

Based on their isotopic analysis of the methane from the Greenland ice cores, the researchers concluded that it did not come from seafloor hydrate deposits or "gas bursts" of methane associated with them. The most likely candidates, they said, were higher emissions from tropical wetlands or larger amounts of plants, or some other combination of sources.

If the rise in methane had come from seafloor hydrate deposits, the study found, the atmospheric levels of methane would have had a different isotopic "signature" than they actually did.

...The current understanding of methane sources and sinks does not completely explain the isotopic signature of methane now found in the atmosphere. This indicates that estimates of methane emissions, including the human-made contribution, may have to be revised.

There are also concerns, they said, about methane trapped in permafrost across wide areas of the Earth's Arctic regions. There are significant amounts of methane found in this permafrost that could be released if it melted, and also organic material associated with melting permafrost that could cause further increases in methane. This might cause "a fairly significant rise in the total level of atmospheric methane of around 20 percent," Schaefer said.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Isn't that curious. Well here is the abstract.

Hinrich Schaefer, Michael J. Whiticar, Edward J. Brook, Vasilii V. Petrenko, Dominic F. Ferretti, Jeffrey P. Severinghaus 2006 Ice Record of 13C for Atmospheric CH4 Across the Younger Dryas-Preboreal Transition, Science 25 August 2006: Vol. 313. no. 5790, pp. 1109 - 1112

We report atmospheric methane carbon isotope ratios (13CH4) from the Western Greenland ice margin spanning the Younger Dryas–to–Preboreal (YD-PB) transition. Over the recorded 800 years, 13CH4 was around –46 per mil (); that is, 1 higher than in the modern atmosphere and 5.5 higher than would be expected from budgets without 13C-rich anthropogenic emissions. This requires higher natural 13C-rich emissions or stronger sink fractionation than conventionally assumed. Constant 13CH4 during the rise in methane concentration at the YD-PB transition is consistent with additional emissions from tropical wetlands, or aerobic plant CH4 production, or with a multisource scenario. A marine clathrate source is unlikely.

However there is something fishy here and I'll explain later
 
The fishy thing is here, of the last author, Jeff Severinghaus. http://icebubbles.ucsd.edu/pubs.html is the most interesting.

Check:

Here we address these problems with measurements of isotopes of nitrogen and argon gas trapped in air bubbles in the GISP2 (Greenland Ice Sheet Project 2) ice core. Bubble 15N/14N and 40Ar/36Ar record a signal of rapid temperature change at the surface of the ice sheet

The idea is that temp changes change fractionation processes with heavy isotopes within the firn, causing an enrichment during the warming. Isotopes, that is, all the gas isotopes, isn't it? Seeing this http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/313/5790/1109 (anybody seen the complete study?) it does not appear that they corrected for this gravitational and molecular fractionation of the CH4 gas, did they?

If indeed they did not, then the corrected 'warming' isotope ratio should be a lot lower, right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andre said:
Seeing this http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/313/5790/1109 (anybody seen the complete study?) it does not appear that they corrected for this gravitational and molecular fractionation of the CH4 gas, did they?
Here it is. http://static.mwnx.net/mac/Climatology/Ice%20record.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Testing Just lost a post worth of an hour work. :mad:

Well here are the links

http://www.ig.uit.no/~maarten/publications/Buenz_etal_Geophysics_2005.pdf

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/311/5762/838

http://www.ig.uit.no/~maarten/publications/Mienert_Vanneste_etal_MPG_2005.pdf

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/313/5790/1109/DC1/1

Bottom line was that Sowers and Schaefer et al see appear to see considerable differences in atmospheric oxidation and that the Clathrate methane source of the Preboreal, the Ormen Lange gas field was geologic methane not biogenic methane, with a different isotope signature.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It hasn't happened to me for a while because I put a lot of saftey procautions on my browser, but I used to save long posts on notepad so I would still have them and laugh in the face of my computer when my window closed or something.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
10K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
9K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K