Here's a related post from my blog that might be of interest ... Despite the recent release of an Arctic Council report on climate change and regional collapse (see Alarming New Study from the Arctic Council, 5/5), the past week has witnessed discouraging developments on the Arctic front. On Thursday, the Arctic Council held its seventh Ministerial Meeting in Greenland, with attendees including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The focus of the meeting was not regional deterioration and possible mitigation, but rather the accelerating scramble for Arctic resources made possible by global warming. The main purpose of the gathering was to sign a new Search and Rescue (SAR) Agreement, necessitated by increasing traffic resulting from intensified oil and gas exploration and regional shipping.
Prior to the conference, WikiLeaks released a series of US diplomatic cables detailing the quickening rush to carve up newly accessible Arctic mineral resources. In one cable, Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller is quoted as saying (with reference to US failure to ratify the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and consequent difficulty establishing claims in the Arctic), "if you stay out, then the rest of us will have more to carve up in the Arctic." Another cable quotes the Russian Ambassador to NATO remarking that "The twenty- first century will see a fight for resources, and Russia should not be defeated in this fight ... NATO has sensed where the wind comes from. It comes from the North." The Arctic is in a grave state, but the reality is that many national and corporate interests stand to gain considerably from a thawing Arctic. Mineral resources, fisheries, superior shipping lanes--climate change is creating a resource bonanza for extractive and other industries. The irony, of course, is that the region most sensitive to global warming, and therefore most likely to benefit from expeditious geoengineering, is the same region giving rise to some of the most powerful incentives to acquiesce in, or even hasten, climate change. Josh Horton On May 14, 2:09 pm, voglerl...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi Folks, > > John asked a few important questions and I also thank him for moving the > trawler problem forward. > > As to "nutrient question. I have found a correlation between 2 studies and > explored an idea for nutrient enhancement. Here is a copy of the post under > the thread "Lecture on Methane..." May 12. > > "If you take a look at this paper > http://www.mumm-research.de/download_pdf/treude_et_al_aom_hr.pdfPg 2 > > "The AOM consortium predominant at HR consists > of sulfate-reducing bacteria of the branch Desulfosarcina/Desulfococcus and > archaea of the ANME-2 > group (Boetius et al. 2000b). The archaea are surrounded by the > sulfate-reducing bacteria and both > grow together in dense aggregates that comprise up > to 90% of the microbial biomass in hydrate-bearing > sediments. The current hypothesis on the functioning > of AOM assumes that archaea oxidize methane in a > process that is reverse to methanogenesis (Valentine > & Reeburgh 2000, and references therein). The role > of the sulfate-reducing bacteria in AOM-consortia is > the oxidation of a so far unknown intermediate by > simultaneous reduction of sulfate, thus maintaining > thermodynamic conditions allowing methane oxidation to proceed > exergonically." > > Now take a look at this: > http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-05-scientists-links-biology-cloud-fo... > > The "so far unknown intermediate" seems to have been found by the second > group. Thus, I believe sulfite enhancement might be used to both feed the > sulfate-reducing bacteria in the vent areas to enhance the biomass around > vents and thus methane oxidation. There may also be a synergistic link > between increasing this process and.... believe it on not.....cloud > nucleation. > > This brings up the possibility of transplanting biotic colonies to less > well populated vents to kick start the natural process. Methane hydrates > are associated with local sulfate production in some vents. This may be a > clue as to how we might get new biotic masses growing....feed them sulfate > through dispersing blocks of compressed sulfate around vents. > > Just a thought....Any comments, suggestions?" This nutrient enhancement can > be done by aircraft. I will not take that much per sq km. > > Also, I believe the methane can be captured and used to cool the > surrounding water without extensive invasion of the area by industrial > processes. The broad sketch of the concept is the first post at "Lecture on > Methane". > > One last thing. I think the ESAS has a mean depth of 150m....still not > much. I try to address enhanced oxidation through hydrosol assimilation in > todays post to Sam on the same thread. > > Thanks, > Michael > > On May 14, 2011 2:24am, John Nissen <j...@cloudworld.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > Thanks Albert and thanks to Michael before you (about the trawling > > danger). > > Albert, the problem of the ESAS (East Siberian Arctic Shelf) is that > > it's shallow - about 8 metres deep I believe - so the microbes in > > the water do not have time to convert the methane rising from the > > seabed. Any overturning of the water column makes things worse, > > because it carries warmer water from the surface to the seabed, to > > melt the permafrost. But certainly an adequate supply of nutrients > > would help the microbes in the water. What about the microbes on > > the seabed - in the "biotic" layer that Michael mentions? > > Presumably they convert methane before it enters the water above the > > biotic layer. Is there any way to stimulate their activity? > > If venting were done deliberately, could there be a way of capturing > > the methane, with or without the CO2? > > Michael, I'm copying this to Professor Watson, representing DEFRA, > > to alert about