If we come together all 7.8 billion stop all emissions. We still melt a guess about 85 % all ice and permafrost. Not to mention the shock this planet would have.
Try to mix your weekly doses of information with this and also more positive news. Otherwise it can be atrocious to your mental health. I about a year ago i had to start taking antidepressants and one of the reasons was that i was stuck in a dooming loop of bad news and pessimists in social media
He doesn't know why.... AEROSOL MASKING EFFECT!!! HEEEEEELLLLLLLOOOOOOO!!!!! HEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Is there someone in this head?????? HEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
I watched a video in 2013 The Arctic Death Spiral, the Methane Time Bomb. I had never seen so many people in a state of clinical shock. Shakhova and SImelotov had good reason to be in shock since the IPCC openly mocked their studies, and even banned them from one conference. Those actions are criminal and for them to now start acting like they're concerned rings hollow. Kudos to JHAT for getting the methane potency correct. Swiss media gaslights people and lies about it's potency.
I couldn't agree more Lawrence. Shakova was interviewed on several occasions by Nick Breeze from memory. She was definitlely very concerned with what she had seen on her last expedition.
It's never easy being the bearer of bad news. Especially on such an epically world ending scale. I sometimes wonder if all the government agencies and academic organisations push back so hard because they can see the reality and just want to keep everyone calm. Or perhaps their just ignorant fools 🤷
Hi, I've searched for the video with the names you mentioned but can't find anything meaningful, would you mind telling me the name of ghe channel? Thanks so much!
Right on. Even before that study I knew that methane was trapped in the Arctic. Just waiting to be released. Oh the greenies and woke are blind to what awaits us.
I remember hearing that there is an enormous lag time between green house gas emission and its full effect. The Perma-frost is thawing now but today’s emissions won’t be fully fealt for 10-20 years. My mind thinks we have already passed the tipping point.
There was a PNAS study on the tipping points that concluded that THE tipping point triggering all the other ones was somewhere between +1.5 and +2°C... So we are def close but IF we put strict regulations there is still a chance to reach a stabilized climate (hotter but at least somewhat stable) edit: The PNAS study was on hothouse earth: "Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene" Vol. 115 | No. 33
@@etienne8110 how can there be any chance? wed have to *decarbonise* this decade to stay below 1.5!! whats most likely is that we will reach net zero once our civilisation collapses
@@josephstalin5003 No, there were periods in the Earths history when the MGT has been warmer and the atmosphere had more CO2. Humans flourished and the Earth was just fine
Lots of Arctic Explorers happened to stay forever in the Arctic.🤭 I expect any Anglo American imperialist warships that might happen to misbehave in the Arctic will probably stay there too!😉🤗
Don't worry about the Methane. We had Hunga Tonga ha'apai blow enough vapourised rock, SO2, CO and seawater in to the stratosphere, mesosphere, and past 100km into space to clear it up.👍
@@josephstalin5003 Humans have a much bigger threat than Climate Change. We are WAY overdue for a solar catastrophe. And our magnetic field is failing FAST.
The US/UK demolition of the Nordstream pipeline (between Russia and Germany) in late 2022, reportedly resulted in the release of 500,000 cu m of natural gas (main component being methane). The pipline(s) were 1100km long.
Also, with 7% more water vapor per 1c rise, water vapor is also a greenhouse gas and will also trap solar energy, so for every 7% increase in water vapor that more heat will be trapped, accelerating the average global temperature rise
Wouldn't more water vapour result in more clouds giving more reflectivity and lower radiation making its way to the surface? Reminds me of the problem of growing trees in snowy regions making the area less reflective and potentially more heat absorbing.
@barryjenkinson9152 Not necessarily. The H2O gas makes clouds when it cools and clumps onto microscopic bits of anything solid. Warmer air can mean more H2O gas with less cloud and that's definitely what has been happening. The jury is essentially in now with CERES and Earthshine analysis and the cloud is less, or at least it's reflecting less, for sure. The quantities are all over the place on the Internet and it's being discussed energetically on Web sites with knowledgeable people that discuss that stuff. Lindzen was wrong ! (silly old twit). So it's now 7% more H2O, 4% more evaporation , 4% more precipitation, less sunlight being reflected by clouds causing an extra warming feedback.
Water vapour amplifies the effect of adding other greenhouse gases. If the other greenhouse gases remain at a constant level the water vapour comes to an equilibrium at the new temperature as the water cycle typically goes from evaporating to raining (or snowing) in nine days.
We will experience a lot of positive feedback loops and all the linear intervention strategies like 3% annual reduction based on a reference date will fail.
Methane hydrates “normally” originating from cracks in the sea floor are by far more a quantity that gets into the air than methane emissions from “human” activities ! It’s disturbing, that any type of greenhouse gas emission is automatically blamed on human activities !
@@MyKharli What deforestation …. in the Western world ? Europe has as an example more than the double of forested areas in comparison to 100 years ago ! North America has «distinctly » more forests than 100 years ago, but the % of « more » is still open to debate. It’s not a surprise, that the Western anti capitalist climate charlatans blame everything they can on Western industrial activity ……
The worst part of all this is that we really don't know everything for sure. Much like we didn't expect methane to rise, there are tons of examples of things we miss or just haven't discovered yet. We're committing actions on this planet that we don't understand.
Agreed we don't know. What about about those who know and keeping from us. More info is given then united we come come up with solutions. We are people and want to live.
@@manoo422 Let's take that pleasant "not so bad" assumption and act upon it. And then we're wrong. Bad idea. Btw, scientists don't think or assume the worst. They extrapolate from the data. That's why agreement is in the high 90 odd percent. The 1-2 percent who think otherwise are more often than not, employed by vested interested parties.
It’s something that started in 2020, not a decade ago. But you’re right the whole matter of reduced dimming and its side-effects are rarely covered. I strongly suspected the crazy weather of 2021 and 2022 was one of those side-effects.
@@KimiAvary - C02 is no time bomb. The earth has seen much higher levels in fairly recent history, and there’s zero risk of a “runaway” effect. Nearly all trees today evolved under a C02 regime with multiple times the current atmospheric content.
To be honest: it’s hard to be optimistic after understanding this explanation. If methane is such a potent greenhouse gas and its release can only be slowed by reinstating permafrost conditions in the arctic… well, we’d better get to work on survival strategies for a significantly different world, even more extreme than the 2 degree change models. 😅
@@rdallas81 agreed in the “never again by flood, next time fire” way of thinking… makes me curious to know what atmospheric changes triggered that ancient apocalypse, I expect it’d be similar to our realization about methane release today. or, did you have a different “destined” in mind with your comment?
@@grantandre79 I absolutely believe a fire end to the world. Burnt up completely in fervent heat so hot that even very subatomic particles that comprise atoms and molecules will be burned up just like space itself- big rip or the increasing speed of space itself will outpace the ability of material to withstand it.
I have seen calculations on 10.2°C warming by european foresight group John Doyle on average, that will be much higher on the continents, if that is true even bacteria will not survive, forget about survival, nobody and nothing will survive this
I’ll be honest, as someone who’s worked on this, once we get to 2 degrees, we arrive at 4 really quite quickly. Once we’re in a 4 degree world, we need all the energy we can get. Taking the 4 degrees of warming aerosols are hiding into account, we’re sat on a +8C time bomb, and we need to figure out how to defuse it on a bigger scale and more quickly than we’ve ever done before
Then who is funding it then and what are their goals, he cherry picks his data just like all the so called climate experts. T This is also debunkable like all the other vids.
@@shanewheeler713 Keep watching FOX then, who's stopping you? Keep the joy and happiness you receive in the knowledge that all of your propaganda is brought straight to you by capitalistic greed. Isn't it wonderful to have so many commercial interruptions that work synergistically with your attention deficit so you barely even notice the disorder?
@@paul9156c That's so funny! I'll take Capitalism over socialists' tyranny any day. You live in your fear bubble mate. P.S I don't watch TV so it doesn't bother me, I spend most of my free time reading.
I am just trying to learn all I can…often your “thinks” are over my head, but I try! And I admire how your break down such enormously complex topics to educate less science savvy people who, nonetheless, are determined to learn what we can to help. I’m glad I subscribed. Now I’m going to check out that Reuters animation.
In the late 1990’s my firm built a machine for Canadian Petroleum Engineering, to facilitate the exploration of these hydrates, in the Arctic Ocean. At that time, the hydrates were referred to as “the snow that burns”, when brought up through conventional drilling, via the mud tank. The goal of this machine was to provide a chilled mud that would enable core samples to be taken of the hydrate layers. Much thought was given on how these solid gas formations could be put into production, but it was deemed not profitable. This was because as the hydrate was warmed to re-gasify it, the expansion would rupture the permafrost, and the gas would escape to atmosphere. One of the engineers on the job mentioned that the consequences of this would be dire, as methane is a potent green house gas. Needless to say, the project was abandoned. . .
Animal agriculture, also known as factory farming, has a significant impact on the environment. Some of the main environmental impacts include: 1) Greenhouse gas emissions: Animal agriculture is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, particularly methane and nitrous oxide, which are both more potent than carbon dioxide in terms of their warming potential. 2) Deforestation: Clearing land for grazing and growing crops to feed animals is a major contributor to deforestation, particularly in tropical regions. This not only destroys the habitats of many species but also contributes to the loss of biodiversity. 3) Water pollution: Animal waste, fertilisers, and pesticides used to grow feed crops can all contribute to water pollution, which can harm aquatic life and make water unsafe for human consumption. 4) Air pollution: Animal agriculture operations can also produce significant amounts of air pollution, including ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, and particulate matter. 5) Soil degradation: Overgrazing and the use of heavy machinery in animal agriculture can lead to soil degradation, which can make the land less productive and contribute to desertification. 6) Biodiversity loss: Animal agriculture can lead to loss of biodiversity as it reduces the natural habitats of many species and causes their extinction. 7) Antibiotic resistance: The overuse of antibiotics in animal agriculture can contribute to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which can pose a threat to human health. 8) Loss of carbon storage: Animal agriculture also leads to loss of carbon storage as it reduces the amount of carbon stored in forests and grasslands, which are converted to animal agriculture land. This is not an exhaustive list and there are other impacts as well. The choices we make as individuals about the food we eat and the way it is produced, multiplied by the number of humans on this planet, makes a very big difference to our environment.
