Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

Often I see comments asking what we can do to combat this, or expressing feeling hopeless. While it is not the complete solution, one direct way is by eliminating your personal consumption of animal products. Animal agriculture is a huge contributor to methane production, especially from cows.<p>&gt; Overall, we conclude that methane emissions associated with both the animal husbandry and fossil fuel industries have larger greenhouse gas impacts than indicated by existing inventories. [1]<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pnas.org&#x2F;content&#x2F;early&#x2F;2013&#x2F;11&#x2F;20&#x2F;1314392110.abstract" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pnas.org&#x2F;content&#x2F;early&#x2F;2013&#x2F;11&#x2F;20&#x2F;1314392110.abs...</a>

Not sure how this is &quot;unexpected.&quot;<p>For 20 years there have been articles&#x2F;studies saying that the &quot;calthrate gun&quot; containing all the methane stored in Siberia and the arctic is the best reason we need to keep CO2 levels below 400 ppm.<p>Now CO2 is at 415 ppm and we&#x27;re starting to see the accelerated release of methane and it&#x27;s &quot;unexpected.&quot; Why not interview one of the people who said this is exactly what was going to happen 10 years ago, and ask them what happens next?

One thing I don&#x27;t understand is why political leaders aren&#x27;t all over this? Think about a nation going full green and the effect it could have on neighbouring countries? Or a president understanding, that this problem was of highest importance could be a leader of a global change! Think about the fame!<p>But what do we have instead? Ignorance, unwillingness, a dangerous continuation of the status quo on the state level andin the general polulation. Think about exxon who knew this was a problem since the &#x27;70 and there&#x27;s no change in sight. A dark (or should I say hot?) future awaits us.

I bet frackers are underreporting&#x2F;underestimating how much methane is leaked into the atmosphere as a result.

Weird that there&#x27;s no mention of the melting permafrost as a methane source. I thought that was a well understood potential feedback loop for climate change.

&quot;That said, most experts in the field suspect that all traditional sources (natural and anthropogenic) are contributing at least in small part to the surge, and that the biggest contributor might be wetlands responding to climate change (though there is some dissent on this point).&quot;<p>New kind of clathrate gun we didn&#x27;t anticipate?

The risk of abrupt methane release in the east siberian arctic shelf: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=kx1Jxk6kjbQ" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=kx1Jxk6kjbQ</a><p>This graph is more fun but not up to date <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.methanelevels.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.methanelevels.org&#x2F;</a>

Fuck this is scary. My understanding is that methane could be involved in some theorized runaway feedback loops.

Great hyperbole with words like &quot;surge&quot; and &quot;skyrocketed&quot; to summarize an increase of 12% in 35 years.

&quot;Starting in 1990s, the growth in global methane levels began to slow down, and global methane became relatively stable over the period of 2000-2006. A resurgence of global methane was not anticipated and came as a surprise.&quot;<p>If it&#x27;s been rising for centuries and is continuing to rise now, shouldn&#x27;t the six year period of stability be the anomaly, not the fact that it&#x27;s continuing to increase?

Keyword is &quot;unexpected.&quot; Despite all our climate models, we have almost no clue about the future of the earth. The IPCC reports are all guesses and the real situation could be much, much worse than anticipated.

Looks fairly flat in 2000-2008. What happened there?

Critical to finding the source of these emissions is first establishing who smelt it.

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor.<p>Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

My favorite doomsday scenario at the moment is that it may be earthworms who finally kill us: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;05&#x2F;20&#x2F;science&#x2F;earthworms-soil-climate.html?action=click&amp;module=Discovery&amp;pgtype=Homepage" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;05&#x2F;20&#x2F;science&#x2F;earthworms-soil-c...</a><p>They appear to be venturing into new areas and releasing carbon there, furthering global warming.<p>There are just too many scenarios of that kind.<p>Either we really are doomed, and climate will switch into a new kind of equilibrium hostile to humans.<p>Or, there are lots of mechanisms in place that counteract against such effects, and which are not yet well understood.<p>With so many climate based doomsday scenarios, how did earth survive for so long? I think there have to be at least some regulating mechanisms.