the trawling danger. There obviously needs to be > > some effective international regulation to protect areas of the > > sea-floor where there may be a biotic layer of methane-converting > > microbes. > > John > > --- > > On 13/05/2011 18:50, Veli Albert Kallio wrote: > > The methane tends to be devoured by microbes. However, methane > > supply may exceed availability of other necessary nutrients such > > as oxygen and trace elements that living organisms require. Thus > > there is a saturation point where methane conversion to carbon > > dioxide stops, after this the methane dissolves into water as > > such. > > As a result, it is very dangerous situation if a still deep water > > pocket becomes heavily laden with carbon dioxide as this dissolves > > in huge volumes (5 times the volume of water). The water column > > becomes highly unstable if water overturns and the dissolved > > carbon dioxide and methane starts runaway nucleation as the rising > > bubbles pull water with them upwards. This leads to overturning of > > water and suffocating discharges of carbon dioxide and methane as > > well as risk of drowing where ocean turns into foam and becomes > > unsupportive to boats. Over 2,000 people died and professor Michel > > Halbwachs was commissioned to resolve this by a controlled venting > > of gases. > > The largest singel pan of highly dangerous carbon dioxide and > > methane laden water is Lake Kivu. Besides melting permafrost > > thawing methane clathrates, volcanoes can pump methane and carbon > > dioxide into water making it unstable, which has been so far with > > the case Professor Halbwachs team of engineers has been working to > > resolve to prevent further fatalities. We will see these in > > off-shore and on-shore water bodies that have presence of frozen > > methane. Microbes will eat methane away in most cases, but when > > supply of other nutritiens falls back methane accummulates > > after microbial digestion to carbon dioxide phases out. > > I hope this clarifies what happens to the methane and carbon > > dioxide as arctic reservoirs start leaking it. > > Yours sincerely, > > Veli Albert Kallio > > Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:39:59 +0000 > > Subject: Re: [geo] Arctic Council meeting on Thursday - the truth > > is out > > From: voglerl...@gmail.com > > To: j...@cloudworld.co.uk > > CC: robert.wat...@defra.gsi.gov.uk; albert_kal...@hotmail.com; > > crisis-fo...@jiscmail.ac.uk; > > climatechangepolit...@yahoogroups.com; john.dav...@foe.co.uk; > > gorm...@waitrose.com; kcalde...@stanford.edu; > > Geoengineering@googlegroups.com; richard.bla...@bbc.co.uk; > > sam.car...@gmail.com; g.monb...@zetnet.co.uk; > > markly...@zetnet.co.uk; robert.wat...@uea.ac.uk > > Hi Folks, > > Your question "There could also be an effect of methane bubbling > > through water on marine life. Anybody know?" > > I don't know about health effects on marine life at an expert > > level, but....probable little...if any. However, Please pay > > attention to this........ > >http://www.afma.gov.au/resource-centre/teachers-and-students/about-fi... > > This is the type of commercial fishing gear you can expect going > > into new arctic areas. The Demersal trawling gear drags along the > > seabed and basically will wipe out and kill every thing in it's > > path. If this happens in a hydrate field, critical damage to the > > methane oxidizing biotic layer will happen. It was a trawler that > > found the Cascade Hydrate field. The sea-floor biotic layer can > > oxidize up to 90% of the methane. I don't think we need to loose > > that type of protection. > > Also, this type of fishing boat wiped out the north Atlantic cod > > and is now making a big dent in the north pacific stock. They work > > the continental shelves. So, don't underestimate what they can do > > to a hydrate field. And, expect them to cheat if they are limited > > to only mid water gear. It is very easy to switch gear with few > > knowing about it. I have watched a number of shady practices in > > that business. They need to be banned from any known or suspected > > hydrate fields and probably the arctic as a whole. Fish-n-Chips > > are not worth it. > > Thanks > > Michael > > On May 12, 2011 11:30pm, John Nissen > > wrote: > > > > Dear Professor Watson, > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9483790.stm > > > > How absurd. Now we have it confirmed that the Arctic Council > > is > > > there, not to pretect the Arctic, but to carve up the > > resources. > > > And now we know that the people involved ARE rubbing their > > hands > > > with glee as the sea ice retreats, seemingly oblivious of the > > > tremendous horrors that await them (and the rest of humanity) > > as > > > Arctic ice melts away and methane, trapped by permafrost, is > > > discharged in ever increasing quantities to exacerbate global > > > warming. There are signs that this process is already > > underway > > > [1]. As I said to BBC correspondent, Richard Black, at the > > EGU > > > conference in April, we only need 10% of potential methane to > > be > > > discharged over 20 years, and the rate of global warming > > would be > > > multiplied by about 40 times [2]. This is easily enough to > > cause > > > abrupt and catastrophic climate change [3]. > > > > Governments around the world, together with the whole > > environment > > > movement, should unite to fight this absurd situation, and > > back a > > > plan to stop the methane at all costs. This is an emergency. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > John > > > > [1]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8437703.stm > > > > [2] Sam Carana points out that I was erring on the low side > > for > > > this figure. > > > > [3] I am not the first to point out this danger from > > methane. > > > Research on the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS) has exposed > > the > > > dire situation. > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