Real shit though. We burn everything under far cleaner conditions than we did. Looken way back like 200 years ago since the advent of modern machines our lives have completely changed and coupled with improved in efficiency repeatedly over the years we've actually gotten a better looking atmosphere today. Remember the dust bowl? You really think it's that bad now?
@@TheRealMikeDrop compared to 200 years ago the world burns a heck of a lot more too.. and developing countries don't have expensive carbon-capture. Can I ask what your thoughts are on the dust bowl ? It's interesting that because the theory of "rain follows the plough" ➡️farmers unknowingly created the conditions for the destruction of their farm land
@@AngelaH2222 - Don’t really see what the Dust Bowl has to do with this. It might have been exaggerated by poor farming practices but you can hardly claim C02 had any influence whatsoever.
How tight against the wall do people need to be before they understand it's impossible to continue with business as usual? No technology can beat exponential growth. The only solution is reduction. Will we do it equitably, or will we let mother nature do the culling for us?
Really easy-to-grasp romp through one of the most interesting subjects in atmospheric chemistry. I did a talk on methane to the West Yorkshire Humanists, and got feedback that I'd traumatised some of them! I only told them the truth!!
@@clives4501 Can you stop being skeptical about what you see around you and what you know of how things work? How old do you have to be to see that we are getting more and bigger storms, floods, fires, droughts? It's increasing every year. If you deny this your denial level is cultish. Are you really that lost to an ideology that you can't see reality?
@@jazziejim Hey Jim, thanks for your comment. in answer to your first question - no I can't put my skepticism to one side. In any argument where one side is heavily censored and proponents of the alternative view are vilified and/or cancelled, it pays dividends to be skeptical. From experimental medical procedures to climate catastrophes let us all have open and enquiring (safe and effective) minds. As for age in relation to floods, fires and droughts, I suggest that one lifetime is not enough. Climate has changed over the millennia and we kid ourselves if we believe that the wall to wall coverage of recent dramatic events is in any way indicative of longer term trends. So perhaps you consider that I am in cultish denial. Well no actually. Perhaps climate is changing as a result of human activity and perhaps that's to the detriment of the planet. I accept the possibility. However with my open, albeit skeptical mind, I am yet to be persuaded of that version of reality. I do not subscribe to that particular narrow interpretation of events. I resist group think. I resist the religious fervor and blind faith in favour of rational and open debate. There are many eminently qualified scientists and academics who disagree with the mainstream narrative re. climate change. Why are their voices not heard; nay suppressed, cancelled, censored? The science is not settled. Yet we are constantly told it is. Joseph Goebbels said "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it". We must not fall into that trap. Yet many have! And to finish with a quote from the late Frank Zappa - "the mind is like a parachute it doesn't work if it is not open. Best wishes Clive
@@clives4501 Well, Clive, at least you're friendly. But the denying scientists have not been censored. They've been supported and paid off by industry or think tanks. Look into the millions Exon, the Koch Bros., and petroleum organizations have put into the denial kingdom. Anyone who enjoys being a gadfly or will sell out finds a very comfortable and secure position for themselves. So I'm glad you have your mind and eyes open. What we are going to see is not going to be nice.
@@clives4501 I understand your skepticism about the censorship, but people are too weak to confirmation bias to handle both sides. Seems patronizing, but that's how we work... We get an idea, look for things that justify it, then once we find a scrap we dig our heels and don't budge even if what justified us is proven false (look at the "vaccines cause autism" debacle). Accepting it would mean accepting that we were wrong, not many people can do that. We want to make our own opinions, but we don't want to put in the colossal effort required to make one actually based on the facts (and even if we do, we are limited to a few narrow fields at most... knowing everything we as a species know is impossible) You know what we must not fall trap of? Believing that both sides of an argument have always equal merits Exxon researchers themselves predicted climate change in 1977, then the company happily ignored that and peddled the opposite for 30+ years (many news outlets have written an article on that a few days ago, even if it was known for a while. Shouldn't be hard to find one if you want to read it) "As for age in relation to floods, fires and droughts, I suggest that one lifetime is not enough." What are you using to substantiate that belief? "Climate has changed over the millennia" is actually against your point xkcd.com/1732/ Look how slow the change is "over the millennia", then look how sharp the change gets in the last 100 years or so Something is happening, arguing against it is even weaker than arguing that we did nothing that caused the change Resisting group thinking is different from ignoring data because the majority accepts it, the latter is just being contrarian for the sake of it
Huge 77 F temperature change from ionocaloric cooling breakthrough at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. Sounds deserving of coverage here. Thanks for this one!
what do you expect to cover with it as these processes just pump heat from one place to another place on a very short distance. The heat does not disappear or is radiated away. So intersting for heat pumps, refigerators and air condition but thats it.
@@Techmagus76 This looks to be the greatest temp change of any new tech trying to replace the environmentally problematic working gasses used in heat pumps. I'd like to know more about how it works and if there's a path to get it into people's homes.
I don't blame people for being skeptical of the self serving politicians and this economic system that prioritizes the interests of the already very wealthy. I just wish it was easier to convince them that climate change is not some ploy for them to control more (they're clearly not competent enough to do that), but is something happening outside of human civilization and is due to our rapid progress and we need to wake up and recognize that if we're not careful, we'll be an example of "intelligent" life being too self destructive to last very long.
So it seems that if we reduce burning of fossil fuels and so reduce atmospheric pollution then the concentration of hydroxyl radicals is reduced, methane levels go up and so temperatures rise. In addition reduction of air pollution also reduces global dimming, also causing temperatures to rise. It looks like things are going to get a lot worse before they get better!
Yes. We are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. As for "getting better" that's not going to happen for us or most of life on earth. Q. Who will look after our 400+ nuclear power plants while the climate warms, our food crops die, and our civilisation falls apart? They take decades (and millions of dollars) to decommission safely and we have no long-term storage for waste. If even only a handful are abandoned they have the ability to poison or even sterilise most of the planet.
@@langdons2848 A. future people will look at your comment as a prime example of shooting both feet. nuclear power plants are our only way to make power sustainably, they are super safe and the waste storage is complete non-issue, but you seem to think they are dangerous, even more so than other kinds of power plants. Could you tell us where the waste of coal, gas, oil power plants goes ? what are the plans to store it safely ? there are none.
Thanks Dave, another great video. I remember reading Peter Wadams' book 'Farewell to Ice' as I'm sure your do too. He wasn't wrong although he was vilified over the years by the academic powers that be. Yes, I knew what was coming as soon as I saw the title of this episode. This is the challenge of a lifetime writ large. We better get onto it now, no more time to waste. Thanks again
F, economic growth is more important that any other thing in human race, so u know, we're kinda d00m Bourgeoisie just wants to keep growing no matter what, that's all I see in my country that has part of the Amazon rainforest , good luck we'll need it
We need to demand that the US fund study and implementation of Cloud Brightening IMMEDIATELY , not study it over the next (to be non-existent) ten years or whatever . Here's Dr Peter Wadhams, Dr Steven Salter and Paul Beckwith being talking about it on detail last Winter (should have been DONE by now !!) ruclips.net/video/0BBVTStBrhw/видео.html
Arctic and Antarctic ice extent is the greatest in 40 years- Polar bears are at record population levels 37,000. North America has just received its largest snowfall in 40 years. Ice caps and glaciers have been growing for 7 years. Wake up you easily lead fool!
Al Gore told us we'd be underwater and have no ice by 2020, now he sips margaritas in his seaside mansion paid for with all the lies he sold to the gullible.
I had to do a presentation on gas hydrates when I was in college, ironically about it's prospects as 'fuel source'. Just reading for one section about it's challenges for extraction itself gave me unimaginable level of climate anxiety ever since and made me realize just how reckless the petroleum industry is for spending money for marine prospecting expeditions for gas hydrates even when they know full well that one small mistake can set off an unimaginable level of catastrophy for our planet; one 'oil spill' equivalent for a gas hydrate extraction process is enough and more for a catastrophy. Gas hydrates are already under the threat of destabilizing with just global warming and the petroleum industry still want a piece of that pie
Thanks Dave. The clathrate gun is starting to off in the Arctic as predicted. There is now too much heat stored in the oceans to stop it. Shakhova and SImelotov stated btw 50 and 500 Giga tons of methane is stored down there, not including permafrost.
No, it's more than 500 billion tons of methane stored down there. 1.4 trillion sounds more accurate to me. From what I understand, methane hydrate has been building for most of the last 200 million years, whereas permafrost is only a few million and can only exist on 1/4 of the planets surface.
Methane is present in almost immeasurably low levels and in the last 50 years the amount has increased by a tiny fraction of immeasurable levels. You are talking parts per billion when measuring a gas that breaks down naturally to mostly water and some C02. Climate alarmism is big business. Isn't it time you stop funding adversaries because you got easily frightened?
@@richardivonen3564 No, the fear creation is accelerating. They need you to stampede. Again. Remember trust the science re: Covid? How did that work out? Stop trusting these people!
Me and my girl didnt get the (you know what) however we both have been having heart pains. Hers hurts sharp and beats fast mine hurts when i bend over to the right of my heart. Man i feel like something is up with all our future health people. Love you all
Dear Dave, I think I have watched every one of your videos for at least two years, but methane levels alarm me so much, that I'm going to give this one a miss. 10 years ago I would reliably get at least a week and probably two of continuous sub zero temperatures, and so much snow I got fed up with it. But the last 5 or so years just rain, and occasionally a bit of slushy snow for a few days. It has happened so quickly that my youngest child has quite different experiences of winter than my oldest. This can't be caused by CO2, which causes slow change, but could very plausibly be caused by methane, and as you've mentioned before, the Siberian permafrost is melting,and that is terrifying. Thank you for your untiring work, your thorough research and perceptive presentation. I find we as humankind are running headlong into the abyss, and far too few people seem bothered.
I know personal annecdotes dont mean much but I'm also expiriencing one of the warmest winter when there were sub zero temperatures a few years ago. Truly terrifying to think what summer might be holding in store for us in 2023.
Dave it's always a joy to watch your flawless execution in the transfer of this new and changing knowledge (making it much easier to understand) while on a deeply troubling subject. Keep up the great and essential work.
