Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors
Gristmill

Burning ice, ice, baby

Methane hydrates: What's the worst -- and best -- that could happen?

Posted by Joseph Romm (Guest Contributor) at 11:03 AM on 17 Apr 2008

methane_hydrate.jpgMethane hydrates (or clathrates), "burning ice," are worth understanding because they could affect the climate for better or worse. You can get the basics here on ...

... a solid form of water that contains a large amount of methane within its crystal structure [that] occur both in deep sedimentary structures, and as outcrops on the ocean floor.

The worst that could happen is a climate catastrophe if they were released suddenly, as some people believed happened during "the Permian-Triassic extinction event, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum." The best that could happen is if they could be recovered at a large scale safely -- then they would be an enormous new source of natural gas, the lowest-carbon and most efficient-burning fossil fuel.

A recent workshop was held: "Vulnerability and Opportunity of Methane Hydrates," International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, March 13-14, 2008. You can find most of the presentations here. Science magazine recently ran a summary ($ub. req'd) of the meeting, which I will reprint below [unindented]:

Weighing the Climate Risks of an Untapped Fossil Fuel
John Bohannon

A recent workshop on methane hydrates felt like a powwow of 19th century California gold prospectors, looking ahead to both riches and peril. Sizing up the prize, Arthur Johnson, a veteran geologist of the oil industry who is now an energy consultant based in Kenner, Louisiana, predicted that "within a decade or two, hydrates will grow to 10 to 15 percent of natural gas production," becoming a more than $200 billion industry. And the peril? "The worst-case scenario is that global warming triggers a decade-long release of hundreds of gigatons of methane, the equivalent of 10 times the current amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere," said David Archer, a climate modeler at the University of Chicago in Illinois. Although no current model predicts such an event, said Archer, "we'd be talking about mass extinction."

When methane molecules become locked in atomic cages of water called clathrates, they form icy chunks that ignite when lit. These solids form wherever methane encounters water at high pressure and low temperature. The necessary conditions reign in permafrost and in some sea-floor sediments, forming a "ring around the bathtub" on continental slopes. This exotic fuel was discovered by the Soviet petroleum industry more than 3 decades ago, but even a few years ago many doubted its commercial potential. After several successful pilot drilling studies and heavy research investment over the past 4 years, says Johnson, "the question now is not whether industry will exploit hydrates but how soon."

Considering the skyrocketing price of oil, the answer seems to be soon, says one of the workshop organizers, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, an energy economist here at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis outside Vienna. "And yet hydrates are absent from most of the climate discussions," he says, "and virtually absent from the IPCC fourth assessment report," last year's 1000-page tome by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The goal of the IIASA workshop was to bring together researchers from all the different fields that touch hydrates-from chemistry and economics to climate impact-to get an "interdisciplinary perspective" on the uncertainties.

"It's clear that one of our biggest knowledge gaps is figuring out the distribution," says Michael Riedel, a marine geophysicist at McGill University in Montreal, Canada. "We still don't know how much there is in the world, not even within an order of magnitude."

Another crucial gap is the flux of methane, which drives hydrate formation over time. The largest amounts of methane hydrates are thought to reside in sub-sea-floor sediments. In a newly built sea-floor-monitoring network called NEPTUNE off the western coast of Canada, Riedel is part of a team studying methane-spewing vents to get a handle on their flow rate and marine chemistry. Where the conditions are just right, methane hydrates form caps over pockets of such gas. These not only are sweet spots for those who want to tap hydrates for energy but also represent a major worry for climate modelers.

"If the sea floor warms up by a few degrees Celsius, the most vulnerable hydrates will melt, and then you're going to get a massive release of methane," says Euan Nisbet, a marine geologist at Royal Holloway, University of London. That warming and release is expected to take centuries or even millennia even in the most extreme climate scenarios. Riedel says the methane bubbles from seafloor vents are sponged up by the ocean water. But if a methane release were large and shallow enough, it would reach the atmosphere, says Archer. What is unclear is whether the climate system has methane-driven positive feedback mechanisms that could lead to abrupt climate change.

Johnson threw cold water on the scenario of a massive release of submarine hydrate-trapped methane to the atmosphere. Most hydrate deposits found so far "are as deep as a kilometer below the sea floor," he says, "and they aren't going anywhere." Walter Oechel, an ecologist and carbon-cycle expert at San Diego State University in California, doesn't find the "doom-and-gloom scenarios" very likely either. "The real story for me is hydrates as yet another chronic contributor to greenhouse gas emissions," he says.

Others considered methane hydrates part of a greenhouse gas solution. A plan proposed by Vladimir Yakushev, a geologist at Gazprom, the world's largest natural gas corporation, based in Moscow, involves simultaneously extracting methane and methane hydrates while pumping liquefied carbon dioxide into the underground spaces left behind. Researchers also discussed the idea of using hydrates for electricity generation or even manufacturing on the spot. "We have to try to make it carbon-neutral if we're serious about climate change," says Nisbet.

