Why This New Study, Published in Nature - Climate Change, On Arctic Permafrost Is So Scary

[Bill USA]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/08/3643953/greenland-permafrost-thaw-microbes/

Scientists might have to change their projected timelines for when Greenland’s permafrost will completely melt due to man-made climate change, now that new research from Denmark has shown it could be thawing faster than expected.

Published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, the research shows that tiny microbes trapped in Greenland’s permafrost are becoming active as the climate warms and the permafrost begins to thaw. As those microbes become active, they are feeding on previously-frozen organic matter, producing heat, and threatening to thaw the permafrost even further.

In other words, according to the research, permafrost thaw could be accelerating permafrost thaw to a “potentially critical” level.

“The accompanying heat production from microbial metabolism of organic material has been recognized as a potential positive-feedback mechanism that would enhance permafrost thawing and the release of carbon,” the study, conducted by researchers at the University of Copenhagen’s Center for Permafrost, said. “This internal heat production is poorly understood, however, and the strength of this effect remains unclear.”

~~
~~

What makes this new research so important is that it adds to the urgency of stemming permafrost thaw. Because even without this new discovery of heat-producing microbes, estimates for carbon releases from thawing permafrost have been alarmingly large. According to the National Snow & Ice Data Center, there are about 1,700 gigatons of carbon currently frozen in permafrost — more than the total amount in the atmosphere now (Earth’s atmosphere contains about 850 gigatons of carbon, according to the Center).
(more)

[Binkie The Clown]

1. "Faster than expected" ... "Sooner than expected"

"More severe than anticipated" "Scientists are surprised by the rapid pace of..."

It's the same reaction of "we're so surprised" over and over. When is the message going to sink in that this is really serious, and the experts need to stop hemming, hawing, and hedging, and start raising the alarm among the general public.

[Bill USA]

2. yeah, scientists write 4 each other and they are loath to vary from scientific probity which, while

appropriate for fellow scientists - and to be published in the Journals - loses something when passed along in that form to the general population. I started noticing in the 90's that every time the estimates of increasing temperature were refined they were always adjusted upwards. So this info is no surprise to many of us. There are a few informed non-scientists who are trying to get out the message that the World is in BIG trouble but we could use more of them.

Scientists, even when they are interviewed for a general audience are really reluctant to start speaking in the 'common' vernacular and say: what all this research means is we need to make big changes as fast as we can and hope it's not too late. .. OF course, NOW it is too late - to achieve a turn-around before significant sea level rise and serious weather changes around the Earth. The best we can hope for now is to try to mitigate the Climate Change that is coming (hopefully averting the most extreme temperature increases) and eventually technologically more advanced approaches will gradually reduce our GHG production so that in maybe a couple/few hundred years we might see temps start coming back down. Meanwhile much adaptation to significantly warmer climate will be necessary.


... This is why I have tried to make the point that those things we can do that will produce reductions in GHG output more quickly we should be embracing (in addition to pursuing the technically more sophisticated approaches - which in the longer term offer bigger results).  But this doesn't get any consideration from those who deem the only approaches worthy of consideration are the more 'sexy' technically sophisticated ones. The only problem with embracing ONLY the technically more sophisticated approaches is that they are generally more expensive and require more time to be implemented to achieve significant results. These people don't realize the more time we let pass before we start realizing significant GHG reductions the more GHG reductions we need to get the same effect as smaller reductions achieved in less in time.