Climate scientists shine new light on methane mystery

[Scpg02.]

Climate scientists shine new light on methane mystery

By David Fogarty, Reuters
Thu Aug 11, 7:25 AM EDT

SINGAPORE — Atmospheric levels of methane, 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide (CO2) at trapping heat, stayed steady for two decades to 2006 on wider fertilizer use to grow rice or a surge in natural gas demand, according to two separate studies in the journal Nature.

Climate researcher Fuu Ming Kai from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Singapore research center said in one study that methane output from rice fields in the Northern Hemisphere dropped during the period as fertilizers replaced manure and because of reduced water use.

In the second study, Murat Aydin at the University of California, Irvine, concluded that a drop in methane emissions from more efficient burning of fossil fuels and a surge in natural gas demand.

The studies aim to solve a puzzle that has confounded climate scientists for years: why did methane levels in the atmosphere, after rising steadily for many years, taper off in the mid-1980s in a dip lasting two decades?

~snip~

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news...E-METHANE/

[Sunsettommy]

Quote:Atmospheric levels of methane, 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide (CO2) at trapping heat,

The usual 20 times more powerful baloney is never considered as being the absurdity it is.

For one thing.CH4 has a negligible IR absorption capability.Another is that gases do not "trap" energy.It is not possible to do that by it's very nature.

The two charts below shows vividly how minimal CH4 really is:

[Richard111]

Looks like methane is becoming big business. Have a read of some of the projects. Pigs are going to save us from global warming. I kid you not! Lots of numbers on the reduction of CO2 but no cost analysis of the equipment developed and installed on site.

Global Methane Initiative

[Derek]

(08-12-2011 07:41 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote:  

Quote:Atmospheric levels of methane, 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide (CO2) at trapping heat,

The usual 20 times more powerful baloney is never considered as being the absurdity it is.

A diagram may be of help to illustrate this...

[Richard111]

Isn't that a lovely graph? Been drooling over it since SST posted it over here a couple of days ago. Post # 52

Not only does it show the poor response for methane it shows how bad carbon dioxide is at 15 microns. The 2.7 micron band is totally lost in the water vapour bands. Just the 4.3 micron band shows clearly but that is only effective in daylight. Warmists NEVER mention that.

Ah, well... I'm stocked up for the winter, wood, coal and gas, all storage full. Had -1C this morning in Milford Haven. A taste of things to come I think.

[Sunsettommy]

(11-07-2011 10:45 AM)Derek Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 07:41 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote:  

Quote:Atmospheric levels of methane, 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide (CO2) at trapping heat,

The usual 20 times more powerful baloney is never considered as being the absurdity it is.

A diagram may be of help to illustrate this...

Richard in post #5.Has answered for me.

The chart in the link shows why I called it an absurdity.

[Derek]

Just a shame more have not read Methane mythology by Joel Kauffman and myself..
I have attached the pdf to this post for convenience.

I added to Joel's original plot, with his permission and approval to produce the above plot.

NB - If your new to all this, CH4 is the chemical "shorthand" for Methane,
just like H2O is shorthand for water, and CO2 is shorthand for Carbon Dioxide.

[Questioning_Climate]

Methane is clearly one of the next environmental scares and even more stupid than CO2. Preparations are taking place:

Methane Hack meeting 1 Dec 2011: http://tinyurl.com/6bhhuom

Quote:"Surprisingly air capture of methane has not received the same attention as air capture of CO2"

http://tinyurl.com/6338zdc

At 0.00018% of air!?!

Have they never studied geology? Rock & soil naturally emits methane (natural gas) and the oceans produce vast amounts but much of it is converted to CO2 before reaching the surface, if it isn't absorbed first.

Atmospheric methane is up 0.000024% over 30 years! http://tinyurl.com/6jubdgw Now whopping 0.00018% of air!

[Derek]

If they can (seemingly successfully) get a parts per million scare going (ie, CO2), then,
they obviously think they can get a parts per billion scare going (ie, CH4).

Un-be-liev-able, beyond laughable, beyond reason, but apparently true......
They think they can.

What next, a parts per trillion scare....
LOL.

[Goose52]

Can anyone shed some light on how the spectoscopy is done. Is a sample of the air used or a pure sample of whatever is being tested? I seem to remember reading that a certain something (CO2) doesn't absorb really much better then air that surrounds it.

[Richard111]

(11-12-2011 07:46 PM)Goose52 Wrote:  Can anyone shed some light on how the spectoscopy is done. Is a sample of the air used or a pure sample of whatever is being tested? I seem to remember reading that a certain something (CO2) doesn't absorb really much better then air that surrounds it.

Good question. Something I've been keeping a lookout for. See the spectrum I posted over at Layman struggles
Post: #132 where reported temperature for the spectrum is 1,500k.
Nice example of line doubling but let us see a spectrum at 255K (-18C) and I bet we see no line doubling. In fact we would not even see any spike at all for the 2.7 and 4.3 micron bands for CO2. As for methane... zilsch!

The spectrum in Post:#6 above is "absorbance" at 28C. I assume this was recorded in the daytime looking upwards, i.e. energetic photons from the sun would be needed to see much below 5 microns.