Dave is mostly dellusional and anthropocentric... Not even a climate scholar (economist). Yeah he reports the science correctly, albeit selectively... But hopelessly comitted to a favourable (positive) outcome. Which of course is now irrelevant.
Why does the environmental crowd never mention the largest single release of methane in the history of the world done when the US blew up the Nordstream 2 pipeline recently?
Been a lot of volcanic eruptions the past 2 years...Volcanoes put out alot of methane...unless I missed it...I didn't hear this mentioned as a variable. I've been keeping an eye on things like earthquakes, solar flares, and volcanoes since 2010 and the past 2 years have seen some particularly large volcanic eruptions...and also some terrible fires...California had some very bad wild fires in 2019...and 2020, wild fires in Europe around 2020-2021...and let's not forget something like half of Australia caught fire...at one point there were huge fires on just about every continent...excluding Antarctica. So massive fires burning millions of square acres across the globe and some huge volcanic eruptions it doesn't seem altogether surprising from my vantage point that methane would be on the increase.
I saw a study recently about how beavers are moving north and creating more lakes in the high latitudes in Canada and Alaska and how that is accelerating the release of methane. Every new report is just another brick in the wall.
I was there, the beavers have always been there, we were discussing buying mass areas of land and removing the beavers to create grasslands for animal hay feed.
Sort of reminds me of Blade Runner when Tyrell was shooting down every solution to "more life" that Roy suggested. It's like there is no way out of this situation.
@@kx7500 Hope is also a coping mechanism. If this chain reaction gets stronger, it is not a matter of perspective or opinion, we are headed towards an apocalyptic timeline. And we know because it has already happened something similar in the past. Look for "Permian-Triassic extinction event". 85% of all species went extinct.
@@DrBernon not all coping mechanisms are bad or based on falsehood. Some home is based on truth and real solutions, some is based on ignorance. There’s always genuine hope out there the question is where to find it
Sorry folks, it's too late. All of the findings were dumbed down by corporations years ago. If you are in a good location then maybe 10 years. If you "Just Give A Think" about the tipping speed you have just watched and the fact that pollution is increasing, not decreasing and more wars are likely just try and and enjoy whatever time you have left.
I am embarrassed to say my first thought was to joke that it's people doing home-brews and discovering sourdough baking while bored in lockdown 🤪. But it is frightening to keep seeing the evidence that shows we're on "a runaway train"
I wish you had covered Pleistiocene Park in Siberia. Potential long term solution to keeping permafrost, with marketability as range land and Safari tourism. And just a cool initiative.
We can't even measure if co2 has any effect at all, which renders the hypothesis (not theory, that requires repeatable and falsifiable experiments) invalid. It's within the uncertainty for the effect of water vapor. So zero times whatever, is zero.
9:00 one small thing. I need to see with my own eyes how an arctic lake (not seawater) can be prevented from freezing. That's an unbelievable claim. I grew up at only a 45 degree latitude in Canada. Ice forms on all water surfaces in winter, even in waterfalls, and it is thick.
I'm SO relieved, knowing they've given so much research to this impending "global climate change" ! It's high time someone did something about a force of nature that's been GOING ON FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS.
As soon as I saw the title my thought was permafrost runaway. We have been led to believe CO2 is the big problem but water vapor and methane are the big ones that no one in the mainstream media talks about. I think it was @thunderfoot that woke me up to the water vapor and methane. Great video.
The amount of water vapour in the atmosphere and the release of methane are very dependent on the CO2 we emit, so it makes sense that the media would focus on CO2
Thunderf00t is a BS artist. I wouldn't pay much attention to what he says. The amount of water in the atmosphere is tightly controlled by temperature. If we add more, it falls out as rain.
Methane, natural gas, is an energy source. This methane pouring out of the melting permafrost, since we have no way to capture gasses on a global scale and if we did we wouldn’t have a problem, will warm the atmosphere 84X more effectively than CO2. Water vapor, steam, is another greenhouse gas we already use as an energy source.
Excellent video as ever Dave. Well researched and presented. Given the impacts of methane as a greenhouse gas are you aware of any Methane capture projects, or is it not yet economically enticing enough?
@@andrewblake2254 One man's mad idea is as good as the next mans. Let the dreamers dream - just don't expect the taxpayers to pay for their foolishness.
I a bit more research. The current CO2 ppm equivalent in the atmosphere is now 675. The IPCC rates the GWP (global warming potential) of methane at 130 x CO2 over a 10 year period. And in fact methane lasts in the atmosphere for about 10 years, so to calculate it on a 100 year basis or even a 20 year basis makes no sense. The current amount of methane in the atmosphere is approximately 1940 ppb. Divided by 1000 =1.94 ppm. Multiplied by 130 (Co2 equivalent) we have roughly 250 ppm CO2 equivalent global warming potential from methane alone over a 10 year period. Adding the 250 to the current 425 ppm CO2 currently in the atmosphere, we arrive at 675 CO2 ppm equivalent currently in the atmosphere. No longer any need to be worried about the 425 figure.
@@kenjohnson5124 CO2 is beneficial for plants to make photosynthesis and to carbonate soft drinks. However too much in the atmosphere is deadly to the biosphere. However, my comment was primarily about the growing negative impact of methane on the biosphere. You actually have to read the science and THINK about it.
@@petewright4640 Do we know that? It chucked a load of water vapour into the stratosphere which I would expect to have a warning effect, but interested to hear your view
Can someone please inform the WEF and Vegan Hoards that they owe the cows they tried to blame, and the Omnivores whom they shamed a public apology. Meanwhile I'll be sure to enjoy my next steak without a side dish of guilt.
Other than this issue, I think the momentum is really hard to stop. Assuming we pull all the brakes today, we'll continue to see warming for decades. (speculation and my gut feelings, not based on data)
And unless we figure out a way of absorbing massive amounts of CO2 and methane from the atmosphere instantly, we'd likely see a major rise in temperature shortly after the particles like sulfur dioxide that are responsible for aerosol cooling break down. Marvel at the beauty of this world and that you, a self aware collection of stardust are capable of witnessing and fathoming it. The meteor that wiped out most of the dinosaurs was beautiful in it's own way too, and life will very likely come back from this like it did then. That's not to say i don't care about what's happening of course. I just try to avoid getting lost in despair.
Current science says that when anthropogenic emissions reach zero temperatures will immediately stop rising. What's not clear is whether this result includes some of the big scale feedbacks of the biosphere such as permafrost melt. I fear not.
Damn unfortunately I have to break it to you that your totally uninformed not based on data guess is totally accurate...based on data. Last (old) study I remember quoted about 250 years inertia for atmospheric effects outside of any feedback loops we've created/ unleashed...
OMG! This isn't news to me, however, I haven't heard any updates on this concern for quite a while. TY for sharing... Will stay tuned and support anything i/we can do to slow it down and turned it around... If there's even any chance to do so we need competent leadership locally and beyond. Just saying... 🙂
The several dozen feedback loops that humans have set in motion are clearly unstoppable, which any educated critical thinker clearly understands..Alot of these feedback loops really explain Earth's past mass extinction events, when considering the severity of these heating events..Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, trillions and trillions of greedy, ignorant and destructive actions have existential, exponential and apocalyptic reactions..Our careless use of technology, our technology itself, could only be temporary, and it merely delays and multiplies the coming collapse and misery...Humans have also removed several trillion trees from Earth's system, which just makes escape that much more unlikely...If you critically examine our behavior, we are destroying country after country, the Ukraine proxy war being the most recent, killing millions of people for profits and hegemony, letting mass amounts of people die from treatable medical conditions, or starve to death, we have these mass propaganda and indoctrination machines that keep people ignorant, confused, censored and compliant as we systematically destroy the environment and through out of balance Earth's systems that allow for our existence.. No matter what, we are far too immature to responsibly wield the technology we possess.. There is a cycle of every civilization to exist until this point in time..The cycle has a conquest phase, an exploitation phase and a collapse phase..As long as we celebrate and reward greed, ego and violence, there is no escape from this cycle, in fact, our civilization is the pinnacle of the cycle of civilizational collapse, as we will likely be the last civilization.. Maybe after several thousand years we will start again, but that's a big IF....
@realeyesrealizereallies6828 I think a lot of the problems you cited can be traced back to the cultural problem that many people have: putting far too much value on social status. It leads us to mass consumerism and bigger cars, houses, and other polluting products. Only a very small percentage of people are mature enough to hold themselves back from this force.
@@lawrencetaylor5407 Well we reward and celebrate, greed, ego and violence, which is not compatible with a civilization that doesn't self destruct..I live in a tiny house with a massive garden, build and have electric bikes, solar systems, make cross bows, water well, everything that enables self sufficiency..And study the ways of our fore fathers, in the context of living in balance with the natural world..But, if everyone did that, our supply systems and economy would crash like yesterday, we are in a catch 22, in every possible way imaginable..The inertia and momentum is driving our trapped civilization into a brick wall.There's no escape..
Yes. The celebration of greed, ego, and violence you speak of puts psychopaths in leadership positions. Psychopaths couldn't care less what happens to others. All they care about is the endless pursuit of power and wealth. They're happy to invent wars and send other peoples' children off to fight and die. And we let them. PS -- I always appreciate your posts. Glad to see you are still showing up.
In my personal experience i have observed that methane generally lingers no more than five or so minutes depending on the size and filtration of a given area. Discovering the source however can be quite difficult at times especially in small enclosed high population areas such as planes, elevators, board rooms etc. Barring of course an audible release, I generally use as a rule of thumb, "He who smelt it dealt it!" This atmospheric anomaly can sometimes be quickly neutralized by striking a match without all the fuss of government regulation.
It displaces oxygen and doesn’t dissipate quickly, it just sits there at just above ground level. On top of methane hydrates from frozen deposits defrosting rapidly… And lp pipelines have vents that are open to the air and just vent mostly methane. And other things found in fossil fuels. Unfortunately these pipes are often right next to population centers … Fracking. Is horrible and releases methane too
As you noticed. By using biogas on an industrial scale. Sewage, Farmwaste, Food waste you could take a gigantic amount of methane gas out of circulation. Sustainable as well, but governments supports only wind and solar. That is one of the main reasons I don't support their vision of climate change. Because they are not serious. All is about money, your money.