The overarching question of whether methane hydrates should play a major role in climate change debate was up for grabs. Considering the workshop discussions, "the methane hydrate issue is one risk that shouldn't drive policy considerations at the moment," concludes Brian O'Neill, an IPCC author and climate modeler at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. "There are bigger fish to fry." But Neil Hamilton, director of the International Arctic Programme for the World Wildlife Fund, based in Oslo, Norway, says, "It's absolutely shocking that hydrates have gotten so little attention." The risk of a massive methane release, however unlikely, "is reason enough for very serious concern," he says. More meetings like these are clearly needed.

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Mining CH4 hydrates is a climate risk due to leaks



350? 280? Remember those numbers?

350 being the holdout number that we should try to get to in order to "minimize" global warming. We "minimize" wildfires here in California too; it consists of running a bunch of trucks and planes around while the damn fire does what it wants to do.

280 ppm was where the atmospheric CO2 level was before we started burning coal and draining every peat bog in the world.

In english:We don't need new sources of fossil fuels. We've burned too much already.

Lets shoot for 600 already.

Jesus wept.


Put the Carbon Back

Polar meltwater and deep sea temps

Interesting article, although with the exception of sea vents the temperature of the deep ocean over a mile deep is 2-4 degrees C. It is uniform and covers an area of maybe 60 percent of the globe. Sure, the top of the water can warm but deeper water are protected by thermoclines.

In addition, and many fail to see this, as polar ice melts, the meltwater is dense and hugs to the sea floor and circulates around the globe, even off tropical Hawaii but in the deeper trenches. That deep water is 2-4 degrees C.  

Getting the picture? It's cold as heck down there and  will stay that way for a long time.

And BTW, mining the chunks of solid clathrates sounds as fantastical as mining manganese nodules in the 1970's - which we know was all poppycock.

I'd me more worried about permafrost melting and releasing tons of methane into the atmosphere, maybe.
-sam

Onward through the fog

You don't understand-catastrophe is close

What isn't brought up in this article on methane hydrate (clathrate) is that a sizable amount is located in shallower ocean water vulnerable to small increases in temperature.  Furthermore, a "small amount" (about 400 billion tons, when a sudden release of less than 30 billion tons would be like doubling the CO2 level in the air) is located in permafrost, and half of the surface permafrost is expected to melt by 2050.

But, what is really important is the positive feedback loop, where a "small amount" of hydrate melts, releasing the methane (CH4 is about 23 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2), warming the climate, melting more hydrate, and so on.  What is really scary about this senario is we are already increasing greenhouse gas levels more than 30 times faster than the last severe global warming episode (which resulted in the PETM).

The idea that mankind could mine enough methane from hydrate to blunt the natural release when melted is preposterious.  Already there are reports of "explosions" offshore (when the methane emerges from the ocean, the water first parts, then collapses noisily), and rotten egg smell (that methane is thousands of years old and stinks like a natural gas leak).

Finally, you can read my blog at www.myspace.com/dobermanmacleod for more information, but there is a cheap and simple method of immediately cooling the Earth and avoiding catastrophic warming: add a small amount of aerosol to the upper atmosphere to dim the sun a little.  Frankly, I doubt many people understand how bad how fast it will get without that geoengineering mitigation strategy.

As the Earth warms, carbon sinks (like methane hydrate, which contains more carbon than all the oil, coal, and natural gas) will become carbon emitters bigtime.  Furthermore, the Earth is expected to aborb 30% less CO2 by 2030.  So, any reasonable cuts we make in greenhouse gas emission will be overwhelmed by nature as we warm (and it takes 50 years for the CO2 already in the air to fully warm us, so we've incurred a very large warming committment already, with a whole lot more to come since we are dramatically increasing emissions now, not decreasing them).

Elaboration

When I say that it is expected that the Earth will aborb 30% less CO2 by 2030, I meant 30% less of mankind's CO2 emissions.

In other words, now the Earth aborbs about half of mankind's emissions, with half of that aborbed by the ocean ecosystems, and the rest aborbed by the land ecosystems.  Both the ocean and land carbon sinks are becoming saturated and damaged by warming.  Therefore, we can reasonably expect only 35% of the CO2 we emit by 2030 to be removed from the air by nature.

Was we continue to dramatically increase emissions, the Earth will be absorbing significantly less, and will also be emitting much more.  Get the picture?

Latest news: methane level in 2007 soars!

Carbon dioxide, methane up sharply in 2007-US govt
Reuters, April 23, 2008

...The amount of methane increased by 0.5 percent, or 27 million tonnes, after nearly a decade of little or no change, according preliminary figures to scientists at the government's Earth System Research Laboratory in Colorado...

The increase in methane emissions after years of little change may indicate that methane locked for thousands of years in frozen Arctic soil known as permafrost is being emitted into the atmosphere as the soil melts.  "What used to be in the deep freeze is now being taken out in the warming," Tans said.  It is also possible that the 2007 rise in methane emissions is due to some other cause. Methane emissions rose sharply between 1978 and 1998 and then leveled off.


You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks