Meredith Poor + 897 MP October 21 https://www.colorado.edu/today/2024/10/21/microbes-not-fossil-fuels-drove-methane-growth-between-2020-and-2022 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 711 November 22 No, we will not give up on our carnivore diets! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markslawson + 1,061 ML November 26 On 10/22/2024 at 8:54 AM, Meredith Poor said: https://www.colorado.edu/today/2024/10/21/microbes-not-fossil-fuels-drove-methane-growth-between-2020-and-2022 Methane has caused problems for climate researchers before. Some years back - I think around 09-10 (the story says early 21st century) - the general increase of methane in the atmosphere levelled off for a few years. Researchers attributed this to engineers fixing leaks in gas pipelines, although I didn't buy the explanation at the time and the fact that natural sources have been taking the lead since is interesting. One less thing to blame on fossil fuels I guess.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,012 GE November 26 16 hours ago, markslawson said: Methane has caused problems for climate researchers before. Some years back - I think around 09-10 (the story says early 21st century) - the general increase of methane in the atmosphere levelled off for a few years. Researchers attributed this to engineers fixing leaks in gas pipelines, although I didn't buy the explanation at the time and the fact that natural sources have been taking the lead since is interesting. One less thing to blame on fossil fuels I guess.. Partial blame. The fossil fuel industry industry still emits methane. One could also argue that emissions from landfills and cattle operations are increased by fossil fuel usage. Big agriculture uses a lot fuel and chemicals. Don't get me wrong - I enjoy eating - but we are very wasteful. We like energy intensive foods like beef, and we produce huge amounts of food waste that most often ends up rotting in a landfill (making methane.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markslawson + 1,061 ML November 27 8 hours ago, TailingsPond said: One could also argue that emissions from landfills and cattle operations are increased by fossil fuel usage. Big agriculture uses a lot fuel and chemicals. Don't get me wrong - I enjoy eating - but we are very wasteful. We like energy intensive foods like beef, and we produce huge amounts of food waste that most often ends up rotting in a landfill (making methane.) I don't disagree with any of that, although it just underlines the fact that the problem of emissions is basically intractable. But while we're on the subject I should point out that they have done the same isotopic analysis for CO2 in the atmosphere and found that the vast bulk is of natural origin. Now before you jump down my throat screaming denialism I might point out that no-one is disagreeing and that the science has an explanation. I don't buy the explanation but it's not my problem. I'm retired. When the climate apocalypse starts, call me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,012 GE November 27 (edited) 28 minutes ago, markslawson said: But while we're on the subject I should point out that they have done the same isotopic analysis for CO2 in the atmosphere and found that the vast bulk is of natural origin. Now before you jump down my throat screaming denialism I might point out that no-one is disagreeing and that the science has an explanation Unfortunately, carbon dating doesn't work so well anymore after all the nuclear bomb testing. There was a big dump of unnatural C14 into the air which can be confused with biological C14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomb_pulse Edited November 27 by TailingsPond Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markslawson + 1,061 ML November 28 22 hours ago, TailingsPond said: Unfortunately, carbon dating doesn't work so well anymore after all the nuclear bomb testing. There was a big dump of unnatural C14 into the air which can be confused with biological C14. That's carbon dating. Don't see its relevance to the 12C and 13C ratio... If you're interested in this point then try looking up Tom V Segalstad a Norwegian professor of Geology who has had many things to say about CO2 in the atmosphere. Yes, I'm aware of his detractors but, as I noted previously, my understanding is that no-one is now arguing the point but they have explained it away. anyway, that's it from me. Take care. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,012 GE November 28 (edited) 7 minutes ago, markslawson said: That's carbon dating. Don't see its relevance to the 12C and 13C ratio... If you're interested in this point then try looking up Tom V Segalstad a Norwegian professor of Geology who has had many things to say about CO2 in the atmosphere. Yes, I'm aware of his detractors but, as I noted previously, my understanding is that no-one is now arguing the point but they have explained it away. anyway, that's it from me. Take care. The whole thing is that old methane (fossil fuels) has has different isotopes than new methane (cows, etc.). It is literally carbon dating! You need to look up the basics - you don't understand the article at all. Edited November 28 by TailingsPond Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