I remember the full shutdown, of course I still had to take packages to the post office, which I do by bicycle with or without a trailer depending on how much I have to carry. The air was so clean! I could smell that some grass had been mowed hours before. I could smell peoples' cooking. It was really peaceful. I also got much more cautious and even paranoid about traffic, though, as while there were far fewer drivers, those few were a lot crazier and indeed, traffic deaths for drivers and pedestrians went up markedly in my city in 2020.
It makes total sense... The people who DID follow the lock-down were more likely to be law abiding, careful citizens. The people who completely ignored it, we're much more likely to be conspiracy theorists, criminals, drug users, or simply people who take risks and thats why You encountered what you encountered. Not surprising at all, really.
@@extropiantranshuman Unfortunately, it wasnt just the reckless people who were killed by covid. It also killed many others that were cautious, stayed home as much as was possible, wore masks, got vaccinated, and followed the lock down as closely as was possible. I wore my mask, followed the protocol, stayed home for months, and I caught the virus on the one day I left my house to go and get my first vaccination shot. Go figure, that's just my luck.. 🤷🏻
@@davelowets actually that's why I didn't get a shot - because I felt taht people were going to get ill waiting in those lines. I felt it was reckless. I'm not here to judge you but that's what I thought then - that vaccines were a perceived sense of safety and that if you stay away from people your chance of getting the virus is 0. I stayed home and didn't get it. For 2 whole years. Thanks for confirming my suspicions. I'm just saying being cautious doesn't make up for the times you're not. I mean you can say I avoided committing a crime for many years until taht one day. Like how does that change anything?
Very well put together videos and dialogue. I appreciate how you left humans out of the problem and pointed out the naturally occurring cycles of warming and cooling of the Earth much like climate control HVAC system in your home, it has a few degree variance.
I live in Australia and this summer has been the coolest I've ever felt....personally i feel that the covid lock downs definitely cooled the place down... I guess everyone staying at home eating all day elevated methane levels lol 😆
All this proves is that nature is KING and it doesn't matter what we do it's going to do what it wants to do. As a species we have almost no effect on what's happening.
I remember back around y2k I was obsessed with the peak oil Doomsday ideas. Fossil fuel hawks at that time speculated about the untapped and endless potential of mining methane hydrates in the arctic. Naysayers would caution, “not advisable, for if you disturb the methane hydrates, and a chain reaction initiates and melts all the hydrates, then we’re screwed.” Well, that seems like where we’re at now.
@@extropiantranshuman - “We have no planet”. The planet will be fine, its been thru far far worse. Most humans will also be fine. Even the 3.5 million who live in the tundra zone where subsidence may be a problem will be fine. They’ll repair their homes or build new ones, and get on with their usual struggle for life in incredibly harsh conditions that may actually become more pleasant for them.
@@sirrathersplendid4825 I mean there won't be a planet for us to live on. I mean you can say 'well there will be people in a better habitat' - sure but at what expense to everyone else? You want to see all the major cities go underwater for that? What abotu when everything's overfished? It's going to be a tough struggle but it'll be much harder in teh future.
@@extropiantranshuman - All the computer models at present are massively over-predicting effects. The crazy weather of the last two years seems rather to be a result of the sudden clearing of the atmosphere, resulting in more heat reaching the ground.
An excellent report, so I've subscribed. What interest's me is the effect of DIRECT heat production into the atmosphere, such as heated air in urban conurbations from computers, home heaters, fridges, air conditioning units, cooking stoves and car engines. I think scientists are not including this sufficiently in their models and are grossly underestimating it, which is why their models and predictions always seem to be wrong and lagging behind what is actually happening in global warming. Reducing emissions is good, of course. But switching cars to electricity is not going to reduce the direct heat production of the engine - electric cars get just as hot as petrol ones. This heat is dispersed directly into the atmosphere, and as it is produced at ground level this heat may take some time before it is radiated away into outer space. A report by JHAT on how much such heat is being generated and how quickly it is radiated away would be very interesting indeed.
This is precisely why it's probably a good idea to start looking into artificial cooling by releasing aerosols into the atmosphere. Drastically reducing our consumption of fossil fuels will cause a drastic drop in aerosols that will in turn cause a heat spike that could be seriously dangerous. Releasing a controlled amount of aerosols manually, and gradually reducing it over time, allows us to control this spike and turn it into something more manageable. Some people will surely complain, thinking artificial cooling is yet another excuse to keep burning fossil fuels. In reality, it's basically a necessity in order to stop burning them.
Mee thane (said through your nose) exists in the atmosphere at 1.7 parts per million. CO2 is 400ppm. It also has a very short life because it quickly oxidizes and breaks down. (self regulating)
The implication of this observation is that we are tackling climate change in the wrong order - we should be focusing first on methane reduction by moving to a global vegan world to reduce atmospheric methane and release land that can sequester CO2, and THEN focus on reducing fossil fuels.
I believe there is still a place for the burning of natural gas as a transition fuel. I have lost the figures, but I once did a back-of-an-envelope calc that led me to believe that the UK potential amount of sewage gas alone would provide enough for domestic use. DYOR. Not even counting landfill and green waste gas.
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
![Natanael Cano - Amor Eterno [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EO4prCs6WpM/mqdefault.jpg)
I’m starting to think you should change the channel name to “Just Have a Cry”.
If we come together all 7.8 billion stop all emissions. We still melt a guess about 85 % all ice and permafrost. Not to mention the shock this planet would have.
My theory is that the increase in methane was due to the massive increase in the ingestion of frozen burritos during covid lockdown.
Very funny! The world is ending and I will die laughing!
🤣🌯🌮🤣🌯🌮🤣🌯🌮
💩💩
LMAO
GUNTA BUMBERG wants to know your location 🤡💩🤡
Methane is soooo overlooked and underestimated. Forget electrical stuff, we should focus on methane instead
Ah yes, my weekly dose of abject terror and panic attacks
how old are you? I've been witnessing this disaster since the 1990s
Try to mix your weekly doses of information with this and also more positive news. Otherwise it can be atrocious to your mental health. I about a year ago i had to start taking antidepressants and one of the reasons was that i was stuck in a dooming loop of bad news and pessimists in social media
@@DSAK55 Where have you seen 'this disaster' occur?
Unfortunately too many lap it up ....the sky is falling
He doesn't know why.... AEROSOL MASKING EFFECT!!! HEEEEEELLLLLLLOOOOOOO!!!!! HEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Is there someone in this head?????? HEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
I watched a video in 2013 The Arctic Death Spiral, the Methane Time Bomb.
I had never seen so many people in a state of clinical shock. Shakhova and SImelotov had good reason to be in shock since the IPCC openly mocked their studies, and even banned them from one conference.
Those actions are criminal and for them to now start acting like they're concerned rings hollow.
Kudos to JHAT for getting the methane potency correct. Swiss media gaslights people and lies about it's potency.
I couldn't agree more Lawrence. Shakova was interviewed on several occasions by Nick Breeze from memory. She was definitlely very concerned with what she had seen on her last expedition.
It's never easy being the bearer of bad news. Especially on such an epically world ending scale.
I sometimes wonder if all the government agencies and academic organisations push back so hard because they can see the reality and just want to keep everyone calm. Or perhaps their just ignorant fools 🤷
Hi, I've searched for the video with the names you mentioned but can't find anything meaningful, would you mind telling me the name of ghe channel? Thanks so much!
@@SkepticalTeacher ruclips.net/video/m6pFDu7lLV4/видео.html
Right on. Even before that study I knew that methane was trapped in the Arctic. Just waiting to be released. Oh the greenies and woke are blind to what awaits us.
Many tears ago McPherson called attention to the dimming effect of airborne pollution and the fatal effect of permafrost thawing
Fatal is ahead of the Science
I remember hearing that there is an enormous lag time between green house gas emission and its full effect. The Perma-frost is thawing now but today’s emissions won’t be fully fealt for 10-20 years. My mind thinks we have already passed the tipping point.
Yeah, I fear that too
@ShutterJunkie Possibly, but I'm going to keep trying everything I can.
There was a PNAS study on the tipping points that concluded that THE tipping point triggering all the other ones was somewhere between +1.5 and +2°C...
So we are def close but IF we put strict regulations there is still a chance to reach a stabilized climate (hotter but at least somewhat stable)
edit: The PNAS study was on hothouse earth: "Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene" Vol. 115 | No. 33
@@etienne8110 how can there be any chance? wed have to *decarbonise* this decade to stay below 1.5!!
whats most likely is that we will reach net zero once our civilisation collapses
The earth has both a cooling and heating process to allow for changes in levels, the planet can regulate climate, it's not out of control.
What happens in the Artic, never stays in the Arctic.
U guys think we are done?
@@josephstalin5003 No, there were periods in the Earths history when the MGT has been warmer and the atmosphere had more CO2. Humans flourished and the Earth was just fine
Lots of Arctic Explorers happened to stay forever in the Arctic.🤭
I expect any Anglo American imperialist warships that might happen to misbehave in the Arctic will probably stay there too!😉🤗
Don't worry about the Methane.
We had Hunga Tonga ha'apai blow enough vapourised rock, SO2, CO and seawater in to the stratosphere, mesosphere, and past 100km into space to clear it up.👍
@@josephstalin5003 Humans have a much bigger threat than Climate Change. We are WAY overdue for a solar catastrophe. And our magnetic field is failing FAST.
The US/UK demolition of the Nordstream pipeline (between Russia and Germany) in late 2022, reportedly resulted in the release of 500,000 cu m of natural gas (main component being methane). The pipline(s) were 1100km long.
God. That's depressing.
Hard to stay positive.
Yep 😔 😟
Don't worry, the WEF has a solution, it's called de-population........
Also, with 7% more water vapor per 1c rise, water vapor is also a greenhouse gas and will also trap solar energy, so for every 7% increase in water vapor that more heat will be trapped, accelerating the average global temperature rise
Sure explains why the earth burned up and destroyed all life back millions of years ago. Oh... wait... we are all still here...
Wouldn't more water vapour result in more clouds giving more reflectivity and lower radiation making its way to the surface? Reminds me of the problem of growing trees in snowy regions making the area less reflective and potentially more heat absorbing.
