Climate scientists have come forward to dispute claims that methane trapped beneath the Arctic Ocean could suddenly escape, causing extremely costly global damage.
In a study published in the scientific journal Nature last week, researchers said the release of a single “pulse” of methane from permafrost beneath the East Siberian Sea could cost $60 trillion (£39 trillion) alone.
However, the research has provoked a scientific controversy. Gavin Schmidt, climate scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, took to Twitter to say the study was “misleading” and assumed an “unlikely” rapid increase in methane emissions.
The study, by researchers from the UK and the US, says a 50 gigatonne pulse of methane could be released between 2015 and 2025. As methane is 20 times more effective at trapping heat as carbon dioxide, the study claims this would accelerate global warming by anywhere between 15 to 35 years.
This would then set off an “economic timebomb” as extreme weather conditions would affect global agricultural production and batter developing economies.
However David Archer, a climate scientist from the University of Chicago, said that there was not a proposed mechanism that would release large quantities of methane gas from the sea floor to the atmosphere quickly enough to cause the kind of damage predicted in the study.
“It has to be released within a few years to have much impact on climate, but the mechanisms for release operate on time scales of centuries and longer,” Archer told Live Science.
In a 2008 report, the US Climate Change Science Programme also said that such a release appears “very unlikely.”
Peter Wadhams, one of the scientists who worked on the original study, has defended the findings, claiming that sceptics are not working from the latest information.
“The mechanism which is causing the observed mass of rising methane plumes in the East Siberian Sea is itself unprecedented and the scientists who dismissed the idea of extensive methane release in earlier research were simply not aware of the new mechanism that is causing it”, he said.
“Therefore I robustly defend our research and commentary, and hope that rather than dismiss the substantial risk such a methane release poses, the response might be to support more intensive research on this problem.”
Like our Facebook Page
7 Benefits of Purchasing Sustainable Housing
Our Top Five Sustainable Home Renovations For 2023
6 Ways Eco-Friendly Photographers Can Take Beautiful Natural Pictures
Emerging Research In Seagrass Restoration: What Does The Future Hold?
Sustainable Bites: How To Make Your Diet Eco-Friendly
Coffee Farms & Cloud Forests: Colombia’s New Eco Initiatives
Electric Cars: Are They Worth The Switch?
Maximizing the Efficiency of Deliveries: Strategies for Sustainable Businesses
The Rise of Sustainable Cloud Computing
Navigating Towards A Greener Future: Sustainable Practices In Maritime
The Future of Sustainability In The Logistics Industry
Can Eco-Friendly Businesses Embrace VPNs to Bolster Cybersecurity?
Eight Different Eco-Friendly Developments in the Food Industry
UK Lags EU in Installing Heat Pumps to Slow Climate Change
5 Key Areas to Look at When It Comes to Business Sustainability
Addressing Leadership Challenges in Green Entrepreneurship
Holding Eco-Friendly Coins is Greener and More Profitable
5 Reasons That Diamonds Can Be Excellent Green Investments
Eco-Friendly Airlines Use Weather Models to Make Safer Flights
Why Should We Invest in Eco-Friendly Homes?
- Features3 months ago
What is the Eco-Friendliest Option to Wash Your Dishes?
- Environment7 months ago
6 Home Improvements You Can Make to Help the Environment
- Environment11 months ago
How to Ensure Your Home’s Eco-Friendly During Construction?
- Business10 months ago
The Pulp & Paper Industry is Reaching its Sustainability Goals