[Vision2020] Global Warming, methane, politics

[Ted Moffett]

Jim et. al.

I was afraid my comments on the atmospheric lifespan of methane might be
misinterpreted as minimizing the methane and methane hydrate release threat
to global climate...

While methane does have a 10-12 year lifespan in the atmosphere before
dissipating, the amount of methane that could potentially be released from
human sourced global warming is very large when considering methane is
measured in the atmosphere at parts per billion, and methane is a very
powerful greenhouse gas, about 20 times more powerful than CO2.  The methane
releases that could be triggered by the processes outlined in the articles
Jim Meyer posted to Vision2020 could be ongoing for decades and decades, so
though the earlier releases of methane will dissipate quickly compared to
how long CO2 stays in the atmosphere (100 years or more), continuing
releases of methane will continue the warming process, leading to a
potential "run away" global warming effect.

Ted Moffett


On 8/30/06, Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Jim et. al.
>
> I enjoyed your excellent points on comparing water vapor and CO2 impacts
> on global warming to a scenario with Earth having virtually no atmosphere.
>
> It is important to consider though that human releases of CO2 leading to
> warming might increase water vapor levels in the atmosphere, so the science
> indicates water vapor should not be removed as a consideration when
> contemplating the future potential or present real world impacts of human
> sourced global warming.  And of course the claims that CO2 has a very very
> small impact on global warming that is dwarfed by the impacts of water vapor
> I do not think is justified anyway by current climate science.
>
> Thanks also for the links to the articles on potential or past global
> warming impacts of methane.  Thought this is potentially a very serious
> climate change problem that could be triggered by human sourced CO2 global
> warming, while CO2 can stay in the atmosphere for 100 years or more, methane
> quickly dissipates in 10-12 years, so its climate altering effects are not
> as long term as CO2.
>
> However, this comment below gave me pause.  If global warming is not human
> caused, our options to stop it might be very limited, just as stopping a
> large asteroid from hitting Earth would present limited options to prevent
> the disaster, only options to adapt.
>
> A large campaign is under way to mystify the science indicating that human
> sourced global warming is a danger.  Rush Limbaugh calls it a "hoax"
> regularly to his audience of millions.  I think making the case that human
> sourced global warming is not a hoax, that the best science demonstrates it
> is caused by human behaviors which can be changed to lessen the threat, is a
> very important argument to make.  Every time someone insists taking radical
> action to address human sourced global warming is questionable because we
> don't know enough about what is really causing global warming, just helps
> delay taking substantive action.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Ted Moffett
>
>
> > Lastly, it really doesn't make any difference what causes global
> > warming/fast climate change. The point is that it is happening and
> > people will die. It may not be from warming; it might be from cold.
> > But--We can mitigate. We can reduce the deaths and misery, but only if
> > we work together as one world, which of course, we are. Intelligent
> > mitigation with worldwide cooperation, that is the answer to global
> > climate change.
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060830/85bb6288/attachment-0001.htm