@barryjenkinson9152 Not necessarily. The H2O gas makes clouds when it cools and clumps onto microscopic bits of anything solid. Warmer air can mean more H2O gas with less cloud and that's definitely what has been happening. The jury is essentially in now with CERES and Earthshine analysis and the cloud is less, or at least it's reflecting less, for sure. The quantities are all over the place on the Internet and it's being discussed energetically on Web sites with knowledgeable people that discuss that stuff. Lindzen was wrong ! (silly old twit). So it's now 7% more H2O, 4% more evaporation , 4% more precipitation, less sunlight being reflected by clouds causing an extra warming feedback.
Water vapour amplifies the effect of adding other greenhouse gases. If the other greenhouse gases remain at a constant level the water vapour comes to an equilibrium at the new temperature as the water cycle typically goes from evaporating to raining (or snowing) in nine days.
Probably the worst of all the feedback loops in the short term..
There was a methane spike in my office today. I work alone so I only have myself to blame.
Positive feedback loop!
We will experience a lot of positive feedback loops and all the linear intervention strategies like 3% annual reduction based on a reference date will fail.
@@thankyouforyourcompliance7386 lets hope not 🙁
Has been engaged...
Cheers, Dave, I really appreciate your work
Methane hydrates “normally” originating from cracks in the sea floor are by far more a quantity that gets into the air than methane emissions from “human” activities ! It’s disturbing, that any type of greenhouse gas emission is automatically blamed on human activities !
But in the video it was said that permafrost is the biggest problem. J read about that several times yet.
Human activities via animal husbandry , deforestation and fossil fuel extraction leaks are huge all of there own .
@@MyKharli What deforestation …. in the Western world ? Europe has as an example more than the double of forested areas in comparison to 100 years ago ! North America has «distinctly » more forests than 100 years ago, but the % of « more » is still open to debate. It’s not a surprise, that the Western anti capitalist climate charlatans blame everything they can on Western industrial activity ……
The permafrost thawing is the biggest driver in increase temperature. Also changes in rotations of earth rotations and speed of rotation.
The worst part of all this is that we really don't know everything for sure. Much like we didn't expect methane to rise, there are tons of examples of things we miss or just haven't discovered yet. We're committing actions on this planet that we don't understand.
If we 'dont know' then why assume its bad?
Agreed we don't know. What about about those who know and keeping from us. More info is given then united we come come up with solutions. We are people and want to live.
Its always worse , the only tiny bit of good news was that sediment from melting glaciers can absorb small amounts of CO2....
@@manoo422 Let's take that pleasant "not so bad" assumption and act upon it. And then we're wrong. Bad idea.
Btw, scientists don't think or assume the worst. They extrapolate from the data. That's why agreement is in the high 90 odd percent. The 1-2 percent who think otherwise are more often than not, employed by vested interested parties.
The planet emits methane gas on its own from under the oceans than anything humans could cause.
For the last decade I have wondered why this has not been covered. Thank you ❣
It’s something that started in 2020, not a decade ago. But you’re right the whole matter of reduced dimming and its side-effects are rarely covered. I strongly suspected the crazy weather of 2021 and 2022 was one of those side-effects.
I’ve wondered too. I saw something about it 10-15 years ago and was horrified. Seems it’s a bigger time bomb than CO2. Very scary.
ruclips.net/video/WfwnKWIWPzk/видео.html
@@KimiAvary - C02 is no time bomb. The earth has seen much higher levels in fairly recent history, and there’s zero risk of a “runaway” effect. Nearly all trees today evolved under a C02 regime with multiple times the current atmospheric content.
They knew that they could not do anything about it. We are being pacified.
Thanks for the update,from Pennsylvania US
I just had a drink after watching this episode of Just Have a Think.
To be honest: it’s hard to be optimistic after understanding this explanation. If methane is such a potent greenhouse gas and its release can only be slowed by reinstating permafrost conditions in the arctic… well, we’d better get to work on survival strategies for a significantly different world, even more extreme than the 2 degree change models. 😅
Its destined to happen
@@rdallas81 agreed in the “never again by flood, next time fire” way of thinking… makes me curious to know what atmospheric changes triggered that ancient apocalypse, I expect it’d be similar to our realization about methane release today. or, did you have a different “destined” in mind with your comment?
@@grantandre79 I absolutely believe a fire end to the world. Burnt up completely in fervent heat so hot that even very subatomic particles that comprise atoms and molecules will be burned up just like space itself- big rip or the increasing speed of space itself will outpace the ability of material to withstand it.
I have seen calculations on 10.2°C warming by european foresight group John Doyle on average, that will be much higher on the continents, if that is true even bacteria will not survive, forget about survival, nobody and nothing will survive this
I’ll be honest, as someone who’s worked on this, once we get to 2 degrees, we arrive at 4 really quite quickly. Once we’re in a 4 degree world, we need all the energy we can get. Taking the 4 degrees of warming aerosols are hiding into account, we’re sat on a +8C time bomb, and we need to figure out how to defuse it on a bigger scale and more quickly than we’ve ever done before
And the Siberian Peat Bogs, formerly frozen over, have been melting and methane has been bubbling to the surface now for years, right?
I love this channel. No advertising means having a think isn't interrupted. 👍
Then who is funding it then and what are their goals, he cherry picks his data just like all the so called climate experts. T
This is also debunkable like all the other vids.
@@shanewheeler713 Keep watching FOX then, who's stopping you? Keep the joy and happiness you receive in the knowledge that all of your propaganda is brought straight to you by capitalistic greed. Isn't it wonderful to have so many commercial interruptions that work synergistically with your attention deficit so you barely even notice the disorder?
@@paul9156c That's so funny! I'll take Capitalism over socialists' tyranny any day. You live in your fear bubble mate.
P.S I don't watch TV so it doesn't bother me, I spend most of my free time reading.
Thanks Dave! Do you have any suggestion for carbon neutral antidepressants? I'll need those now...
I believe the Wuhan lab is working on it right now.
I am just trying to learn all I can…often your “thinks” are over my head, but I try! And I admire how your break down such enormously complex topics to educate less science savvy people who, nonetheless, are determined to learn what we can to help. I’m glad I subscribed. Now I’m going to check out that Reuters animation.
Another great video, thank you a lot for sharing all these references and insights.
Permafrost and shallow sea clathrates leaking is my guess before the video explains why...
In the late 1990’s my firm built a machine for Canadian Petroleum Engineering, to facilitate the exploration of these hydrates, in the Arctic Ocean. At that time, the hydrates were referred to as “the snow that burns”, when brought up through conventional drilling, via the mud tank. The goal of this machine was to provide a chilled mud that would enable core samples to be taken of the hydrate layers. Much thought was given on how these solid gas formations could be put into production, but it was deemed not profitable. This was because as the hydrate was warmed to re-gasify it, the expansion would rupture the permafrost, and the gas would escape to atmosphere.
One of the engineers on the job mentioned that the consequences of this would be dire, as methane is a potent green house gas. Needless to say, the project was abandoned. . .
Animal agriculture, also known as factory farming, has a significant impact on the environment. Some of the main environmental impacts include:
1) Greenhouse gas emissions: Animal agriculture is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, particularly methane and nitrous oxide, which are both more potent than carbon dioxide in terms of their warming potential.
2) Deforestation: Clearing land for grazing and growing crops to feed animals is a major contributor to deforestation, particularly in tropical regions. This not only destroys the habitats of many species but also contributes to the loss of biodiversity.
3) Water pollution: Animal waste, fertilisers, and pesticides used to grow feed crops can all contribute to water pollution, which can harm aquatic life and make water unsafe for human consumption.
4) Air pollution: Animal agriculture operations can also produce significant amounts of air pollution, including ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, and particulate matter.
5) Soil degradation: Overgrazing and the use of heavy machinery in animal agriculture can lead to soil degradation, which can make the land less productive and contribute to desertification.
6) Biodiversity loss: Animal agriculture can lead to loss of biodiversity as it reduces the natural habitats of many species and causes their extinction.
7) Antibiotic resistance: The overuse of antibiotics in animal agriculture can contribute to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which can pose a threat to human health.
8) Loss of carbon storage: Animal agriculture also leads to loss of carbon storage as it reduces the amount of carbon stored in forests and grasslands, which are converted to animal agriculture land.
This is not an exhaustive list and there are other impacts as well.
The choices we make as individuals about the food we eat and the way it is produced, multiplied by the number of humans on this planet, makes a very big difference to our environment.
Good video! Good explanation of why and how methane is worse.
ruclips.net/video/WfwnKWIWPzk/видео.html
great video, so well explained and presented, just the right depth for me, very pleasant manner. thank you.
First time viewer. Great talk! Thanks fot posting! Will subscribe! Greetings from Tennessee.
Scientists: too much methane
Humanity as a whole : rookie numbers, we gotta pump those numbers up.
I think it was made clear in the vid that the amount of methane humans create is dwarfed by the amount nature can produce at the drop of a hat.
Lockdowns begin, people get bored, eat more, fart more...
Real shit though. We burn everything under far cleaner conditions than we did. Looken way back like 200 years ago since the advent of modern machines our lives have completely changed and coupled with improved in efficiency repeatedly over the years we've actually gotten a better looking atmosphere today. Remember the dust bowl? You really think it's that bad now?
@@TheRealMikeDrop compared to 200 years ago the world burns a heck of a lot more too.. and developing countries don't have expensive carbon-capture.
Can I ask what your thoughts are on the dust bowl ? It's interesting that because the theory of "rain follows the plough" ➡️farmers unknowingly created the conditions for the destruction of their farm land
@@AngelaH2222 - Don’t really see what the Dust Bowl has to do with this. It might have been exaggerated by poor farming practices but you can hardly claim C02 had any influence whatsoever.
How tight against the wall do people need to be before they understand it's impossible to continue with business as usual? No technology can beat exponential growth. The only solution is reduction. Will we do it equitably, or will we let mother nature do the culling for us?
Human species will choose the Mother Nature route, as always. Remember, when in doubt rely on dear old Mum.
I believe the folks over in Davos are deciding your fate as we speak. You probably won't like what the continued plan will be for humanity........
So let me get this straight… reducing pollution led to an increase in methane release into the atmosphere. I give up.
Really easy-to-grasp romp through one of the most interesting subjects in atmospheric chemistry. I did a talk on methane to the West Yorkshire Humanists, and got feedback that I'd traumatised some of them! I only told them the truth!!
The truth? According to which theory or model?
