Latest research, updates, and outreach
Could widespread, very low-level, as-yet-undetected Arctic methane explain the faster warming of the North Pole? Satellite data is focused on point source and larger scale emissions, hence missing subtle ground emissions.
The work of researchers like Katey Walter Anthony (phys.org) on bubbling methane from thermokarst lakes has been especially important in revealing that previous estimates significantly underestimated emissions from these sources.
From our web designer Johnny Sheflin: Permafrost Thaw in Siberia Creates a Ticking ‘Methane Bomb’ of Greenhouse Gases — in 2020, temperatures in the region rose nearly 11 degrees Fahrenheit above normal, causing limestone to release ancient methane deposits.
From Michael Moench, climatology student (Masters): NASA Earth Observatory notes higher methane concentration above the North Pole.
From Jean-François Louis, former Principal Scientist, Numerical Weather Prediction Group, Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc.: Here are 10 of the most important and influential scientific papers on methane emissions from permafrost:
1. Schuur et al. (2015) — “Climate change and the permafrost carbon feedback”
Published in Nature. One of the most comprehensive reviews, concluding that evidence points to a gradual but prolonged release of greenhouse gas emissions in a warming climate. Led by Ted Schuur at Northern Arizona University.
2. Turetsky et al. (2020) — “Carbon release through abrupt permafrost thaw”
Published in Nature Geoscience. Shows that emissions from abrupt thaw affecting less than 20% of the permafrost zone could provide a similar climate feedback as gradual thaw from the entire permafrost region.
3. MacDougall et al. (2012) — “Significant contribution to climate warming from the permafrost carbon feedback”
Published in Nature Geoscience. Used coupled climate models to show permafrost soils could release 68–508 Pg carbon by 2100, with additional warming of 0.13–1.69°C by 2300.
4. Walter Anthony et al. (2014) — “A shift of thermokarst lakes from carbon sources to sinks during the Holocene epoch”
Published in Nature. Found that carbon accumulation in deep thermokarst-lake sediments since the last deglaciation is about 1.6 times larger than Pleistocene-aged permafrost carbon released as greenhouse gases.
5. Wik et al. (2016) — “Climate-sensitive northern lakes and ponds are critical components of methane release”
Demonstrated the importance of aquatic methane emissions from northern water bodies.
6. Comyn-Platt et al. (2018) — “Carbon budgets for 1.5 and 2°C targets lowered by natural wetland and permafrost feedbacks”
Published in Nature Geoscience. Showed permafrost and natural wetland methane feedbacks require 9–15% lower permissible emissions to achieve climate stabilization at 1.5°C.
7. Meredith et al. (2021) — “Permafrost carbon feedbacks threaten global climate goals”
Published in PNAS. Argues that emissions from permafrost thaw and Arctic wildfires, not fully accounted for in global climate models, threaten limiting warming to 1.5°C or 2°C.
8. Parmentier et al. (2022) — “Seasonal increase of methane emissions linked to warming in Siberian tundra”
Published in Nature Climate Change. First long-term observational evidence of increasing early summer methane emissions from a permafrost site in the Lena River Delta — roughly 1.9% per year since 2004.
9. Schuur et al. (2022) — “Permafrost and Climate Change: Carbon Cycle Feedbacks From the Warming Arctic”
Published in Annual Review of Environment and Resources. Examines how much permafrost carbon will be released and over what timeframe.
10. Natali et al. (2022) — “Permafrost carbon emissions in a changing Arctic”
Published in Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. Examines processes that impact Arctic permafrost carbon emissions and how to monitor and predict them.
Also see work by M.V. Glagolev — years of extensive Siberian methane bog studies: Eurasian Soil Science / Springer Nature
And independent researcher Stefan Burns (geophysicist): YouTube presentation
Jeffrey has worked up the following to show what ground-level methane measurement would constitute an alarm threshold:
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| INPUTS | |||
| 2 | Percent of thawed permafrost | 10% | |
| 3 | Potency of Methane vs. CO₂ | 80× | |
| 4 | Methane decays after | 20 years | |
| 5 | Quantity of Arctic Methane (web says hundreds; seen 1,400 cited also) | 200 Gt | Gt |
| 6 | CO₂ negated by renewables | 2.6 Gt | Gt |
| 7 | Total area of permafrost km² (21–23 million per web) | 22,000,000 | km² |
| 8 | Area of thawed permafrost (B2 × B7) | 2,200,000 | km² |
| CALCULATIONS | |||
| 10 | Amount of Methane to cancel renewables (B6 ÷ B3) | 0.0325 | Gt |
| 11 | Methane Gt from thawed area (B2 × B5) | 20 Gt | |
| 12 | B10 as fraction of B11 (B10 ÷ B11) | 0.001625 | |
| 13 | Percent of thawed Arctic methane to cancel renewables (B12 × 100) | 0.1625% | |
| 14 | Margin of error of predictions over 20 years (B13 ÷ 20) | 0.00813% | |
| Note: Above presumes no feedback loop and constant emission — so probably much lower | |||
| GROUND LEVEL MEASUREMENT IMPLICATIONS | |||
| 17 | Methane to cancel renewables over 20 years (B10 ÷ 20 × 1,000,000 to kilotons) | 1,625 | kt/yr |
| 18 | Spread over thawed permafrost area, in tons (B17 ÷ B8 × 1,000) | 0.74 | t/yr/km² |
|
B18 ABOVE: CONSERVATIVE ALARM LEVEL OF AVG. GROUND MEASUREMENT Studies by M. Glagolev et al. (2011) showed 18% emissions increase over 10 years → adjusted alarm level: 0.54 t/yr/km² (B18 ÷ 1.36) See: Environ. Res. Lett. 6 045214 |
|||