@@clives4501 Can you stop being skeptical about what you see around you and what you know of how things work? How old do you have to be to see that we are getting more and bigger storms, floods, fires, droughts? It's increasing every year. If you deny this your denial level is cultish. Are you really that lost to an ideology that you can't see reality?
@@jazziejim Hey Jim, thanks for your comment. in answer to your first question - no I can't put my skepticism to one side. In any argument where one side is heavily censored and proponents of the alternative view are vilified and/or cancelled, it pays dividends to be skeptical. From experimental medical procedures to climate catastrophes let us all have open and enquiring (safe and effective) minds.
As for age in relation to floods, fires and droughts, I suggest that one lifetime is not enough. Climate has changed over the millennia and we kid ourselves if we believe that the wall to wall coverage of recent dramatic events is in any way indicative of longer term trends.
So perhaps you consider that I am in cultish denial. Well no actually. Perhaps climate is changing as a result of human activity and perhaps that's to the detriment of the planet. I accept the possibility. However with my open, albeit skeptical mind, I am yet to be persuaded of that version of reality. I do not subscribe to that particular narrow interpretation of events. I resist group think. I resist the religious fervor and blind faith in favour of rational and open debate.
There are many eminently qualified scientists and academics who disagree with the mainstream narrative re. climate change. Why are their voices not heard; nay suppressed, cancelled, censored? The science is not settled. Yet we are constantly told it is. Joseph Goebbels said "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it". We must not fall into that trap. Yet many have!
And to finish with a quote from the late Frank Zappa - "the mind is like a parachute it doesn't work if it is not open.
Best wishes
Clive
@@clives4501 Well, Clive, at least you're friendly. But the denying scientists have not been censored. They've been supported and paid off by industry or think tanks. Look into the millions Exon, the Koch Bros., and petroleum organizations have put into the denial kingdom. Anyone who enjoys being a gadfly or will sell out finds a very comfortable and secure position for themselves. So I'm glad you have your mind and eyes open. What we are going to see is not going to be nice.
@@clives4501 I understand your skepticism about the censorship, but people are too weak to confirmation bias to handle both sides. Seems patronizing, but that's how we work... We get an idea, look for things that justify it, then once we find a scrap we dig our heels and don't budge even if what justified us is proven false (look at the "vaccines cause autism" debacle). Accepting it would mean accepting that we were wrong, not many people can do that.
We want to make our own opinions, but we don't want to put in the colossal effort required to make one actually based on the facts (and even if we do, we are limited to a few narrow fields at most... knowing everything we as a species know is impossible)
You know what we must not fall trap of? Believing that both sides of an argument have always equal merits
Exxon researchers themselves predicted climate change in 1977, then the company happily ignored that and peddled the opposite for 30+ years (many news outlets have written an article on that a few days ago, even if it was known for a while. Shouldn't be hard to find one if you want to read it)
"As for age in relation to floods, fires and droughts, I suggest that one lifetime is not enough."
What are you using to substantiate that belief? "Climate has changed over the millennia" is actually against your point xkcd.com/1732/
Look how slow the change is "over the millennia", then look how sharp the change gets in the last 100 years or so
Something is happening, arguing against it is even weaker than arguing that we did nothing that caused the change
Resisting group thinking is different from ignoring data because the majority accepts it, the latter is just being contrarian for the sake of it
Huge 77 F temperature change from ionocaloric cooling breakthrough at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. Sounds deserving of coverage here. Thanks for this one!
Out of necessity, will develop New technologies as this. Exciting times.
what do you expect to cover with it as these processes just pump heat from one place to another place on a very short distance. The heat does not disappear or is radiated away. So intersting for heat pumps, refigerators and air condition but thats it.
@@Techmagus76 This looks to be the greatest temp change of any new tech trying to replace the environmentally problematic working gasses used in heat pumps. I'd like to know more about how it works and if there's a path to get it into people's homes.
Its normal for the earth to go through warming and cooling cycles.
@@timothyandrewnielsen And it's impossible for a natural cycle to be disrupted?
People being home 24 hours a day, and heating their homes much more often? 🤷🏻
I don't blame people for being skeptical of the self serving politicians and this economic system that prioritizes the interests of the already very wealthy.
I just wish it was easier to convince them that climate change is not some ploy for them to control more (they're clearly not competent enough to do that), but is something happening outside of human civilization and is due to our rapid progress and we need to wake up and recognize that if we're not careful, we'll be an example of "intelligent" life being too self destructive to last very long.
It would help if your weren't so fixed on pushing extrapolation
So it seems that if we reduce burning of fossil fuels and so reduce atmospheric pollution then the concentration of hydroxyl radicals is reduced, methane levels go up and so temperatures rise. In addition reduction of air pollution also reduces global dimming, also causing temperatures to rise. It looks like things are going to get a lot worse before they get better!
Buckle in, it's going to be a crazy ride.
We need to urgently stop emitting co2 and implement full on solar, wind and ocean. It will give life a chance
Yes. We are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't.
As for "getting better" that's not going to happen for us or most of life on earth.
Q. Who will look after our 400+ nuclear power plants while the climate warms, our food crops die, and our civilisation falls apart? They take decades (and millions of dollars) to decommission safely and we have no long-term storage for waste.
If even only a handful are abandoned they have the ability to poison or even sterilise most of the planet.
@@langdons2848 A. future people will look at your comment as a prime example of shooting both feet. nuclear power plants are our only way to make power sustainably, they are super safe and the waste storage is complete non-issue, but you seem to think they are dangerous, even more so than other kinds of power plants.
Could you tell us where the waste of coal, gas, oil power plants goes ? what are the plans to store it safely ? there are none.
Hydroxyl radicals form via a variety of pathways. We may or may not be screwed, but this is not the reason.
Your diligence is an inspiration to me. But my oh my! You have to do a follow up on what is being done to mitigate methane release...if anything!
Well your saying Guy is correct ...again
As always, an incredible video. Thank you for all your hard work in putting these together. It's very insightful and appreciated
Except it didn't mentioned biggest methane leak on record Nordstream Pipeline sabotage.
Because of that you had warmer winter & now southern European rivers drying up in summer.
Thanks Dave, another great video. I remember reading Peter Wadams' book 'Farewell to Ice' as I'm sure your do too. He wasn't wrong although he was vilified over the years by the academic powers that be. Yes, I knew what was coming as soon as I saw the title of this episode. This is the challenge of a lifetime writ large. We better get onto it now, no more time to waste. Thanks again
F, economic growth is more important that any other thing in human race, so u know, we're kinda d00m
Bourgeoisie just wants to keep growing no matter what, that's all I see in my country that has part of the Amazon rainforest , good luck we'll need it
We need to demand that the US fund study and implementation of Cloud Brightening IMMEDIATELY , not study it over the next (to be non-existent) ten years or whatever . Here's Dr Peter Wadhams, Dr Steven Salter and Paul Beckwith being talking about it on detail last Winter (should have been DONE by now !!) ruclips.net/video/0BBVTStBrhw/видео.html
@@danawoods5367 Keep dreaming buddy, plastic is the only thing that matters and we just get it from one source...
Arctic and Antarctic ice extent is the greatest in 40 years- Polar bears are at record population levels 37,000. North America has just received its largest snowfall in 40 years. Ice caps and glaciers have been growing for 7 years. Wake up you easily lead fool!
Al Gore told us we'd be underwater and have no ice by 2020, now he sips margaritas in his seaside mansion paid for with all the lies he sold to the gullible.
coincidence (lockdown), is not causation, the Methane from Permafrost is on an exponential increase as the Tundra thaws
Methane gun goes off
Causation 👉 coincidence
I had to do a presentation on gas hydrates when I was in college, ironically about it's prospects as 'fuel source'. Just reading for one section about it's challenges for extraction itself gave me unimaginable level of climate anxiety ever since and made me realize just how reckless the petroleum industry is for spending money for marine prospecting expeditions for gas hydrates even when they know full well that one small mistake can set off an unimaginable level of catastrophy for our planet; one 'oil spill' equivalent for a gas hydrate extraction process is enough and more for a catastrophy.
Gas hydrates are already under the threat of destabilizing with just global warming and the petroleum industry still want a piece of that pie
The film Don't Look Up is a masterpiece. Let's het the asteroid impact, we heard there's trillions we could mine!
Thanks Dave. The clathrate gun is starting to off in the Arctic as predicted. There is now too much heat stored in the oceans to stop it. Shakhova and SImelotov stated btw 50 and 500 Giga tons of methane is stored down there, not including permafrost.
No, it's more than 500 billion tons of methane stored down there. 1.4 trillion sounds more accurate to me. From what I understand, methane hydrate has been building for most of the last 200 million years, whereas permafrost is only a few million and can only exist on 1/4 of the planets surface.
It is accelerating faster than predicted. Very informative. Thanks.
Optimism is exactly why we’re in this mess now.😅
Love your videos. Thanks for the great work!
An excellent video with a discouraging message. Thanks for your efforts Dave - the world needs more folk like you.
Methane is present in almost immeasurably low levels and in the last 50 years the amount has increased by a tiny fraction of immeasurable levels. You are talking parts per billion when measuring a gas that breaks down naturally to mostly water and some C02. Climate alarmism is big business. Isn't it time you stop funding adversaries because you got easily frightened?
No the 🌍 does not
@@TheBelrickYeah! A healthy dose of perspective is what we need. Well said that Tuber!!
@@TheBelrick
Currently; the pace of the melting of the permafrost in the Arctic is accelerating.
This isn't something that I would call good news.
@@richardivonen3564 No, the fear creation is accelerating. They need you to stampede. Again. Remember trust the science re: Covid? How did that work out?
Stop trusting these people!
Me and my girl didnt get the (you know what) however we both have been having heart pains. Hers hurts sharp and beats fast mine hurts when i bend over to the right of my heart. Man i feel like something is up with all our future health people. Love you all
Dear Dave, I think I have watched every one of your videos for at least two years, but methane levels alarm me so much, that I'm going to give this one a miss. 10 years ago I would reliably get at least a week and probably two of continuous sub zero temperatures, and so much snow I got fed up with it. But the last 5 or so years just rain, and occasionally a bit of slushy snow for a few days. It has happened so quickly that my youngest child has quite different experiences of winter than my oldest. This can't be caused by CO2, which causes slow change, but could very plausibly be caused by methane, and as you've mentioned before, the Siberian permafrost is melting,and that is terrifying. Thank you for your untiring work, your thorough research and perceptive presentation. I find we as humankind are running headlong into the abyss, and far too few people seem bothered.
Temperatures have not increased the last 8 years. Flat at best
Please don't fret. 5 years of personal unscientific observation should not be relied upon to support an ideological argument.
Or maybe just maybe it is connected to known forty and 100 years cycle in climate that have zero to do with co2 or methane!
I know personal annecdotes dont mean much but I'm also expiriencing one of the warmest winter when there were sub zero temperatures a few years ago. Truly terrifying to think what summer might be holding in store for us in 2023.
Yep.
Dave it's always a joy to watch your flawless execution in the transfer of this new and changing knowledge (making it much easier to understand) while on a deeply troubling subject. Keep up the great and essential work.
deeply troubling so many believe this shit. 20 years ago world was 15% more arid... somehow now we are in climate dissaster land?
Dave is mostly dellusional and anthropocentric... Not even a climate scholar (economist). Yeah he reports the science correctly, albeit selectively... But hopelessly comitted to a favourable (positive) outcome. Which of course is now irrelevant.
Why does the environmental crowd never mention the largest single release of methane in the history of the world done when the US blew up the Nordstream 2 pipeline recently?
Been a lot of volcanic eruptions the past 2 years...Volcanoes put out alot of methane...unless I missed it...I didn't hear this mentioned as a variable. I've been keeping an eye on things like earthquakes, solar flares, and volcanoes since 2010 and the past 2 years have seen some particularly large volcanic eruptions...and also some terrible fires...California had some very bad wild fires in 2019...and 2020, wild fires in Europe around 2020-2021...and let's not forget something like half of Australia caught fire...at one point there were huge fires on just about every continent...excluding Antarctica. So massive fires burning millions of square acres across the globe and some huge volcanic eruptions it doesn't seem altogether surprising from my vantage point that methane would be on the increase.
I hear you. You must remember that your theory is against the globalist narrative so nobody will believe it.
I saw a study recently about how beavers are moving north and creating more lakes in the high latitudes in Canada and Alaska and how that is accelerating the release of methane. Every new report is just another brick in the wall.
I was there, the beavers have always been there, we were discussing buying mass areas of land and removing the beavers to create grasslands for animal hay feed.
You didn't mention all the geoengineering going on for the last 75 years dimming our planet.
Sort of reminds me of Blade Runner when Tyrell was shooting down every solution to "more life" that Roy suggested. It's like there is no way out of this situation.
the future will be _Blade Runner_
what about putting covers on these lakes to keep them from getting sun?
Worse.
@@extropiantranshuman
ruclips.net/video/uxPdPpi5W4o/видео.html
For a different reason, but it can be done.
Thx for the video, Dave. Unfortunately it is not good news for humanity as a species and will most likely lead to hitting tipping points sooner...
And those who've truly caused it will do all that they can to ensure they're never held responsible, they have been for the last 45 years.
What he describes is already a tipping point. We are doomed.
@@DrBernon doomerism will never be the answer, it is only a short term coping mechanism.
@@kx7500 Hope is also a coping mechanism. If this chain reaction gets stronger, it is not a matter of perspective or opinion, we are headed towards an apocalyptic timeline. And we know because it has already happened something similar in the past. Look for "Permian-Triassic extinction event". 85% of all species went extinct.
@@DrBernon not all coping mechanisms are bad or based on falsehood. Some home is based on truth and real solutions, some is based on ignorance. There’s always genuine hope out there the question is where to find it
Sorry folks, it's too late. All of the findings were dumbed down by corporations years ago. If you are in a good location then maybe 10 years. If you "Just Give A Think" about the tipping speed you have just watched and the fact that pollution is increasing, not decreasing and more wars are likely just try and and enjoy whatever time you have left.
I love knowing the answer before the video even begins not many surprises for me though.
I was telling people at work about the dangers of Arctic Methane. I retired over 7 years ago.
I am embarrassed to say my first thought was to joke that it's people doing home-brews and discovering sourdough baking while bored in lockdown 🤪.
But it is frightening to keep seeing the evidence that shows we're on "a runaway train"
I wish you had covered Pleistiocene Park in Siberia. Potential long term solution to keeping permafrost, with marketability as range land and Safari tourism. And just a cool initiative.
It's a very cool initiative, literally and figuratively.
We can't even measure if co2 has any effect at all, which renders the hypothesis (not theory, that requires repeatable and falsifiable experiments) invalid. It's within the uncertainty for the effect of water vapor. So zero times whatever, is zero.
No worries the freeze should help significantly.
9:00 one small thing. I need to see with my own eyes how an arctic lake (not seawater) can be prevented from freezing. That's an unbelievable claim. I grew up at only a 45 degree latitude in Canada. Ice forms on all water surfaces in winter, even in waterfalls, and it is thick.
.
@LouisEmery Simple. They are referring to summer, not winter. "Permafrost" means "Fozen all year round". That's what is changing.
@@kx7500 dudetheyfreezeovertoocoldsaltwaterfreezesover
@@BCFalls1 use spaces
@@kx7500 can't
I'm SO relieved, knowing they've given so much research to this impending "global climate change" !
It's high time someone did something about a force of nature that's been GOING ON FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS.
➡️ that is accelerated by human activity 🙄
As soon as I saw the title my thought was permafrost runaway. We have been led to believe CO2 is the big problem but water vapor and methane are the big ones that no one in the mainstream media talks about. I think it was @thunderfoot that woke me up to the water vapor and methane. Great video.
The amount of water vapour in the atmosphere and the release of methane are very dependent on the CO2 we emit, so it makes sense that the media would focus on CO2
Thunderf00t is a BS artist. I wouldn't pay much attention to what he says. The amount of water in the atmosphere is tightly controlled by temperature. If we add more, it falls out as rain.
"water vapor ..... the big ones that no one in the mainstream media talks about" is always the good indicator of a Troll-imbecile.
you are not the sharpest
The carbon /toxicity footprint of the military industrial complex anybody?
Maybe I'm weird, but while people are looking at this as a problem, I can't help but look at it as a potential energy source.
The crab in the pot of boiling water had the same thought.
No.
It was already an energy source, now escaped and diluted to uselessness
Methane, natural gas, is an energy source.
This methane pouring out of the melting permafrost, since we have no way to capture gasses on a global scale and if we did we wouldn’t have a problem, will warm the atmosphere 84X more effectively than CO2.
Water vapor, steam, is another greenhouse gas we already use as an energy source.
What an amazing analysis, fantastic work, new SUB for sure.
Excellent video as ever Dave. Well researched and presented.
Given the impacts of methane as a greenhouse gas are you aware of any Methane capture projects, or is it not yet economically enticing enough?
I understand that some farmers are capturing methane gas for energy use.
I wonder if the rapidly thawing areas should be planted with appropriate vegetation and whether this would slow or end the Methane production.
Seems like a good idea. Let's spend billions to implement it.
Do you have the slightest idea of the area or its remoteness?
@@andrewblake2254 People live there, Iceland is doing a similar thing.
@@andrewblake2254 One man's mad idea is as good as the next mans. Let the dreamers dream - just don't expect the taxpayers to pay for their foolishness.
@@clives4501 Or we could just do nothing.
I a bit more research. The current CO2 ppm equivalent in the atmosphere is now 675. The IPCC rates the GWP (global warming potential) of methane at 130 x CO2 over a 10 year period. And in fact methane lasts in the atmosphere for about 10 years, so to calculate it on a 100 year basis or even a 20 year basis makes no sense. The current amount of methane in the atmosphere is approximately 1940 ppb. Divided by 1000 =1.94 ppm. Multiplied by 130 (Co2 equivalent) we have roughly 250 ppm CO2 equivalent global warming potential from methane alone over a 10 year period. Adding the 250 to the current 425 ppm CO2 currently in the atmosphere, we arrive at 675 CO2 ppm equivalent currently in the atmosphere. No longer any need to be worried about the 425 figure.
What was your point?
CO2 is beneficial. This “Have a Think” is stuck in a bubble!
@@kenjohnson5124 CO2 is beneficial for plants to make photosynthesis and to carbonate soft drinks. However too much in the atmosphere is deadly to the biosphere. However, my comment was primarily about the growing negative impact of methane on the biosphere. You actually have to read the science and THINK about it.
@@centuriesofblood Greenhouse owners pump in extra CO2 into their greenhouses, up to 1200ppm. C02 hardly affects temperature.
it's like Tonga never happened.
Tonga did not and is not having a big impact on global av temperature.
@@petewright4640 Do we know that? It chucked a load of water vapour into the stratosphere which I would expect to have a warning effect, but interested to hear your view
Can someone please inform the WEF and Vegan Hoards that they owe the cows they tried to blame, and the Omnivores whom they shamed a public apology.
Meanwhile I'll be sure to enjoy my next steak without a side dish of guilt.
that's not how this works
Mother nature is a force we are powerLESS over. We must adapt & deal with it or perish.
Other than this issue, I think the momentum is really hard to stop. Assuming we pull all the brakes today, we'll continue to see warming for decades. (speculation and my gut feelings, not based on data)
And unless we figure out a way of absorbing massive amounts of CO2 and methane from the atmosphere instantly, we'd likely see a major rise in temperature shortly after the particles like sulfur dioxide that are responsible for aerosol cooling break down.
Marvel at the beauty of this world and that you, a self aware collection of stardust are capable of witnessing and fathoming it. The meteor that wiped out most of the dinosaurs was beautiful in it's own way too, and life will very likely come back from this like it did then. That's not to say i don't care about what's happening of course. I just try to avoid getting lost in despair.
Current science says that when anthropogenic emissions reach zero temperatures will immediately stop rising. What's not clear is whether this result includes some of the big scale feedbacks of the biosphere such as permafrost melt. I fear not.
Damn unfortunately I have to break it to you that your totally uninformed not based on data guess is totally accurate...based on data. Last (old) study I remember quoted about 250 years inertia for atmospheric effects outside of any feedback loops we've created/ unleashed...
Sadly this is not new news, I remember seeing a documentary about the dangers of the purmafrost melting and the consequences many years ago.
@@harrybartlett4020 I remember it.
OMG! This isn't news to me, however, I haven't heard any updates on this concern for quite a while. TY for sharing... Will stay tuned and support anything i/we can do to slow it down and turned it around... If there's even any chance to do so we need competent leadership locally and beyond. Just saying... 🙂
The unmasking this methane issue would destroy the cash cow the CO2 alarmist are pushing.
The term lockdown is offensive to the unindoctrinated.
The several dozen feedback loops that humans have set in motion are clearly unstoppable, which any educated critical thinker clearly understands..Alot of these feedback loops really explain Earth's past mass extinction events, when considering the severity of these heating events..Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, trillions and trillions of greedy, ignorant and destructive actions have existential, exponential and apocalyptic reactions..Our careless use of technology, our technology itself, could only be temporary, and it merely delays and multiplies the coming collapse and misery...Humans have also removed several trillion trees from Earth's system, which just makes escape that much more unlikely...If you critically examine our behavior, we are destroying country after country, the Ukraine proxy war being the most recent, killing millions of people for profits and hegemony, letting mass amounts of people die from treatable medical conditions, or starve to death, we have these mass propaganda and indoctrination machines that keep people ignorant, confused, censored and compliant as we systematically destroy the environment and through out of balance Earth's systems that allow for our existence.. No matter what, we are far too immature to responsibly wield the technology we possess.. There is a cycle of every civilization to exist until this point in time..The cycle has a conquest phase, an exploitation phase and a collapse phase..As long as we celebrate and reward greed, ego and violence, there is no escape from this cycle, in fact, our civilization is the pinnacle of the cycle of civilizational collapse, as we will likely be the last civilization.. Maybe after several thousand years we will start again, but that's a big IF....
@realeyesrealizereallies6828 I think a lot of the problems you cited can be traced back to the cultural problem that many people have: putting far too much value on social status. It leads us to mass consumerism and bigger cars, houses, and other polluting products. Only a very small percentage of people are mature enough to hold themselves back from this force.
@@lawrencetaylor5407 Well we reward and celebrate, greed, ego and violence, which is not compatible with a civilization that doesn't self destruct..I live in a tiny house with a massive garden, build and have electric bikes, solar systems, make cross bows, water well, everything that enables self sufficiency..And study the ways of our fore fathers, in the context of living in balance with the natural world..But, if everyone did that, our supply systems and economy would crash like yesterday, we are in a catch 22, in every possible way imaginable..The inertia and momentum is driving our trapped civilization into a brick wall.There's no escape..
Actually, one side effect of increased CO2 in the atmosphere is that the earth has got significantly and measurably greener over the last thirty years
Yes. The celebration of greed, ego, and violence you speak of puts psychopaths in leadership positions. Psychopaths couldn't care less what happens to others. All they care about is the endless pursuit of power and wealth. They're happy to invent wars and send other peoples' children off to fight and die. And we let them.
PS -- I always appreciate your posts. Glad to see you are still showing up.
@@sammason2300 That is small plants in the arctic, doesn't compare to the trillions of trees that are missing and the lungs of the planet..
In my personal experience i have observed that methane generally lingers no more than five or so minutes depending on the size and filtration of a given area. Discovering the source however can be quite difficult at times especially in small enclosed high population areas such as planes, elevators, board rooms etc. Barring of course an audible release, I generally use as a rule of thumb, "He who smelt it dealt it!" This atmospheric anomaly can sometimes be quickly neutralized by striking a match without all the fuss of government regulation.
It displaces oxygen and doesn’t dissipate quickly, it just sits there at just above ground level.
On top of methane hydrates from frozen deposits defrosting rapidly…
And lp pipelines have vents that are open to the air and just vent mostly methane. And other things found in fossil fuels.
Unfortunately these pipes are often right next to population centers …
Fracking. Is horrible and releases methane too
As you noticed. By using biogas on an industrial scale. Sewage, Farmwaste, Food waste you could
take a gigantic amount of methane gas out of circulation. Sustainable as well, but governments
supports only wind and solar.
That is one of the main reasons I don't support their vision of climate change. Because they are not serious. All is about money, your money.
Interesting how Mother nature is still teaching us stuff. It still comes down to be kinder and nicer to each other
always a good idea☸❤
Save Our Planet - Now
Just perfectly normal off-gassing from the rotting corpse of our society...
I remember the full shutdown, of course I still had to take packages to the post office, which I do by bicycle with or without a trailer depending on how much I have to carry. The air was so clean! I could smell that some grass had been mowed hours before. I could smell peoples' cooking. It was really peaceful. I also got much more cautious and even paranoid about traffic, though, as while there were far fewer drivers, those few were a lot crazier and indeed, traffic deaths for drivers and pedestrians went up markedly in my city in 2020.
and that's why when they say lockdown stay locked down. Those that didn't suffered consequences.
It makes total sense... The people who DID follow the lock-down were more likely to be law abiding, careful citizens.
The people who completely ignored it, we're much more likely to be conspiracy theorists, criminals, drug users, or simply people who take risks and thats why You encountered what you encountered. Not surprising at all, really.
@@davelowets it was the reckless people that covid wiped out as well as the family of the reckless.
@@extropiantranshuman Unfortunately, it wasnt just the reckless people who were killed by covid. It also killed many others that were cautious, stayed home as much as was possible, wore masks, got vaccinated, and followed the lock down as closely as was possible.
I wore my mask, followed the protocol, stayed home for months, and I caught the virus on the one day I left my house to go and get my first vaccination shot. Go figure, that's just my luck.. 🤷🏻
@@davelowets actually that's why I didn't get a shot - because I felt taht people were going to get ill waiting in those lines. I felt it was reckless. I'm not here to judge you but that's what I thought then - that vaccines were a perceived sense of safety and that if you stay away from people your chance of getting the virus is 0. I stayed home and didn't get it. For 2 whole years. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
I'm just saying being cautious doesn't make up for the times you're not. I mean you can say I avoided committing a crime for many years until taht one day. Like how does that change anything?
4:15 - The McPherson Paradox! Of course - the very thorough shutdown early on would make a great "lab experiment" to show how much of a factor it is.
What amazes me is how "the experts"can have a "bit of a surprise"I thought they had all the answers....
Many of the experts that disclosed truths were sikenced , discredited or ...
Very well put together videos and dialogue. I appreciate how you left humans out of the problem and pointed out the naturally occurring cycles of warming and cooling of the Earth much like climate control HVAC system in your home, it has a few degree variance.
I live in Australia and this summer has been the coolest I've ever felt....personally i feel that the covid lock downs definitely cooled the place down... I guess everyone staying at home eating all day elevated methane levels lol 😆
All this proves is that nature is KING and it doesn't matter what we do it's going to do what it wants to do. As a species we have almost no effect on what's happening.
I remember back around y2k I was obsessed with the peak oil Doomsday ideas. Fossil fuel hawks at that time speculated about the untapped and endless potential of mining methane hydrates in the arctic. Naysayers would caution, “not advisable, for if you disturb the methane hydrates, and a chain reaction initiates and melts all the hydrates, then we’re screwed.” Well, that seems like where we’re at now.
the earth is built of connections of lines running through it and if we start messing iwth it we have no planet.
@@extropiantranshuman - “We have no planet”. The planet will be fine, its been thru far far worse.
Most humans will also be fine. Even the 3.5 million who live in the tundra zone where subsidence may be a problem will be fine.
They’ll repair their homes or build new ones, and get on with their usual struggle for life in incredibly harsh conditions that may actually become more pleasant for them.
@@sirrathersplendid4825 I mean there won't be a planet for us to live on.
I mean you can say 'well there will be people in a better habitat' - sure but at what expense to everyone else? You want to see all the major cities go underwater for that? What abotu when everything's overfished? It's going to be a tough struggle but it'll be much harder in teh future.
@@extropiantranshuman - All the computer models at present are massively over-predicting effects. The crazy weather of the last two years seems rather to be a result of the sudden clearing of the atmosphere, resulting in more heat reaching the ground.
@@extropiantranshuman - Atmospheric clearing as a result of lockdowns, I mean.
Fake
From a lifetime of observation and study, I think we are 50 years past the tipping point, to prevent climate catastrophe.
We have so passed the tipping point 70 years after our first concerns about climate change. All we can do now is watch the spectacle.
An excellent report, so I've subscribed.
What interest's me is the effect of DIRECT heat production into the atmosphere, such as heated air in urban conurbations from computers, home heaters, fridges, air conditioning units, cooking stoves and car engines. I think scientists are not including this sufficiently in their models and are grossly underestimating it, which is why their models and predictions always seem to be wrong and lagging behind what is actually happening in global warming.
Reducing emissions is good, of course. But switching cars to electricity is not going to reduce the direct heat production of the engine - electric cars get just as hot as petrol ones. This heat is dispersed directly into the atmosphere, and as it is produced at ground level this heat may take some time before it is radiated away into outer space. A report by JHAT on how much such heat is being generated and how quickly it is radiated away would be very interesting indeed.
This is precisely why it's probably a good idea to start looking into artificial cooling by releasing aerosols into the atmosphere. Drastically reducing our consumption of fossil fuels will cause a drastic drop in aerosols that will in turn cause a heat spike that could be seriously dangerous. Releasing a controlled amount of aerosols manually, and gradually reducing it over time, allows us to control this spike and turn it into something more manageable.
Some people will surely complain, thinking artificial cooling is yet another excuse to keep burning fossil fuels. In reality, it's basically a necessity in order to stop burning them.
Mee thane (said through your nose) exists in the atmosphere at 1.7 parts per million. CO2 is 400ppm. It also has a very short life because it quickly oxidizes and breaks down. (self regulating)
Methane was here before humans and it will be after. Methane is part of the cosmos
The implication of this observation is that we are tackling climate change in the wrong order - we should be focusing first on methane reduction by moving to a global vegan world to reduce atmospheric methane and release land that can sequester CO2, and THEN focus on reducing fossil fuels.
It the actic circle was warmer and greener before and we don't have more carbon ,what is the problem with getting warmer as before ?
I believe there is still a place for the burning of natural gas as a transition fuel. I have lost the figures, but I once did a back-of-an-envelope calc that led me to believe that the UK potential amount of sewage gas alone would provide enough for domestic use. DYOR.
Not even counting landfill and green waste gas.